Democratic Primaries
Related: About this forumprimary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
question everything
(47,465 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Eliot Rosewater
(31,109 posts)followers.
Telling America they cant have their employer based insurance wont go over good so you have to do it slowly but surely.
The goal is to eliminate any need to buy any insurance ever from a for profit, but it will take educating the public first.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
KPN
(15,642 posts)we all know that's not going to happen. On every issue, the middle moves right if the left isn't pushing equally hard from it's side.
Education is key as you say. The problem isn't Bernie Sanders or his supporters. It's the MSM, RW dominance of airwaves, and big money/corporate influence on the political process. Those are the barriers to educating the public. Bernie takes them head on and deserves way more credit than he gets for actually educating the American public.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)My very well educated opinion is that the Medicare for All system proposed by Sanders is worse for me that what I have now. Yes I know what they do in the Great Nation of ________ . He's not proposing that.
Please don't fix my healthcare. I have other problems at the moment. Fix the health care of the people who need the fixing. If it works, maybe I'll join up later.
Thanks for the offer though.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Eliot Rosewater
(31,109 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
marylandblue
(12,344 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Voltaire2
(12,995 posts)is bad because the health insurance industry cant continue to sell Advantage plans.
Yup. That is a tragedy.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
comradebillyboy
(10,143 posts)with no substance. There is a reason why most other top Democrats shied away from it.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Voltaire2
(12,995 posts)in the House and Senate every session, and has been for years.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
riverine
(516 posts)I ran the numbers myself and arrived at Medicare costs of $5200 PER PERSON.
So a family of four would pay $20,800 in Medicare taxes each year.
That is the reason no Medicare For ALL supporter will price it in taxes paid.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Celerity
(43,280 posts)for-profit model (which is more than double the OECD average and yet the overall system here is not even in the top 20 quality wise.)
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries/#item-relative-size-wealth-u-s-spends-disproportionate-amount-health
Americans shelled out $10,739 per person on health care last year, but growth in spending slows
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/06/americans-shelled-out-10739-per-person-on-healthcare-last-year.html
Our healthcare system here is a MASSIVE scam, a giant wealth transfer scheme, and doesn't even remotely produce the quality of care that much of the rest of the OECD enjoys.
Overall Best Countries Ranking
https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2017-01-11/10-countries-with-the-most-well-developed-public-health-care-systems-ranked-by-perception
According to data from the 2016 Best Countries rankings a characterization of 60 countries based on a survey of more than 16,000 people from four regions Denmark has the best public health care system in the world.
The United States doesn't even rank in the top 10 best public health care systems in terms of perception: of the 60 countries ranked, the U.S.'s health care system clocks in at No. 15.
snip
TOP 10: Countries with the best heathcare system
https://www.cignaglobal.com/top-10-countries-best-heathcare-system
The latest Best Countries rankings examined how people around the globe perceive the quality of the healthcare system in their countries of residence, and found Denmark to be perceived as having the most well-developed public healthcare system in the world. Sweden ranked 2nd on the list, followed by Canada in 3rd place.
The quality and efficiency of a countrys health care system can have a massive impact on its inhabitants' quality of life. The health of a nation depends largely on how the system can cater for their people, which is why a good public health care system is so important.
Why do some healthcare systems stand out from the rest? Take a look at this list to find out.
10- New Zealand
The healthcare system in New Zealand is state-sponsored and very good quality. It is funded through taxes, and provides free or subsidised medical treatment for residents.
9- Austria
Austria has a high standard of healthcare. Paying into the government health insurance scheme is compulsory for both Austrians and expats, with excellent medical facilities and services funded by the taxpayer.
8- France
France has both state run and private hospitals and both maintain a similar degree of excellence. While having private health insurance isnt essential, it is prudent to have cover when youre living in France.
7- Australia
Australias healthcare system has two main parts: the public health system, and the private health system. Since 1984, Medicare has been the Commonwealth Governments universal health insurance scheme. This provides Australian residents with free treatment in public hospitals.
6- Netherlands
Healthcare in the Netherlands is covered by two statutory forms of insurance: Zorgverzekeringswet (Zvw), often called basic insurance, covers common medical care; and Algemene Wet Bijzondere Ziektekosten (AWBZ) covers long-term nursing and care.
5- Germany
The healthcare system in Germany is very good, but expensive. Health insurance is mandatory, and most expatriates will have it added to their employee contract.
4- United Kingdom
Healthcare in the UK has proved to be reliable and convenient for citizens and expatriate workers. The National Health Service, Scottish and Northern Ireland state programs provide many options for emergency medical treatment.
3- Canada
Canadas publicly funded health care system is a group of socialized health insurance plans providing coverage to all Canadian citizens and permanent residents. Canada holds a remarkably high life expectancy rate, which many attribute to the efficiency of its health care system.
2- Sweden
The Swedish health care system is characterised by high standards of quality care and above-average healthcare spending. Only about 600,000 Swedes have a private health plan, which is usually covered by their employers and can be helpful to skip queues for treatment.
