Medicare For All - A Losing Idea

[KCfromNC]

I paid into Medicare for over 40 years, I still pay Medicare premiums, and I have necessary supplemental insurance.

If everyone was able to buy in to Medicare at an appropriate cost, I suppose that the system might work. However, the buy-ins would be many trillions of dollars, and many couldn't afford the costs.

As opposed to the affordable policies now? I remember reading how it was the open market prices which forced people to stop getting insurance, at least when it was time to blame the ACA for something.

But yeah, like I said, if Americans aren't smart enough to figure out how to pay for health insurance, we could just ask our European neighbors. Or even the folks to the North - the can ride down on some moose, share Tim Horton's with us and explain it.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Then like I said, if you're right campaigning on getting rid of Medicare is a guaranteed win for every GOP candidate in 2020. What are they waiting for?

Is it your opinion that if a program is not mandatory and backed up by the coercive force that government has at its disposal that then it should not exist at all? I contend that if something is good people will volunteer to participate and no one would need to be forced to do so. Making Medicare completely voluntary would be the most sensible way to allow people freedom of choice with the option of participating. It does not have to be a matter in which the government takes control and removes individual choice over one's own private health concerns. I'm sure all the pro choice people could not help but agree. agree with that.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Ya know that saying “there are no atheists in foxholes”?

There ain’t anyone opting out when their chest starts hurting.

Then why not make it voluntary ? Why does the government seem to think people would opt out if they had the choice?

 

[cow451]

Then why not make it voluntary ? Why does the government seem to think people would opt out if they had the choice?

Because of the same reason car insurance is required for driving your vehicle on public roads. To help protect others from the poor decision-making of others.

 

[grasping the after wind]

As opposed to the affordable policies now? I remember reading how it was the open market prices which forced people to stop getting insurance, at least when it was time to blame the ACA for something.

But yeah, like I said, if Americans aren't smart enough to figure out how to pay for health insurance, we could just ask our European neighbors. Or even the folks to the North - the can ride down on some moose, share Tim Horton's with us and explain it.

You read a fantasy tale if you read that there were ever open market prices.

 

[LoAmmi]

Then why not make it voluntary ? Why does the government seem to think people would opt out if they had the choice?

Tell ya what. People should be able to opt-out of medical insurance the day they also sign a wavier that if they are in an emergency and end up in the hospital, they get no treatment.

 

[cow451]

Tell ya what. People should be able to opt-out of medical insurance the day they also sign a wavier that if they are in an emergency and end up in the hospital, they get no treatment.

Unfortunately hospitals have to save opting out butts and that’s the inconvenient fact opt-outers can’t get around.

 

[whatbogsends]

Because of the same reason car insurance is required for driving your vehicle on public roads. To help protect others from the poor decision-making of others.

Moreover, when you eliminate rejecting people due to existing conditions, then when you can opt out, people can "opt out" until they develop a condition and then "opt in" to get treatment. Which means they're not paying for insurance, only for services, thus defeating the purpose. To even out costs in health care/insurance, both healthy and sick people need to pay into the system.

 

[LoAmmi]

Unfortunately hospitals have to save opting out butts and that’s the inconvenient fact opt-outers can’t get around.

Oh, I'm aware. I'm just tired of saying they don't want to pay for this, WHEN WE ALREADY ARE! Johnny McUninsured gets into a car wreck and we're picking up his bill.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Because of the same reason car insurance is required for driving your vehicle on public roads. To help protect others from the poor decision-making of others.

Who is forcing people to drive vehicles on the public roads? The two situations are not analogous. . No one is forced to have a car or to use the public roads. It is a voluntarily entered into endeavor. No one has a choice in having a human body to take care of. the government built the roads that they require insurance to use they had no inpiut into creating the body they wish to require having insurance to dwell in.

Government is not equipped to protect us from poor decision -making. Can you honestly look at the decisions that bureaucrats and politicians make and tell me they somehow have superior decision-making abilities to the rest of us? I simply do not find it reasonable to have my right to decision -making about my health care handed over to the lot in Washington.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Moreover, when you eliminate rejecting people due to existing conditions, then when you can opt out, people can "opt out" until they develop a condition and then "opt in" to get treatment. Which means they're not paying for insurance, only for services, thus defeating the purpose. To even out costs in health care/insurance, both healthy and sick people need to pay into the system.

To keep costs from exploding then one needs to opt out or opt in from the start. No getting in after you opted out.

 

[FenderTL5]

Unfortunately hospitals have to save opting out butts and that’s the inconvenient fact opt-outers can’t get around.

Get around? I tend to think they're depending on it.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Tell ya what. People should be able to opt-out of medical insurance the day they also sign a wavier that if they are in an emergency and end up in the hospital, they get no treatment.

