I don't want Hillary Clinton deciding what I can afford

[Sadie4629]

I caught a couple of minutes of George Steph's interview with HRC and heard her assuring the public that under her healthcare plan, their premium would be based on their income, and no one would have to pay "more than they can afford" for her plan. Trouble is, I don't want her telling me how much I can afford to pay!!!

My circumstances might be totally different from someone else with the same income. Maybe I'm helping to support an elderly relative, or raising a disabled child, or trying to save to open a business, or maybe I am passionate about an expensive hobby, or who knows what.

How I spend my money, and how much I choose to spend on health insurance is MY business, not the government's.

[peoli]

1. /agree

[Maribelle]

27. I don't want the non-insured to decide I have to pay their bills.

Seeing issues clearly?

[JorgeTheGood]

46. Not following that one ...

how does the non-insured force you to pay thier bills anymore than you already do?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

66. Basically, it's their way of throwing the working poor under the bus to sell their plan

The reason healthcare is so expensive is because deadbeats aren't paying enough out of their meager paychecks for insurance, not because of greedy corporations.

[Texas_Kat]

127. Uninsured don't generally shell out cash at emergency rooms

The majority of uninsured go to county or municipal emergency rooms -- who are funded by our tax dollars. That is, "our" if you pay taxes.

So we're already funding their health care -- and at a premium.

[jberryhill]

130. I do...

It doesn't help, though, even if you have a wad of 100 dollar bills - which I did have the last time I went. After being x-rayed and left on a gurney for about ten hours, I called a friend of mine with a medical background, got some treatment advice, and then called my wife to help me get out of the ER since I couldn't walk on my own.

Ever since starting my own business, I keep cash around to deal with the "look" that I get from my own doctor's office when they scratch their heads and ask me to "update" my insurance information every time I visit. I probably make more than my doctor does (I'm an attorney), but in general people in health care offices treat you like a leper if you don't have insurance. The last time I had blood work done for a physical, the folks at the counter (as always happened) came back to me with the form saying, "You didn't fill in your insurance information." That's when I stick a Franklin in the clipboard, and put the serial number of the bill as my policy number-

"Insurer: United States Federal Reserve Bank
Policy Number: Serial No. XXXXX"

It shuts them up, but they don't like it.

OTOH, I found a GREAT dentist who takes cash.

[Texas_Kat]

133. Most people who don't have insurance aren't lucky enough

to have wads of $100 bills hanging around. My best advice to you -- find a doctor who will answer basic medical questions when you have them instead of spending hours in the ER. Having to wait a long time in the ER for non-emergency care is standard.

Insurance or not, the emergency room isn't where non-emergency ills should be treated. Most who don't have funds to pay for regular medical care wind up in taxpayer funded medical facilities because they DON'T have the resources.

[jberryhill]

138. Oh I know that

I do have a regular doctor, whose office gives me that "look" because I pay cash.

I was in the ER because of a sudden condition.

[DemDogs]

140. Low percentage of income

She copied Edwards health care plan where employers have to provide insurance but if you are self-insured your premiums will be supplemented by government. Without working out detail it is impossible to give anything more than a range but it should be no more than 5-6% of income, which you don't have to like but you should because if you qualify for supplements you would otherwise be paying a lot more for your insurance.

THIS IS A FALSE COMPLAINT.

[Neecy]

2. agreed

And I think a mandate would be a huge issue for McCain in the GE - a 'big government' mandate that would strike fear into a lot of hearts.

[demo dutch]

28. That's how it is in all countries that have universal healthcare,whether it's paid in tax or premium

[mondo joe]

3. The government already decides on a variety of matters what one can afford.

It's how people get food stamps, etc.

[Flabbergasted]

12. Do you have a better example:

Food stamps a straight give away. Insurace is going to cost something.

[mondo joe]

18. Hm. Sliding fee scales at community health clinics.

I still think food stamps are a valid comparison - the point is the government is determining at what point someone's income merits intervention.

[Flabbergasted]

29. I see. Thanks.

[jlake]

47. Foodstamps are for the greater good. *I* Pay for them with my taxes.

If we want universal healthcare we have to pay for it.

[fenriswolf]

54. whats wrong with single payer then?

if its gonna be mandatory why not single payer?

[jlake]

55. NOTHING. But it ain't going to happen overnight, and only Hillary's plan is a real step

in that direction.

[fenriswolf]

56. no hillaries plan

will have media shut up about the health care crises. They will say the band aid has fixed it, unversal health care is here. then the topic will not be brought up again. Has hillary stated this is a starting point for universal? or is this her "fix"

[jlake]

60. She has said that it is a process and this is the first step.

Obama is the one who does NOT WANT single payer universal healthcare.
I am spinning not for Hillary. This was one of the main reasons I chose to support her.

[fenriswolf]

62. you got that right

spinning for hillary indeed.

[jlake]

64. lol. got me, I changed my sentence and left out a word.

Anyway, please look at both of the plans objectively.
Hillary's (not Hillaries) is far superior.

[fenriswolf]

67. under obamas plan

can I opt out wihtout paying a fee.

[jlake]

70. So you don't want universal coverage?

[fenriswolf]

73. I want single payer

but I don't want to be forced to do something just to say its universal.

[jlake]

78. Well, you're going to take your toys and go home. It will be a process, and unless you want to

start that process, it is never going to happen.

[fenriswolf]

92. the process starts with cutting out the profit

not making it mandatory so insurance companies profit from "everyone"

[jlake]

94. Obama's plan does not address that. The political reality is: that is NOT going to happen.

[fenriswolf]

99. its only a reality

because we now have two candidates that do not represent us as democrats, I think I will take my ball and go home, I'm done trying to argue logically. Oh and this was about hillary and health care not obama, I don't like his idea either. but his is not mandatory.

[jlake]

102. We have a choice between the 2, so it is about Obama's as well - since he is the alternative.

[fenriswolf]

103. k then i go for obama

because its not mandatory.

[rodeodance]

135. yeah--those without--those selfish ones who do not want to purchase health plans--

will lead us all to pay out someday. unless of course they are billionaires who can dish out the $$ incase of a crisis in their family.

[Lucinda]

137. It is for people with children.

[fenriswolf]

152. my son is covered through my wifes

I do not have health insurance, my job does not provide it, I cannot afford it. Hillaries plan would be a burden to me not a boon.

[Lucinda]

160. Which part of her plan wouldn't help you get affordable coverage?

[bvar22]

115. I agree.

Hillary's Mandatory private "For Profit" Health Insurance Plan (she doesn't have a HealthCare Plan)
moves AWAY from Single Payer HealthCare..

It legitimizes and codifies the For Profit Health Insurance Industry, and will make it HARDER to implement a true Single Payer system.

[creeksneakers2]

114. Want everything and willing to pay in nothing?

Would you accept a mandate to pay toward a single payer system?

[fenriswolf]

125. yes. happily.

[juajen]

146. I'm sure that most people did not want to be forced to pay for SS

when it was first proposed. How many of us could live without it now? My husband became disabled when he was 43 years of age. SS paid his SS benefits, which were good, and extra money for my two children, which doubled the amount we received. I could still work, if needed; although, he was so ill, I had to be his caregiver. We, as a family, could not have existed without SS. Someday, we will say that we couldn't exist without mandatory health care for everybody in this country. It will actually be cheaper than what we are paying now. Some things we just do for our own collective good. You know, when you have an abscess, you just gotta grit your teeth and bear it.

[fenriswolf]

155. right

but social security is not privatized. insurance companies are. total difference.

[fenriswolf]

74. dupe

[mcg]

164. car insurance n/t

[sandnsea]

17. And yet lots of people go hungry

because the govt doesn't always get it right. That's the problem that the bottom 50% fully understand.

[mondo joe]

147. And democrats have long worked to fix the measure.

But the point remains, government does do a measure, and must.

[Sadie4629]

19. Yes, and you can choose

not to take food stamps.

Is there an "opt out" feature to Hillary's plan?

[mondo joe]

24. Now you moved the goal post. The first goal post: government determining intervention

based on income: already happens.

Second goal post: Can you opt out? I'd support an opt-out, provided the person who opts out is then full responsible for the full cost of their care.

[Sadie4629]

41. An opt-out

with an open enrollment period at some point. That way young people(whose health costs are generally lower) could have a chance to do without and save their money, and then still get in on it as they get older and "more responsible."

[creeksneakers2]

119. People can't be held responsible for the full costs of their health

care.

Figure a guy with no health care insurance has a bicycle accident and gets severe brain damage. Operations and months of rehab are needed. Is he going to be able to pay for all that? How will he pay later if he's disabled? The guy will declare bankruptcy for sure.

The only way to enforce pay or don't play is to deny care to people who don't have insurance. Society won't accept that.

[ursi]

4. yep ...that's why Edwards' plan was the best but no one listened

[dkf]

5. A mandate sets this plan up for political failure.

That is why Hillary's plan won't pass and Obama's plan will.

[sallyseven]

33. Obama's will not work

He is going to fine parents. 15 million will be left out. Medicare is the most efficient way to make health insurance avail sable for all. Everyone pays in. According to what you make. I am sorry that you have other problems and I am sure that they can be addressed. But if you refuse to get health care then I don't want to pay for you. I don't care if it is a dollar a week at least it is something.

[RoadRage]

149. That all may be true.. but Hillary's plan won't even pass.. it needs bi-partisian support,

and Republicans won't touch that. Obama's has a chance at passing.. so that makes it better. Something is better then nothing, and Hillary's is nothing if it doesn't pass.

[PeaceNikki]

6. As opposed to the current method where the insurance companies and your employer tell you.

It's regressive now. The $500/month premium is the same whether you make $20k/year or $150k/year.

THAT's better, huh?