1 - Denmark
The Danish universal health care system provides Danes with mostly free medical care and is predominantly financed through income tax. All permanent residents are entitled to a national health insurance card, and most examinations and treatments are free of charge.
snip
The Swedish 'private' insurance is NOTHING like the US. That 600K number has also vastly reduced due to new laws passed lat year that mandate no significant queue times. It is ultra cheap (200 to 400 USD per YEAR) and is only used mostly for elective surgery. Most people do not even have it, as the max you can pay out of pocket in the government system is around 130 USD per YEAR for ALL care, and around 240 USD per YEAR for ALL medication.
Seventy-one percent of health care is funded through local taxation, and county councils have the right to collect income tax. The state finances the bulk of health care costs, with the patient paying a small nominal fee for examination. The state pays for approximately 97% of medical costs.
When a physician declares a patient to be ill for whatever reason (by signing a certificate of illness/unfitness), the patient is paid a percentage of their normal daily wage from the second day. For the first 14 days, the employer is required to pay this wage, and after that the state pays the wage until the patient is declared fit.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Voltaire2
(12,995 posts)But it isnt detailed. Odd.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Nanjeanne
(4,935 posts)I am so grateful that when we signed up for Medicare we decided to spend a bit more for a supplemental rather than a cheaper Medicare Advantage program. Both my husband and I were not ill - but we knew we traveled and we spoke with enough people to want flexibility so we chose a supplemental that allowed us to see any doctor that accepts Medicare. Two years later - I got breast cancer and was able to go to a first rate specialist. A year after that my husband was diagnosed with multiple myeloma - a blood cancer that is considered incurable - but "manageable". We were able to have treatment started for him at Yale but we also went to Dana Farber to meet with a myeloma specialist who monitors my husband's treatment. He had his stem cell transplant at DF - no questions asked. When he relapsed five years later, he had many compression fractures and was able to travel to three different specialists to get the best advice.
Unfortunately, I contrast that to my dearest friend who during this period was diagnosed with a brain tumor. She was on a Medicare Advantage program and suddently found out that she was limited to one hospital in New York City for treatment. She was unable to see any specialist she wanted and her physical therapy was also severely limited by her "choice" of plan. When she was no longer able to be cared for at home - her husband wanted her to go to Cavalry Hospice (a very well respected hospice organization). But his Advantage plan wasn't accepted there and he had only one choice located far away from his apartment with limited beds and staff. He had Jane taken to Cavalry and is now paying off the 20% that he was obligated to pay to have his wife cared for there.
We had no idea when we chose our plan and had we tried to change after my husband's diagnosis - we would not have been able to. Our dearest friends had no idea for all the years that they were relatively healthy and paying less than us that their "choice" wasn't the best. I can't tell you how many stories like this we hear in the hospitals where my husband is treated for his myeloma.
Every time I hear a politician talk about "choice" - I want to scream. And senior "chooses" Medicare Advantage because they are cheaper than supplementals. People should not be choosing plans in advance of whatever illness they may get because of price. Every other country figured this out. But we still can't.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)I could not figure that out reading your post. The coverage is clearly different.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Nanjeanne
(4,935 posts)where you live so its impossible to tell you. The Medigap supplement policies are offered by private insurance companies but they have specific government standards. So all N policies for example (the policy we have) all have the same benefits but various private insurance companies offer the N policy at different rates. Its really quite difficult to maneuver through it all.
Each insurance company decides how itll set the price, or premium, for its Medigap policies. Its important to ask how an insurance company prices its policies. The way they set the price affects how much you pay now and in the future. Medigap policies can be priced or rated in 3 ways:
1. Community‐rated (also called no‐age‐rated)
2. Issue‐age‐rated (also called entry‐age‐rated)
3. Attained‐age‐rated
We called and spoke with a state assistant to help us decide what was right for us. But seriously, how does anyone actually know what is right? The plans stay - your heath changes.
We pay $120/mo for the Medigap policy. My husband has been covered through Medicare and this gap policy through all his in hospital chemo treatments, his stem cell transplant and believe me when I tell you continuous treatment that costs a fortune. His infusions that were weekly are more than $100,000 each. When he got the first one, we received notice that Medicare pays 80% and if we didnt have a Medigap policy, our 20% would be $35,000! He had 16 of those and now gets them monthly. Its insane. Where we run into trouble is with the private insurance drug policy as he also takes a chemo pill that is not considered in patient. Even with insurance, his Co-Pay is currently $890 month. We have to get a grant from the Leukemia Society to cover the copays. We have spoken to people in Canada who are also in treatment and they cant fathom how we deal with it here in the US.
Anyway its why we have become so involved in the healthcare debate and why we have such strong feelings about what we want to see happen for those who come after us.
primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Look like you and your husband made the right choice early on.
But a lot of people still are having to choose between getting a serious illness stabilized/cured or going bankrupt.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Nanjeanne
(4,935 posts)primary today, I would vote for: Undecided
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)I know that business insurance is a snake pit, large companies have people that do nothing but work on insurance issues, but small companies don't have that luxury. It would be really nice if it was simple and people get full coverage for any illness or accident.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Politicub
(12,165 posts)It is Medicare in name only. It will be virtually impossible to pass. But if it did, the US would have one of the best and most accessible systems in the world.
It sweeps away private insurers, so no Advantage administrators are needed.
His healthcare proposal is one that I support.
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden