Health Care Should NOT Be Coupled To Employment.

[Ron Green]

Keeping a job that’s not a good fit just to have HC coverage makes no sense, but that’s what many people do.

Small businesses, entrepreneurs and startups shouldn’t have to direct their precarious cash flow into “group plan” schemes, but that’s what many of them are forced to do.

Labor unions shouldn’t have to separate their members into tribes, fighting for pieces of corporate pie while singing about solidarity for all workers.

One Risk Pool for All solves a multitude of problems.

[Sherman A1]

1. Precisely

You are absolutely correct.

[Odoreida]

2. And the reason it is that way ...

... is NOT because someone decided it was a good idea, but mere historical accident of conditions during WWII.


Not endorsing any particular scheme at this point, but ANY health care reform must get rid of this.

[treestar]

3. Exactly. Jobs are not as permanent now.

We are told to use the gig economy or expect to work for different employers. There's no reason to tie it to jobs.

[Rider3]

4. Nailed it!

[LonePirate]

5. Tell that to the Dems who refuse to give up their overpriced, limited coverage private insurance.

Evidently they think they will always have a job with insurance he fits or they will seamlessly transition to employer based coverage to Medicare when they turn 65.

[KT2000]

6. But it all works out so well

If a person gets sick and they are unable to work, they will lose healthcare just when it is going to cost the insurance companies money. It is much better for the seriously ill to spend down all assets until they are in poverty and then qualify for Medicaid, or what will be left of it after the republicans get through with it.

What I find so entertaining is the fact that a person can pay for their workplace health insurance for decades and if they are laid off - poof - no healthcare no matter how much a person has paid into it.

You make a good point about the One Risk Pool.

[Newest Reality]

7. Agreed...

Our real problem is the lobbyists for the insurance industry as well as other vested interests that might be threatened, including the medical establishment and Big Pharma.

The think tanks and PR firms are also on the battle lines and have copious amounts of financial support that translates into targeted propaganda that then poisons the well further.

So, even if we manage to convince larger segments of the population about this in regards to their best interests, their consent will be manufactured and you will certainly see various fears injected into the narrative. There's a LOT of profit at stake here.

[Karma13612]

8. I've been saying this for decades.

This country only seems to value people who can “pull their own weight” .

We should all be productive of course, but when you are a child or the elderly or between jobs, it’s like you don’t count or something.

Universal healthcare is not a handout. So sick of the GOP attitude of “pull yourself up by or bootstraps”, or, my favorite: “why should I be paying for my lazy neighbor’s healthcare”.


Universal Healthcare. We are the only developed country in the world who doesn’t have it.

[Hoyt]

10. Does "one risk pool" mean a 25 year-old will have to pay more than their actuarial cost to cover

the elderly, like me and tens of millions of others? Don't think that is going to go over well, and will pit the young against the old. Telling them they get to pay three times their actuarial rate for 30 years, then they get to benefit from others, ain't gonna work. Obviously, this assumes Warren and Sanders aren't able to hide the costs by claiming million/billionaires will pay for it.

Under Warren and Sanders' plans, I think a lot of small, startup businesses -- who often don't start out providing health insurance -- will have to pay more in taxes. Not sure that is going to go over well either.

One of the nice things about the ACA is that it makes it relatively easy to walk away from a job. Increased subsidies -- for premiums and out-of-pocket costs -- would make that work even better.

I'm all for MFA -- should have started it right after the WWII like most countries, or we should have stayed with Britain 200+ years ago -- but our candidates haven't worked out the details and the 2020 electorate is going to respond negatively to mandated MFA, whether you like the idea or don't trust the government to pull it off. A Public Option will get us there faster because it lets people try a government plan before committing.

[Ron Green]

11. Your use of the term "actuarial rate" makes me doubt that you're really a fan of

MFA, or any single-payer system. That’s an insurance term that indeed pits groups against each other so that maximum cash can be extracted. The 25 year old person can get an illness or injury that will require an expensive amount of care, just as a person may grow old and die with almost no doctor bills. To play the odds based on age, sex or ZIP code is really to emphasize our differences rather than to acknowledge that we all are at some risk for illness and injury.

Here’s an idea to differentiate small mom-and-pops and startups from big corporations: Base the business’ health care tax burden on the ratio between the CEO’s pay and that of the entry level worker!

At first blush, a “public option” seems like a reasonable step toward a real universal system - but of course it will continue to sort people into more- and less-desirable customers for insurers, further promoting a multi-tiered scheme.

[Hoyt]

13. No, that's a term that describes a 25 year-old paying 3 times what they would

under the ACA. It’s also a concept that pits young folks against old.

[Ron Green]

15. You seem to be thinking in terms of rate-paying:

As in premiums, deductibles and co-pays that we have now, in the world of insurance. A single-payer system will be funded by taxes. High wage earners, wealthy individuals and highly profitable businesses will pay more. Your 25-year old will pay a lot if he’s a hedge fund manager or trust fund kid, but very little if he’s just making his way.

The world of plans and networks is many people’s frame of reference because they’ve never known anything better.

One other point is that we must encourage healthier communities with more sensible housing, land use, transportation and other policy decisions. Our overall public health has an enormous impact on health care costs.

[Hoyt]

16. I'll bet you it will be funded partially by premiums -- just like Medicare -- before it's over.

I agree with Public Health aspects.

Heck, even Canada has premiums for prescription drugs.

[Ron Green]

17. The "skin in the game" argument is an important one.

It’s in the American DNA to believe that people value and respect something more if they’ve paid directly for it. This is a concept that’s cynically exploited by the insurance companies selling “choice” while limiting their networks to certain providers.

I honestly don’t know how a universal, streamlined rational system that better controls costs and offers more uniform coverage across the socioeconomic spectrum will be successfully sold to a country so in love with class differences as ours is. Americans love to have nicer things than their neighbors, and that’s not likely to change.

[pinkstarburst]

12. Here's the thing

-There are 25-year-olds who are struggling to find employment/good coverage who ARE worried about getting sick or what happens if they're in an accident

-Not all 20-somethings are healthy.

-Plenty of 20-somethings are not selfish and get the concept that you don't leave poor and disabled and elderly people uninsured and living in poverty just because YOU happen to be healthy TODAY. That can quickly change.

-We as a nation have had to be dragged kicking and screaming to practically every reasonable point of progress. Social security. Civil rights. Interracial marriage. Women's rights. LGBT rights. At some point, we are going to need someone brave enough to take this on even if people howl about how it's going to ruin everything and the world will end.

[Hoyt]

14. Not enough will vote for a MFA until they get a chance to see it and try it out..

By the time we can elect a candidate running on MFA (even if you don’t want it), we could have a Public Option that 80% of the population voluntarily chooses without having it forced down their throats. Then, it’s easy to convert the other 20%.

[Laelth]

18. Agreed. k&r n/t

-Laelth