Since you brought it up, Trump now wands American taxpayers to pay for the wall.
I believe the Trump line is that Mexico will pay us back. But its ten am here, so I could be wrong by now. It’s ten below, so time has pretty much froze around here.
I am shocked. Shocked!
Next you’ll tell me his super secret plan for defeating ISIS, the plan that is so good it will make our heads spin, doesn’t exist. :eek:
My view which while not necessarily the best for the party is probably the best for the country.
Given discussions in Congress even the Republicans realize that they can’t repeal ACA without replacing it with something. Given that Republicans are Republicans what they replace it with will likely be entirely ideologically motivated with just the basic window dressing to try to claim that they are interested in the wellfare of uninsured Americans. Democrats should at this point behave like Republicans did with Obamacare. Oppose it with whatever means possible, fail due to lack of representation, and then harp on the programs failures making sure that every one of them is laid at the feet of Republicans and Trump care.
The strategy shifts come 2020. Rather than vowing to repeal and replace Trumpcare in the first 100 days, they should run in the direction of trying to reform it. Fix the areas where it is clearly lacking, add a public option, …, whatever, but do so in such a way that much of the framework put in by Republicans is maintained, and still leave it as a Republican program. That way it will actually be in their best interest to see that is succeeds. This is the only way that I can see of actually getting useful bi-partisan reform
In the end it may be Trump instead of Obama that cements his credit as having taking the steps necessary to fix the healthcare crisis but that is a small price to pay for a healthcare system that might actually work.
The people who will believe that are pretty much a lost cause anyway. But if the people I know who are sweating this out are relieved of their cause for worry, fuck it.
Going back to the OP, I hope the Democrats take the opportunity to implement a proper system of UHC.
One thing they must do is emphasise that people can keep their private health insurance.
It’s the everyone part of your premise I question, not that higher taxes will be necessary.
I see your point, but to be fair, it depends on the job market. Some industries/regions are quite tight for labor, and so employers will offer good plans to attract talent.
I sort of agree, and sort of disagree. I think we (Dems) need to continue to make offers that meet them (Reps) half-way…but insist on actual action on the total proposal before making any concrete concessions.
This is how we work the proposal for “comprehensive immigration reform.” The Republicans have said, “Control the border first, and only then will we talk about amnesty.” Well, bullshit: after getting what they want, they would simply clam up, and amnesty would go nowhere. The Democrats have offered border control as a part of a whole, which would also include amnesty.
The Republicans won’t accept it, even though the Democrats have offered to meet them half way. We just aren’t going to pay the ferryman before getting on the raft.
Is that a typo? Normally I’d assume you meant to write “wants” but Trump seems to think he can make things happen by magic so I’m not sure.
Sumpeoplus Alltimus!
[QUOTE=Horatius]
I live in the Socialist Hellhole of Canada, and have a pretty good job. My monthly taxes (both federal and provincial combined) run about $1700. And that pays for everything, including my healthcare, and the healthcare of all those people I’m “subsidizing via my higher taxes”. Every time I see a thread here with Americans discussing the costs of their insurance, I see them quoting monthly costs that sound astronomical in comparison to my typical tax load.
[/QUOTE]
I was nodding along with you until I saw the $1700 thingy. Ouch. :eek: I make quite a bit of money, but unless you are making like triple my salary, even including health insurance I’m paying like a bit more than $600 a month less. My total, including the part I personally pay for our family health insurance and all my state, local and federal taxes (plus my retirement which is taken out pre-tax) is only like $1100 (for the month…I assume you aren’t talking about per pay period. If you are…even more ouch!). An increase of $600, assuming you and I make the same, would be quite a substantial upgrade in costs for me and my family per month (my wife makes only a bit less than I do, so presumably that would mean something like $1100 a month more…yikes!).
I’m hoping that wouldn’t be the case or you come back and tell me you are making whatever the maximum tax bracket is in Canada or something, because I can tell you that the rate you describe is a lot more than folks here would accept, even leveraging in their current health care costs into the mix.
That said, I actually do think that the Dems should push single payer health care WHEN they get back into the driver’s seat…and I’m thinking that after what I foresee as a Trump mega-disaster they might be able to do that.
Democrats need to focus on the 2018 elections … specifically State legislatures … we have reapportionment coming up and it would be sad if Republicans had their way with this again … just sad …
One thing I often see overlooked in these discussions on health care is how many people are presently employed in that industry.
Obama said that if he were starting from the ground up, he’d have pursued single payer, no question. But instead, he was attempting to transition a for-profit industry to a universal health care system. The idea was pretty good, and it took into account an awful lot of what had to be done to eventually transition to single payer. But you can’t ignore all the people who work for health insurance companies, insurance brokers or people like me who administer Flex plans. Well, you can - it just wouldn’t be very politically intelligent.
Obamacare didn’t “fail” because it was a bad idea. It “failed” because nearly half the states - Republican-controlled - actively worked for it to fail by not signing on to the Medicaid offset, and because the for-profit industry players (insurance companies, big pharma and their investors) propagandized against it and lobbied their Congress critters to fight it at every turn (not that they needed much encouragement). Never did they give it an honest chance or work in any way to make improvements.
Despite all that, it is a much appreciated change for many people who, for a lot of reasons, could not gain access to health insurance through customary channels. Including me, another sole proprietor.
Any new universal health care system is going to have to include a transitional phase, unless you want to see a staggering new unemployment number along with its implementation. But yes; single payer should be the ultimate goal.
In their quest for universal health care, I’d like to see the Dems mention periodically that we already have “death panels.” Every time an insurance company denies coverage for a procedure, that’s a “death panel” talking. The difference being that government control over reasonable and prudent universal care is made with what’s best for their citizens, and insurance companies’ decisions are made with a profit motive in mind. They only want to cover healthy people.
As has been mentioned numerous times upthread, Medicare is a very good example of single payer health care that could be expanded to include all citizens. In fact, that was Hillary’s plan: Extend its availability to those age 55 and up, allowing them to pay premiums to participate. I could see that eventually being extended to everyone, and a comparatively easy transition is made.
For quartz: Nothing precludes anyone from obtaining private insurance in any universal health care country, so far as I know. There is basic coverage provided by the state, and private health insurance “buys up” for extra amenities.
You’re forgetting the transition issue though. People DO have health insurance, and it is often more generous than what a single payer plan would offer. This would especially be true for those in unions. They won’t be happy about footing that bill in addition to their regular insurance, so you’d have to exempt them, which also carries political risk.
We had this exact problem with ACA. Many people had plans they liked and had to switch to plans they like less. Single payer doesn’t cure this problem, it creates the exact same issue. Voters are faced with the choice of paying for two plans or giving the one the like better up for longer wait times and less coverage.
What I’m seeing on this thread is that Democrats still seem committed to passing something that can’t stand. THeir single payer will get repealed the same way.
Except if you’ve got a platinum health plan, the plan can ditch all the basics that everyone gets through universal coverage and only pays for the extras that are supposedly better than what everyone else gets. Nothing about universal coverage would make private health plans illegal, or forbid fee for service medicine. It would just make most of them irrelevant.
And the fact is, employer-provided health plans stifle the economy. Workers can’t change jobs because they’ll lose their health care. Even if the new job has insurance, it is reasonable to believe that your new insurance will screw you rotten when you least expect it. It’s incredibly expensive to be self employed, or provide insurance as a small business, because you have no leverage and have to pay through the nose for it. I’ve had a dozen positions in the last 20 years, and each time I change jobs I have to go through a godawful rigamarole of figuring out what’s covered and what body parts I just have to send out on the ice floe with granny.
I would gladly pay more for coverage that was slightly shittier on paper, but at least I’d know what I was getting. Except of course in America we pay about twice as much for health coverage as in other countries. That should buy us a gold-plated health care system, right? Ha, ha. Nope. Our health care system puts us at the bottom of the pack among developed countries in all sorts of metrics. Europeans and Canadians don’t have to pay more than we do for their universal coverage, they pay less and get more.
How the fuck did that happen? I thought our free market health insurance system was supposed to do better than those meddling government bureaucrats. Well, let me ask you. Have you ever had to deal with for-profit health insurance bureaucrats? With hospital bureaucrats? Every medical practice has to have a staff of people who’s only job is to try to navigate the bureaucracy for the benefit of the patient and the practice. What a crock.
Does your employer pay anything towards your family health insurance? (Most do and it is often more than what comes out of your paycheck.)
If that amount were included in your pay and then some portion taken as a ‘healthcare tax’, how close would it come to $1700?
Lot of hypotheticals here. Let’s put some real world numbers on the table. I’m actually using (for now) ACA via BCBS Bronze plan with $ 6500 deductible in Maryland. I’m in real estate sales and I’m an independent contractor so my work does not offer anything.
I’m 57, generally healthy and have never some close to touching my deductible.
Here’s the cost to me of ACA Bronze plan over time. Benefits have stayed about the same. 3 well baby visits annually, and a $ 6500 deductible.
2014 Age 54-55 - $ 261 per month- economic pain level - OK
2015 Age 55-56 - $340 per month - economic pain level -eh-- OK
2106 Age 56-57 - $370 per month - eh well… OK
2017 Age 57-58 - $550 per month - Not OK. There’s a fucking problem here, we’re now talking a small house payment.
If I choose not to participate I am subject to a substantial tax penalty.
From an arm’s length perspective I now have (effectively) a new tax that wants $ 6600 year out of me. It’s not OK. Not even a little bit. I have voted democratic in every POTUS election over the last 2 decades including 2016. I may not vote democratic this next time depending on what I see getting put on the table.
The handwaving arrogance of democrats who assume I should be grateful to pay almost 7000 a year for meager benefit plan with a 6500 deductible is galling. It’s not remotely a good deal to me and it could quite likely change the way I vote. I am actually anticipating the possible disassembly of Obamacare to get out from underneath this legally mandated requirement or face penalties and make my own decisions about my health care.
If Democrats want to get back into power they need to fix the rose colored, borderline stupid actuarial predictions they made that got them into this mess. If you intend to suck $ 7000 year our of my pocket on top of the pile of other taxes I pay and give me ACA Bronze in return you will have a fight on your hands.
Democrats kept accusing the GOP of being in an echo chamber, but it turned out the Democrats were actually in their own echo chamber and to a large extent still are. $ 6600 year with meager bennies and a 6500 deductible is not a viable answer for me. This cannot continue and if you think that it can and will you are fooling yourselves.
Do you have any cites for these claims?