[GoldieAZ49]

13. not true

the larger the # of participants/employees the lower the cost

Obama is opening up the senate health insurance to everyone, they have 100 members, if 1/3 of Americans joined that would add another 100 million

Obama's plan is a lower cost per individual than Hillarys

[sallyseven]

51. The people in the Fed Government

pay a portion of their health insurance. Even Obama has to pay. The have several kinds of health care insurance co's. The Gov picks up the rest. It is not on a sliding scale. Pick out the insurance you want and pay your portion. That can be as hundred or more per month. I know I have a supplemental program through a city and it cost me 208. per month plus what I pay for medicare. The senator does not get free health insurance he is lying and covering what it costs if he is telling you different.

[GoldieAZ49]

75. my current insurance program costs $100 per month with a co-pay

and has $10 prescriptions

This is not the same as what the senate has, the # of participants does make a difference

[PeaceNikki]

118. Ask your employer how much they pay per month in addition to the $100 you kick in.

[formernaderite]

111. I don't get why people use employer provided

health care that costs $500 or more per month. Unless they have an ongoing illness, it makes much more sense to apply directly to Blue cross for individual care or family care and opt for a higher deductible. You pay doctors visits at the same rate that the ins companies bill, and if you're like most people you only visit a doctor a few times a year. They also have plans where emergency visits, ie for accidents get covered at the normal 80%. I have found tht I have saved tens of thousands of dollars this way.

[PeaceNikki]

116. You have kids?

I do.

The reality is that ALL private health care is costing this much in monthly premiums. It's just that employers decide how much they cover and how much the employee covers. My employer reminds me every year how much I am costing them in health care premiums with an annual "statement". Some are better than others. Some employers give measly 4% raises and then raise health care costs to the employee by 100-200%.

[formernaderite]

122. yup...two that are still on the plan

But my wife opts out of the employer insured plan...and I self insure us through carefirst blue cross...about $700 bucks a quarter. One of kids will grad college in may and be off the plan...so it will be further reduced. Honestly, it's the cost of prescriptive meds that screws everyone more than the cost of health ins. In that sense, if you're taking meds regularly, i'd opt for an HMO.

[GoldieAZ49]

7. a percentage of your income

I don't trust Big Mama to have access to my paycheck

once that is done, where do you think she is going to get her $30 million slush fund?

[juajen]

150. Yeah,

cause it's really in her best interests to screw all of America.

:sarcasm:

[Flabbergasted]

8. This really bothers me as well. It's possible her plan could work however

I think the tide is going to work against her on this. What will really need to happen is some solid work on reducing costs before we end up buying into a plan.

I think this is just a corporate sell out to get millions more on board into bad insurance plans.

[MoonRiver]

9. Consider voting Republican.

You're not going to get national health care without people paying for it. Every country that has national health care makes people pay, usually on a sliding scale. But maybe you have another agenda.

[DainBramaged]

16. Well said, well said

There are a LOT of agendas today on DU, from choosing the garnish on your dinner to what pole is best to slide down into the abyss on.

[Sadie4629]

35. You can't disagree with her without having an agenda?

Whatever.

[Texas_Kat]

86. Obama uses a similar argument for Health care that Bush uses for privatizing Social Security

"People may want to do something else with their money". Either "universal" means everyone or it doesn't mean anything.

[formernaderite]

120. you know i think we can disagree on single issues

without being called names. Even countries that have nationalized health care still end up with two tiered systems..cause those that can afford to, carry private insurance to avoid the waits.

[PaulaFarrell]

129. ARe you talking about paying taxes or paying for the health care?

Because I live in the UK and I pay nothing for health care except for prescriptions, which are a flat rate per prescription. It's all paid for through tax, which is of course on a 'sliding scale' but your post implies that people have to pay directly for the care. Not true here.

[DainBramaged]

10. Is she President? Did she take over the Senate?

Why so much focus on her appearance today on This Week? Nothing else to attack her on?

[Bitwit1234]

11. I sorry the President GETS TO MAKE DECISIONS NOT YOU.

[Sadie4629]

45. So why bother to question anything

a President does, even the current one. Is that what you're saying?

[southern_dem]

49. The President is not

a dictator; at least in my country.

[Garbo 2004]

157. Despite 8 yrs of "the decider," we still have Congress & the legislative process.

What the President proposes is one thing, what gets through Congress is another. Hillary knows that quite well. Even with a Dem Congress I don't think they'll just give a Dem president a rubber stamp.

Which is why neither Hillary's or Obama's (or Edwards' plan which Hillary's plan resembles) are just straight single payer. Edwards plan, and some people here freaked out because of its mandates, had a government plan that would compete with private, keeping costs down and opening the door to single payer. I think that may be where Hillary's also trying to go, but I haven't yet read her plan to see for sure.

But your responses such as this really don't help your candidate or help make the case for what she's proposing. If you want to have a positive impact on other's views, learn the facts and use them. If you just want to piss people off and don't care whether people can be persuaded with facts to support your candidate or not, then keep on with your style of posting. If Hillary's really your candidate, you're not serving her well by generating heat without light.

[jody]

14. IMO any form of universal health care means those with higher incomes will pay more than those with

low/no income.

[UALRBSofL]

30. However with Obama's plan

It's a flat rate. The millionaires will pay out $2,500 and the person that makes $50,000 will pay out $2,500. Maybe that's acceptable to everyone on DU. If that's what you want go for it. If I'm wrong please correct me.

[jody]

39. Does Obama also want those who make $10k to pay $2.5k ? Where does Obama explain how he will

decide who gets very expensive medical procedures?

[jberryhill]

87. How does your present insurer decide who gets expensive medical procedures?

That aspect of the health care debate mystifies me.

We already have armies of private sector bureaucrats deciding who gets what, but we are supposed to be afraid of public sector bureaucrats doing the same thing. Um.... seems to me that it will probably be the same folks in either event.

[Sadie4629]

91. An insurance policy is a contract

The coverage is all spelled out in (indecipherable) legalese. But it's in there. Most won't pay for any treatment considered "experimental." But if they try to deny coverage for expensive care that isn't experimental, they have to be able to point to something in the contract.

[jberryhill]

105. Yeah right..

...and you have read all that indecipherable legalese, and never been denied coverage for a medical expense by your insurer. These "contracts" provide insurance companies with infinite flexibility - and it only becomes an issue when you are not in the best condition to fight over it.

I want to move to your planet. I'm self employed, uninsured, and pay my medical expenses in cash. I do that because unlike, say, automobile insurance (which is mandated and thus rate regulated), buying health insurance as an individual approaching middle age is... something you might want to look at sometime.

Most people don't even choose their insurer - they get whatever their employer picked. This isn't some sort of situation where individuals have negotiated their coverage. People find out what is or is not covered by experience. And if you haven't had the kinds of experience that most people have had in trying to get claims paid, then I toast to your good health.

[Sadie4629]

110. My son once had

a compression fracture of his spine, and needed a back brace. The insurance company coded it as an "orthotic device" and denied payment. I wrote a nasty letter to the company suggesting that they would be better off paying for the brace rather than an extended hospitalization with traction and physical therapy.

They re-coded and paid for the brace.

When you are looking at denied coverage, it is usually something fairly easily dealt with. (See above.) Or it is an expensive, experimental treatment--like transplants for some conditions. I'm not sure we want docs to feel that they are able to do anything they want to patients. JMHO.

[jberryhill]

117. "it is usually something fairly easily dealt with"

Uh, yeah right. I wouldn't even want to figure the shipping cost on the file relating to the complicated pregnacy and birth that my family had to deal with - including the lost work time in dealing with it, and the credit record damage.

Well this is a huge story. We really need to get the word out that people do not frequently encounter coverage denial problems, because your son's back brace was eventually covered.

"I'm not sure we want docs to feel that they are able to do anything they want to patients."

But you don't want bureaucrats making treatment decisions unless those bureaucrats are making a profit by doing so. Got it.

[jody]

97. Don't know but some lawyers advertise their services to get denied claims approved for medicare.

It's difficult to discuss that topic on DU because apparently some believe society has unlimited funds for health care.

In fact funds are limited and such decisions are made all the time but by an army of bureaucrats without knowledge of or interest in health care.

[busymom]

15. I will only agree if....

You are ok with the fact that if you get sick and have chosen not to cover yourself that you can not opt in to the system then.

[Sadie4629]

32. That really doesn't bother me

There are lots of healthy young people, who probably don't need expensive health coverage. They should be able to opt out.

Maybe there could be an "open enrollment" period each year or two.

[busymom]

50. Here's the problem...

What if one of those young, healthy people is diagnosed with leukemia, lymphoma, breaks an arm or leg, is involved in a serious motor vehicle accident, etc.

Yah, I know...it will never happen to them, right? think again. It happened to me....and I wouldn't have imagined it either. Should these people be entitled to opt in immediately, having not paid a dime in coverage? I say that they then are responsible for 100% of all health bills, even if that means they will pay it off for the rest of their lives.

[Sadie4629]

58. Yes, it happens

and I know, because I was also a cancer patient at a relatively young age. On the other hand, my husband didn't even see a doc for anything but the most minor things, until he was over 50. It's a gamble, all right; but if someone WANTS to take that gamble, shouldn't they be able to?

[busymom]

59. No.

Because the goal is univeral health coverage, which provides a minimum of emergency coverage to all and also reduces costs for the rest of us. Ultimately, do you believe that society will simply allow a 20 year old cancer patient, car crash victim, accident survivor to die on the streets? Of course not. So what will happen here in the real world? You and I will pay higher premiums and higher costs for these people who opted out to then have the benefits that we have paid for.

I'm sorry that this is the truth, but it is. Unless these people all sign a legal waiver stating that they personally will pay upfront for all services or will be denied care...and can't just opt in when they get sick...then I can't suppport it.

[Sadie4629]

72. How would you feel about

a flat rate for coverage and a sliding scale for co-pay fees? That way the young and healthy will not be unfairly burdened with the costs of being ill.

[busymom]

76. That's fine....

I could be on board with that...but it would still have to be mandatory for everyone.

[jberryhill]

121. Methinks someone doesn't understand the entire idea of insurance

Insurance is based on pooled risk. Some folks don't get that.

[BlackVelvet04]

20. If you want universal health care and government subsidized

health care then it IS the government's business. You can't have it both ways.

[demo dutch]

21. That's how it is in all countries that have universal healthcare,whether it's paid in tax or premium

[Maribelle]

22. Educate yourself, and find out what one emergency trip to the ER will cost you.

Find out what this trip would cost without even being admitted. Say: We've completed and read all the x-rays and have determined no bones have been broken, he's an ace bandage, see ya later.

The cost of this minimal trip might cost thousands.

Never mind a true emergency that will cost perhaps a minimum of $50,000 - then admittance, hospital stay, doctor's fees, additional procedures - this could easily run over $100,000.

I personally don't want the non-insured to drive up the cost of my premiums one more penny.

How dare they decide I can pay for their poop?

[Barack_America]

31. But unless that person pays $100,000 into the system...

...don't we still end up paying that? Assuming that the poorest of Americans will be covered under the government-subsidized healthcare plans that Hillary proposes.

[Maribelle]

43. No. There are a lot of issues at play here.

One issue is the fact that most of the uninsured, once insured, will stop using the highly expensive ER facilities and start using perhaps a clinic or doctor's office as their primary care facility.

The non-financial relief in this is remarkable as well, perhaps even saving more lives, definitely fixing the problem of the uninsured clogging the facility.

Obama's plan does not fix this. Hillary's does.

[Sadie4629]

53. No. Costs will skyrocket

We once had group insurance that paid EVERYTHING. No co-pay. No deductible. Just your monthly premium. People were taking constipated babies to the ER. One guy had a sliver and went to the ER. Healthcare had become "free" so they were not so judicious about how they used it.

[Sadie4629]

48. I know very well what the cost of an ER visit is

This post wasn't about that; it was about having the government decide how much I can afford. Chances are that my opinion about that is going to be significantly different than theirs.

[Barack_America]

23. Don't worry, under her plan, there will be an enormous, inefficient bureaucracy...

To help you deal with such "exemptions".

[DainBramaged]

112. Like there isn't now under the current REPUBLICAN misAdministration

jesus Christ on a stick.:wtf:

[jberryhill]

126. These are truly gorgeous buildings:

The Blue Cross tower in Chicago:



The Blue Cross tower in Philadelphia:



Newark, NJ:



Private insurance companies have contributed some of the most stunning architecture to American cities on some of the most expensive real estate.

We can't let the money that goes into these remarkable edifices be consumed by an enormous bureaucracy.

I am not willing to sacrifice urban aesthetics for something as mundane as taking care of a bunch of sick people.

[DainBramaged]

25. If she is elected our Nominee, will you vote for her or sit this one out

And give the election once again to the Republicans who will decide EVERYTHING for you for another four years. I want an answer, no waffling. I had pancakes so I have no room left.

[Sadie4629]

61. There are going to be lots of people in both parties

sitting this one out, if HRC and McCain are the candidates. If I don't vote, my sitting out will just balance out one of theirs.

[DainBramaged]

71. Then why participate in the political process at all?

Why not just volunteer to help at a food kitchen, women's shelter, or even a firehouse instead of pissing away your time hating our candidates?

[Sadie4629]

85. There will be other races on the ballot

I may just leave the presidential preference blank, but vote in the other races.

[CTyankee]

26. How do you pay your taxes if you don't want to spend the money?

It's based on your income. You can't pick and choose which taxes to pay. You can't say to your employer "Don't take out my Medicare taxes because I'm saving to start a new business."

In all but the last examples you cite (except for the "expensive hobby" one and pleast get serious), there are government programs that are designed to help you. There are tax breaks for you if you are raising a disabled child, depending on which state you are in (I know because my grandson in CA has a disability and his health care is very inexpensive). There are small business loans you can obtain, and myriad social service agencies that can help you obtain help with an elderly parent.

We all pay into government run systems that may not benefit us. I still pay for school taxes even tho my kids are grown. I pay for Fire and Police depts. even tho I may not need them.

If we all pay into a health care plan, our insurance costs, individually, will go down. People without health insurance, for whatever reason, will use the Emergency Room for routine care, driving costs disastrously high for that service. People without health insurance land in hospitals requiring acute care which is also driving our health care costs too high.

We should all pay in. After all, we will GET health insurance.

What I can't understand is why on earth you wouldn't WANT to be covered by health insurance? I just can't figure that out...

[Triana]

44. Thank you CTYankee...

We have a shot at National Healthcare here, just as they have in France and Canada.

But SIT BACK AND WATCH while American voters vote against it - though they all claim to want it - because they swallowed whole the spin and propaganda being pushed by the corprat-owned lamestream media. ("Hillary's gonna "garnish" your wages! On NOOOOOOO!").