That's a bit extreme and more like blackmail than anything reasonable. I like the waiver idea though. The waiver should say they cannot reapply for insurance and must pay out of pocket for any health care they desire. Of course, I would prefer a system where insurance companies actually were allowed to offer insurance that the customer wanted to buy. That being the coverage that would be tailored to the needs and wants of the individual and not one size fits all government nanny requirements that the government says you need this coverage whether you think so or not because government nanny knows better than you do what you need. In any case if a person opts out of having any insurance that person needs to be responsible for the whole bill when that person gets health care. No free ride at other's expense. Why should health insurance be different than life insurance on that score? After all it is not as if we have no safety net in place for those that have too small of an income to afford any kind of insurance. Medicaid is quite a good program for those in that situation. then again I would prefer some kind of voucher system to Medicaid allowing the person or family to acquire the insurance they find correct for themselves rather than being told what they need by a bureaucracy that has no idea who they are.

 

[FenderTL5]

That being the coverage would be tailored to the needs and wants of the individual and not one size fits all government nanny says you need this coverage and government nanny knows better than you do what you need.

Do you mean an ala-cart approach?
As-in one could purchase coverage for cancer, diabetes and broken bones but refuse heart disease and stroke coverage (as examples)?

 

[LoAmmi]

That's a bit extreme and more like blackmail than anything reasonable. I like the waiver idea though. The waiver should say they cannot reapply for insurance and must pay out of pocket for any health care they desire. Of course, I would prefer a system where insurance companies actually were allowed to offer insurance that the customer wanted to buy. That being the coverage would be tailored to the needs and wants of the individual and not one size fits all government nanny says you need this coverage and government nanny knows better than you do what you need. In any case if a person opts out of having any insurance that person needs to be responsible for the whole bill when that person gets health care. No free ride at other's expense. Why should health insurance be different than life insurance on that score? After all it is not as if we have no safety net in place for those that have too small of an income to afford any kind of insurance. Medicaid is quite a good program for those in that situation. then again I would prefer some kind of voucher system to Medicaid allowing the person or family to acquire the insurance they find correct for themselves rather than being told what they need by a bureaucracy that has no idea who they are.

1) WHEN (not if) they can't pay for their hospital trip, the cost goes to us.

2) Tailoring healthcare will make it far more expensive.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Do you mean a ala-cart approach?
As-in one could purchase coverage for cancer, diabetes and broken bones but refuse heart disease and stroke coverage (as examples)?

That would be fine with me. But it doesn't have to get that specific. It could be more general or not. The options could be limitless.

 

[grasping the after wind]

1) WHEN (not if) they can't pay for their hospital trip, the cost goes to us.

2) Tailoring healthcare will make it far more expensive.

You would have to prove both those assertions before I believed them.

 

[FenderTL5]

That would be fine with me. But it doesn't have to get that specific. It could be more general or not. The options could be limitless.

So, you think most people can reasonably predict what kind of health issues they may or may not have in the future?

 

[LoAmmi]

You would have to prove both those assertions before I believed them.

1) Hospitals must treat patients in an emergency situation. That's the law. A homeless guy comes in with a heart attack? That guy gets treated. As it should be, frankly. But because that homeless guy cannot pay, the hospital has to absorb that cost. How do they do that? Raise the cost of their services to us. Ever see how much it costs to get a cough drop at a hospital? So, we're paying for the uninsured, even if indirectly, already.

2) Insurance works by a large pool of people paying into the system with most of them not needing the very high-cost treatments on a regular basis. It's why having young people in the system is so great for it. Young people pay in more than they get, but when they get older they may take more than they pay in. So, having healthy people covered for things that they might not need brings the cost down for everybody. Imagine if all men, everywhere, opted out of prenatal care. All the cost of prenatal care now falls upon women getting insurance, making that part of insurance far more expensive since most women have children at some point. Having men be part of that plan, even though they will never need prenatal care, makes that part of it more affordable.

These are like the building blocks of knowledge when approaching healthcare.

 

[cow451]

Who is forcing people to drive vehicles on the public roads? The two situations are not analogous. . No one is forced to have a car or to use the public roads. It is a voluntarily entered into endeavor. No one has a choice in having a human body to take care of. the government built the roads that they require insurance to use they had no inpiut into creating the body they wish to require having insurance to dwell in.

Government is not equipped to protect us from poor decision -making. Can you honestly look at the decisions that bureaucrats and politicians make and tell me they somehow have superior decision-making abilities to the rest of us? I simply do not find it reasonable to have my right to decision -making about my health care handed over to the lot in Washington.

People do not opt to have a heart attack or colon cancer. If you can treat those at home, please pass along your secrets.

People do not intend to fall down and go boom. Please enlighten us about how you treat a compound fracture at home.