General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCould someone please tell me
Why a person can not have private insurance in an M4A system? I see no reason why a person must give up the insurance they already have if they are happy with it. I just don't understand why we are having this debate. It seems to be common sense for the government not to take away from people something they like. Moreover, it seems damn stupid for this to be the centerpiece of a political campaign.
leftstreet
(39,528 posts)I don't think many people do
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)No premiums and no out of pocket expenses for any medical, dental, or eyeglasses, and only a 3 dollar co-pay for drugs. There is no way M4A can beat that. This is why I am concerned that I might have to give it up.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I have a pretty good Medicare supplement.
3Hotdogs
(15,151 posts)The reduction of premium your employer pays might have been given to you as direct income. Your taxes would have gone up but probably less than the increase in income.
That is because private insurance runs on a 15% profit and overhead. Medicare runs on 3% overhead.
That you might retain no co-pay, free dental and so forth, would depend on the pressure put on Congress.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)with no benefit to me. It is in the past and my employer will not distribute what he saves by not paying for these benefits to me.
brewens
(15,359 posts)they paid for workers medical and make up the difference on higher taxes on workers. There is no way people can afford to pay all of that. A plan like that has no chance of passing.
elleng
(141,926 posts)It's foolish to discuss all these intricacies, of hypothetical health 'insurance' schemes. Recall how long it took for Obamacare to be established?
None of them actually exist now, just the confusing mess we live with today.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)elleng
(141,926 posts)such one(s) might get me 'decided.' Not bad for them to tell us what their IDEAL plan would be , but foolish to hang SO MUCH on hypotheticals.
stopdiggin
(15,181 posts)and has been since the issue came under discussion (at least a generation or so back). Frankly, I find this OP a little suspicious. If the poster is sincere, I'd suggest that there are virtually reams of information, and discussion, on this core issue out there at you disposal.
Kaleva
(40,285 posts)of their campaign.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)I need to know how much it will cost me before I make my decision.
Paka
(2,760 posts)You like your doctors, not your insurance. Why should a middle man make money off of your medical care. M4A doesn't change the care you get. It just takes out the unnecessary component that drives up the cost.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)as far as I am concerned. I have never had a problem with any of them. What I am concerned about is what will be my final cost from all factors. See my reply below. My employer is a winner, and I am the loser unless I can keep what I now have.
Paka
(2,760 posts)one doctor is not the same as any other. When I have changed jobs and my HMO was different I have had to endure serious issues with doctors who were not up to my standard of good care. Under M4A I would chose my doctor and not have to rely on those that were offered under my insurance coverage. You have very low standards if you think all doctors are equal.
I might add that I was a microbiologist and so have lots of interactions with doctors. Take my word for it, there are some real crappy ones in practice.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)All the doctors I have interacted with over my lifetime have been good and uniformly the same. Of course, I have never been a part of an HMO, so I have always had the free choice of my doctor.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)for which I pay zero premium beyond what Medicare already takes out. $5.00 copay to see the primary and $35.00 for specialists. It covers my drug benefits (which so far have been generics and I get free), some limited vision, some limted dental, a gym membership through silver sneakers and provides some over the counter benefits as well. So far so good.
You can have both public and private systems working together. I can change my supplemental plan each year during the Autumn enrollment period if I choose. All depends upon the details of how things are thought out and enacted.
thucythucy
(9,062 posts)would work best for me.
Would you mind telling me the name of the plan in which you're enrolled? You can PM me if you don't want to share this info in a thread.
Thanks.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)I am with the Essence Healthcare Plan in Missouri. I don't know if they reach much beyond that, but depending upon your location and needs look for the ones that have no premiums as a place to start.
thucythucy
(9,062 posts)Thanks for this info.
Best wishes.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Best of Luck!
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)I want to be spoon-fed the answer to my question. I have a good plan, but I know I am lucky to have it. Being a liberal, I wish everyone could have what I have, but I know it will come at a cost. My employer would love to lose the cost of my medical benefits. But he will not increase my pay to cover my extra cost since I now have a government insurance program. He will not help me pay my taxes. The cost of my medical insurance has been transferred from my employer to me. I need to know if the way I see this is correct, and if so what will be my cost. This is the basic information I need to know in order to make up my mind about M4A.
Phoenix61
(18,770 posts)If you want to know what youre employer is paying for it ask to see the COBRA rates. If we go M4A your employer should increase your salary by the COBRA amount which you could then use to pay your insurance. Its also possible that employers would continue to pay just into a not-for-profit insurance plan.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)he will not increase my pay. At the present time, my insurance is free for me. If this is part of the law, it is important to know this, since it would resolve many of my concerns. "Its also possible that employers would continue to pay just into a not-for-profit insurance plan." Like Blue Cross which is nowhere as good as what I now have.
Phoenix61
(18,770 posts)employer will do. Blue Cross is most assuredly a for-profit plan. When you say its nowhere near as good as what you have now Im not sure what you mean. There are so many different Blue Cross plans out there and the higher the premium the better the plan. Since you have no idea how much the plan is costing your employer Im unsure how would be able to compare your current plan to another plan. Have you thought about what would happen if you were to lose your current plan? Employers change plans all the time and jobs arent always as secure as they may seem. The advantage of a M4A plan is it isnt dependent on who you work for.
Bettie
(19,448 posts)about a raise, they will talk about your "Total Compensation Package" and include, in that compensation, your vacation time, insurance, and anything else they deem to be a part of your overall pay.
If we're ever fortunate enough to have a not-for-profit system, that amount will not be able to be included in the TCP...so, ultimately, they will have to start paying people more.
I guess for those who pay nothing for their health care, it is nice to be part of a two tier system, where they are top tier.
Many people, even with insurance can't go to the doctor because of the co-pays, the "maximum out of pocket" in the thousands of dollars, and then you still pay 20% or more of the total bill. If you have anything serious to deal with, bankruptcy is a very real possibility because 20% of, say, cancer treatment is more than most can afford. So, you go without checking on that weird lump, that strange pain, the unexplained bruising...because the cost would ruin your family and funerals are cheaper than health care.
But, congratulations on winning the lottery. Your family can access care.
OnDoutside
(20,862 posts)don't understand the issue well enough to know for sure, and will thus be pummelled by Republicans with all sorts of fear mongering. This is a battle Democrats don't need to have, when the greatest existential threat to world democracy is hanging around like a bad smell in the WH.
Think-b4-U-act
(52 posts)I just wish all our candidates would agree on building on fixing Obama-care with the goal of ultimately having Medicare for all who want it. Take it off the table. As you said we face "the greatest existential threat to world democracy" we have ever faced. This makes my concerns about M4A meaningless. Remember, the Supreme Court determines the meaning of all laws and RBG is 85 y/o. If we lose, can she serve until she is 89? This threat is greater than Hitler because it is already here.
Vinca
(53,575 posts)I think opening a Medicare public option will allow a gradual shift away from private insurance. In addition, the competition would lower insurance rates for the people who are happy with private insurance. If there's one thing we've learned it's that you can't force the entirety of the American people to do something. It has to be their idea.
Phoenix61
(18,770 posts)push for having a public option for Tri-Care. It doesnt have the baggage Medicare has and people who have it love it.