If we WANT truely national healthcare, we will all have to pay a healthcare tax and for poor and unemployed that cost will be subsidized or covered. Same way it works in France and elsewhere.

But here they all are hyperventilating, panicking, and tearing their hair out 'cause (according to the media) "Hillary is gonna "garnish" your wages!! Oh NOOOOOOOOOO!"

You pay into the system. You GET healthcare. Period. And they're panicking - because they have to pay at ALL. They want FREE healthcare? I'm sure we all do. How realistic is that?

I don't like - NOW - having to pay for every person who shows up in an Emergency Room with no health insurance - but that's what I'm doing. And so is everyone else. Oh but THAT'S OK...

Pffft.

Idiots.

[CTyankee]

65. I have to laugh because some folks on this board are clearly not on Medicare.

When you are eligible for Medicare you get part A (hospitalization) w/o further cost. Then they tell you to sign up for part B (drs visits)and a monthly fee is deducted from your SS benefit check each month. If you have an alternate to part B you are currently paying for (such as I do) you can decline part B. If not, you will be penalized with a higher fee when, eventually, you must go onto part B. Of course, if you are poor you go onto Medicaid.

I don't think folks on this board understand the way this works currently. I really think they think that Medicare becomes a big, fat freebie when they hit 65. And I don't think all the folks can't possibly afford something adjusted for income to pay for their essential health care. If they are that poor, they would be on Medicaid now, period.

[Sadie4629]

68. I can't see costs go down

Unless people are forced to pay part of the bill, they will see it as "free" and once something is free, there is no limit to the stupidity with which they will use it.

Rather than an income-based premium, I would rather see an income-based co-pay, just to underscore the fact that it is NOT free.

[CTyankee]

79. It is easier, IMO, to do it with the premium than with the co-pay.

You premium is set based on your income which depends on your taxable income. How can the government arrive at the correct co=pay, at the point of service? I don't get how that would work in reality.

[Sadie4629]

101. The politicians would have to work out the details

Maybe a standard percentage at point of service, and then fill out forms to get your refund? Insurance cards that are color-coded (or bar-coded) with your co-pay percentage?

The idea of a co-pay would be to discourage frivolous use of services--and that does exist, believe me. A person should have to ALWAYS THINK TWICE about whether to call and ambulance, or go to an ER, or if they have a child with a fever. The co-pay wouldn't be high enough to make a person choose not to treat a serious illness or injury, but maybe high enough to consider alternatives first, and weigh the cost/benefit factor.

[loveangelc]

34. Totally agree. Thats a problem I have with her as well.

[mondo joe]

38. Did you have a model in mind for a way to have government mandated and

funded health care that would not involve government making decisions about personal income (either what can be paid or what can be taxed)?

[juajen]

154. Oh, come on. You support Obama. Nothing Mama does

would ever satisfy you. Why don't you tell the truth. If you're for Obama, you aren't going to give Hillary credit for a damn thing. You're probably saying that I would't give Obama credit for a damn thing either. Well, you're wrong. I believe he has a million watt smile. So there!

[Unbowed]

36. I for one am very concerned about Hillary Clinton's mandatory health insurance.

Right now I go to a flat-rate physician and only keep catastrophic coverage. You see, my doctor charges an annual fee which covers all visits, lab work and routine tests. I've saved a lot of money over conventional health coverage by partnering with my doctor in this way. My doctor can only afford to do this if he doesn't accept health insurance. I do keep a bare bones policy for health emergencies and severe illness so I don't have to pay the high costs of an HMO.

My question is this: would I be required to have full-coverage insurance under Hillary Clinton's plan? The way I read it, that is a distinct possibility.

Like you, I want to make my own choices on how I spend my money and I also want complete autonomy over my health care choices.

I wasn't impressed with Hillary-care the first time around and I don't much care for her updated version. We can do better. Yes we can.

[UALRBSofL]

52. You prefer flat rate over income based?

What wouod be the provisions for the low income in a flat rate system?

[Unbowed]

144. That's not what I said.

I'm not in favor of flat-rate insurance. My doctor charges a set fee for his services on a yearly basis.

I don't need full-coverage insurance because of this. Buying insurance and how much is my option. I don't want anyone telling me what to buy.

[Sadie4629]

107. I've heard about that type of plan

It sounds like a great deal--for anyone who can afford the doc's annual fee. To tell you the truth, I also like the idea of Health Savings Accounts, with a major-major med supplement. But, of course, not everyone could afford to do that, so it isn't really "universal."

[Unbowed]

145. You're right. It 's not universal. That is the point.

There are reasons why people would not want to be forced to buy insurance. Health savings accounts work for some folks. The point is that we should be allowed to chose instead of having it mandated for us. Now there is talk about wage garnishment entering into Hillary's plan. That is just too much!

Who is to decide who can afford what? What are the guidelines? I remember times in my life when I was so broke I couldn't afford any insurance. If it comes down to food or rent or insurance, most people will choose to buy food and have a roof over their heads.

[creeksneakers2]

128. Do many people have a similar arrangement?

I don't see why an exception couldn't be written into the law for that. The people who have private insurance will be exempt. What you have sounds like just a different method of insuring yourself.

[Unbowed]

148. Exactly. It is about choice.

I don't like the idea of being forced to purchase insurance under threat of having my wages garnished. I'm no libertarian, but that is enough to turn me libertarian.

The entire plan seems to be geared to punishing the victim. How about garnishing the profits of the insurance companies and the drug companies instead?

[paulk]

37. do you want universal healthcare or not?

you're expressing a very libertatian pov, here. Do you want the government involved in this or would you rather things stay as they are?

Do you have a solution to our healthcare crisis that doesn't involve the government?

[Kahuna]

40. Why is she calling her insurance policy plan, "Universal?" Individual

policies is not universal coverage.

[Texas_Kat]

42. I assume then, that you support privatizing Social Security?

For us to get to 'universal health care' that means that everyone has to participate... much like social security. For some to be able to 'opt out' is very similar to the Republicans' proposals that payments into Social Security be 'optional'.

If getting universal health care established is important -- then it requires participation by EVERYONE, not just some.

Obama ignores reality -- again.

[Sadie4629]

77. There is a cap to the income levels

on which you pay Social Security. And, frankly, considering you can get a MUCH better return on your $$ in the stock market than in SS, maybe there should be some limited form of privitization.

[Texas_Kat]

84. You have completely misunderstood the purpose of SS

Want to gamble with your retirement? .. by all means.... play the stockmarket.

You are arguing Bush's position.

[Sadie4629]

88. Boy, do I wish

I'd been able to invest 6.2% of my income in the stock market since the '80's, with my employer matching dollar for dollar.

[Texas_Kat]

95. If you were self-employed, like many of us have to be

You'd be grateful you get a 'match' from your employer.

[sallyseven]

82. Don;t you find it interesting that

Obama has a ad out that has the same situation of Harry and Louise that the republicans used in the first Hillary foray into Health care? Same hair style and plaid shirt, same kitchen table. I almost threw up over that one. Obama is too republican for me be careful and investigate with your mind and not your heart. Obama is a motivational speaker just like Pat Robinson and the rest of charlatans

[sallyseven]

83. Don;t you find it interesting that

Obama has a ad out that has the same situation of Harry and Louise that the republicans used in the first Hillary foray into Health care? Same hair style and plaid shirt, same kitchen table. I almost threw up over that one. Obama is too republican for me be careful and investigate with your mind and not your heart. Obama is a motivational speaker just like Pat Robinson and the rest of charlatans

[Neshanic]

57. What can you afford? How much do you pay now? Employer does it?

[Sadie4629]

81. Ours is through my DH's employment

We pay about 8% for health, vision, and dental. The company pays about double that amount. But we have huge deductibles, which are managed through a flex spending plan.

The DH figures we would pay much more under Hillary's plan--possibly as much as 20%, because the company won't have to pay anything. His company probably wouldn't raise his salary to compensate.

[jberryhill]

109. Ah - now THERE'S a health plan!

All we need is for the government to mandate that everyone marry someone who has good insurance through their employer.

Legalizing gay marriage will also expand everyone's options for seeking health insurance this way.

Problem solved.

Next?

[BlackVelvet04]

63. How do you people think

universal health care is going to happen? With Hillary's plan you don't have to switch health insurance if you are happy with what you have.

[UALRBSofL]

89. How do you think social security works?

It's based on your income. But maybe you want to opt out of social security as well since it's a government based plan and that way you don't have to pay in if you don't want to. You will never get to Universal Health Care opting out.

[NC_Nurse]

69. Whoever enacts a universal health care program will do that.

That's how it works. Or you can possibly opt out and pay for your own health care depending on which plan
gets enacted by CONGRESS. Undoubtedly, it will be different than any of the candidates plans in some ways.
They decide what's affordable for Medicare and Medicaid in the form of payroll taxes right now. They also decide
what care you qualify for and how much of a co-pay you will have. Hopefully whatever is worked out will be more
affordable than now, and more equitable than now, and provide for better care than now. There are no guarantees.

[Cha]

80. I have a different situation

too..we're not all little hilarybots. I've never had "health insurance" per se but I have mine own way of insuring my health..my way. Not freakin' hilary's way.

Totally agree.

[adapa]

143. Who will pay for your health care when you get cancer?

[jberryhill]

90. "how much I choose to spend on health insurance is MY business"

Yes.

I never understand those people who choose to get expensive illnesses and injuries that are clearly beyond what they can afford.

I feel the same way about defense, highways, and other public services. That's why I pay as much in taxes as I feel like, and I don't let the government decide how much defense I'm going to need or want next year.

[fenriswolf]

96. actually i hate the fact the government spend

1 trillion on the pentagon alone, not to mention the war in iraq, DoD spending in fact I have a huge beef with our budget. So yeah I think I'm comfortable in saying the government can spend my money in a much more efficient way then what its doing now.

[formernaderite]

93. that troubles me too

Heck, the whole idea of someone "telling" me what I should have coverage wise bothers me... maybe I'm libertarian on this issue. My kids weren't immunized, which was OUR choice...but even though we're atheists we had to lie and take a religious exemption for school. Stuff like that makes me want to spew. We keep major medical insurance only, which is pretty cheap to begin with...my wife happens to be very adept at homeopathy. I just would hate a government induced plan that would assume we all need or want the same thing.
My youngests pediatrician once shared that while she takes HMO patients...they tend to abuse the co-pay system....especially if they only pay five or ten bucks. She has a bulk of patients who come at least once a month with kids who really just have the sniffles, and always demand antibiotics for example. Do I have to agree to pay for the whiners too?

[1corona4u]

98. Then, you're not for Universal health care.

Simple as that.

[BootinUp]

100. I dont want to not have healthcare when I need it. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

104. I don't want you telling me how much my healthcare costs by forcing me to pay for both of us. n/t

[Araxen]

106. Both the plans suck

Till they truly make it universal and get rid of the for profit companies. We will never have true universal healthcare. The entire problem of healthcare is that it is for profit and till that is done away with everything else is a just band-aid and very poor ones at that.

[AJH032]

108. it sets a premium ceiling below what people would otherwise pay

I do not believe it sets a premium at an exact percentage, but rather uses that percentage as a price ceiling.

[leftofthedial]

113. I don't want anyone forcing me to give money to a corporation

especially for the kind of shit service they provide in this country

I can die just fine on my own without giving them my money so they can deny coverage, raise rates and force me to choose THEIR doctor so he can diagnose whatever they tell him to diagnose and treat it so that their profit is maximized.

fucking corporatists like Clinton are every bit as bad as an "honest" full-on repuke.

[jberryhill]

131. Do you own a car?

And, if so, do you have auto insurance?

[leftofthedial]

153. yeah, but my car insurance actually pays me for what it says it will

when I need it

And it doesn't cost me $380 a month, plus a copay, plus a $75 charge for shit it doesn't cover every time I go to the doctor.

[jberryhill]

163. You know why that is, don't you?

It's because each state mandates certain minimum requirements for auto insurance and regulates the rates. Auto insurance HAS to cover what it says it will - including all of those medical claims that arise from auto accidents.

[leftofthedial]

165. "regulates the rates" and "HAS to cover"

I'll believe those when I see them


plus, I don't die if my auto insurance company refuses to pay enough to fix my dented fender.


single-payer, not-for-profit is the ONLY way health care can be fixed.

[jberryhill]

136. Do you own a car?

And auto insurance?

[Evergreen Emerald]

123. Then you do not want universal heatlh care. Vote republican

So much for change.

[suston96]

124. Pssst...Guess who is paying me my Social Security and my Medicare treatments....

You are - if you are working and having Social Security and Medicare deducted from your paycheck. That's the way the system works.

[rodeodance]

132. Flame-BAIT-Idioit post---We have a congress. She will not decide--committee will as they do for

such matters.

[Alexander]

134. Agreed. The Shillbots don't realize this is an issue and stick with talking points.

[rodeodance]

139. You lost your last argument with me--shall we try on this one?

[adapa]

141. Then keep your current insurance- As long as you're covered

[JFKgirl]

142. She will bankrupt this country, just like her previous healthcare disaster

She knows nothing about healthcare. Does she actually do any work herself? She didnt even read the IWR bill.

[IsItJustMe]

151. The goal is a noble one. Yes, no one, and I do mean no one in this country should be without health

care. It's a damn disgrase that we have children in this country that don't have health care.

All of the industrialized countries, that I am aware of, at least provides minimal health care for their children. I am sick and tired of greedy azz people who only care for themselves.

[BlackVelvet04]

156. Then don't expect the government to help with

health care. You sound like a child wanting everything but not being responsible for anything.

[Jed Dilligan]

158. Agreed.

[Thrill]

159. Hillary will tell you what you can afford or she will take it out of your check

Damn Hillary is like the IRS

[ErnestoG]

161. And you will LIKE IT and say Thank you Ma'am, may I have another!

[Garbo 2004]

162. Congrats on taking the likely Republican position against making a significant change in

expanding the safety net for people. Because that's what they'll say.

They'll trot out the "big government" club just as they did before with Social Security, Medicare, etc. Programs that they still want to destroy, by the way.

They don't want "big government" telling them what to do with their money either, but they don't have a problem with gov't telling you what you can or can't do with your own body or having you be disproportionately taxed (taking your money) when they pass big tax cuts for corporations and then give big contracts (funded with your money) to those same corporations.

Question: who decides how much your health plan costs now? Sure, you may get to choose between different plans, but who decides how much those plans charge for coverage? What control do you have over that?

Like the Repubs you prefer having the decision of how much you have to pay for health care made by the health insurance companies? Because unlike the gov't they're beneficent and the market will keep costs down? How's that been working out?