DOJ Asking Courts to Strike down ACA, Protections for Preexisting Conditions, etc

[Machismo]

really funny cause the large percentage of people who support this, also pay taxes and plenty of them

Nationalized healthcare/ Medicare for all would be paid for by employment taxes just like Medicare/SS. so 196+ million people would be paying for it through their job and paying for their kids. Not exactly a "small group of people". In the end a lot of those people would actually end up saving money

So you are almost totally wrong on whom the population of people supporting nationalized healthcare are and whom would be paying for it. The vast majority would be paying for it and helping out the vast minority who needs help in paying for it.

Sure some people will be paying more than their total cost, but that happens in every single service currently provided from police to fire to education.

- - - Updated - - -



No based on all calculations "other people" would actually be paying less for healthcare/insurance......

And yet,t he two people I've asked int he past couple days have said they are willing to pay far less than the average needed to fund it.

Would those payroll taxes be matched by employers, like SS and Medicare are? If so, then the employees would literally be paying for half, right there. That's on top of their own salaries.

So, the average American pays about $10k a year for health care. How much are you willing to spend, just for yourself?

[Zan15]

People have to pay for those things, right? There's 330 million people in this country, how much are you willing to personally pay to make sure that everyone has healthcare whenever they need it?

- - - Updated - - -



So, 200 a month, that's $2400 a year. The average costs for healthcare are quadruple that. So, who is going to pay for the rest? What about everyone else?

We can take every dime we currently spend on just insurance, Medicaid, Medicare and the other parts and pay for EVERYONE to have coverage, and damn good coverage....and probably save money if we don't fuck up and make it a corporate giveaway like Medicare part D was.

[Machismo]

And it means I'm paying more than others. It's proportional, just as progressive tax systems are.

As I said, I have zero problems paying more than those earning less than me. None whatsoever.

That's because you will more than likely still be paying less than what the per-capita cost is for healthcare in this country. Unless you are paying $10k (per person in your family) a year for healthcare, you will be getting "free money" out of the deal. Most people in these threads will be on the receiving end of that.

[Zan15]

And yet,t he two people I've asked int he past couple days have said they are willing to pay far less than the average needed to fund it.

Would those payroll taxes be matched by employers, like SS and Medicare are? If so, then the employees would literally be paying for half, right there. That's on top of their own salaries.

So, the average American pays about $10k a year for health care. How much are you willing to spend, just for yourself?

Medicare for all would work exactly like Medicare funding works today with a way to opt in if you are unemployed with a combination of Medicaid eligibility rules built in.



Employers/Employees are already paying for 150+ million people to have coverage.

Based on my W2 the amount my employer and myself are paying for coverage is 18,700.

10k you say, sounds like one hell of a saving for myself and my employer.

[Machismo]

We can take every dime we currently spend on just insurance, Medicaid, Medicare and the other parts and pay for EVERYONE to have coverage, and damn good coverage....and probably save money if we don't fuck up and make it a corporate giveaway like Medicare part D was.

Remember, most employers pay a lot for insurance, they are carrying the load.

[Zan15]

That's because you will more than likely still be paying less than what the per-capita cost is for healthcare in this country. Unless you are paying $10k (per person in your family) a year for healthcare, you will be getting "free money" out of the deal. Most people in these threads will be on the receiving end of that.

Build the system right and take the profit and waste out of the system you can easily get that number down by multiple thousands. making even more people under that "free money" threshold.

[Machismo]

Medicare for all would work exactly like Medicare funding works today with a way to opt in if you are unemployed with a combination of Medicaid eligibility rules built in.



Employers/Employees are already paying for 150+ million people to have coverage.

Based on my W2 the amount my employer and myself are paying for coverage is 18,700.

10k you say, sounds like one hell of a saving for myself and my employer.

Medicare works as a large pool of people are paying for the healthcare of a much smaller group of people. When the entire pool is the same size, that percentage taken out will have to increase significantly. This is where people will try to hit business owners to cover the cost.

[Zan15]

Remember, most employers pay a lot for insurance, they are carrying the load.

Yes but a Medicare for all system would save them money over what they are currently paying.
There would be no negative financial implications to them.
Worst case would be they would pay exactly what they are paying today.

[Machismo]

Build the system right and take the profit and waste out of the system you can easily get that number down by multiple thousands. making even more people under that "free money" threshold.

Once again, that's a hard sell for all the "haves" in society who are paying more in your plan.

[Zan15]

Medicare works as a large pool of people are paying for the healthcare of a much smaller group of people. When the entire pool is the same size, that percentage taken out will have to increase significantly. This is where people will try to hit business owners to cover the cost.

The amount you would save in an efficient non profit system would cover any difference.

You are also missing the point of adding a population of people "way more" healthy and less expensive by many multiples then the Medicare population. The risk pool would dramatically be reduced thus offsetting the cost of the larger pool.
This is why it was so important for ACA to have young people participating.


"cover the cost"?? What cost, the program as proposed would cost less than all of the current programs running right now. There is no additional cost to business owners.

- - - Updated - - -

Once again, that's a hard sell for all the "haves" in society who are paying more in your plan.

No its not they currently support Medicare and Social security by a huge margin. They already participate in multiple programs where they are paying more into the system then others and they fucking overwhelmingly support it never going away.

[Machismo]

The amount you would save in an efficient non profit system would cover any difference.

You are also missing the point of adding a population of people "way more" healthy and less expensive by many multiples then the Medicare population. The risk pool would dramatically be reduced thus offsetting the cost of the larger pool.
This is why it was so important for ACA to have young people participating.


"cover the cost"?? What cost, the program as proposed would cost less than all of the current programs running right now. There is no additional cost to business owners.

I agree, younger people are healthier, and older people are damned expensive to keep alive. I never said otherwise. That's why I was going by the average healthcare costs for All Americans.

The issue is that you are going to have to basically shut down and reconfigure one of the biggest industries in the country, and they like their profits. You are going to have to convince a lot of people that "socialism is great." So far, the marketing hasn't been very good. We saw in 2010 that pushing even the ACA crushed the Democrats. Do you think Pelosi is ready to risk her job, once again?

[Edge-]

That's because you will more than likely still be paying less than what the per-capita cost is for healthcare in this country.

Alright, so is the issue, "BUT OTHERS WILL PAY MORE THAN YOU!" which you implied it was and I said it was fine with or, "BUT THE NUMBERS I AM GOING TO THROW OUT WON'T BE AFFORDABLE!"?

Unless you are paying $10k (per person in your family) a year for healthcare, you will be getting "free money" out of the deal.

Alright, then I'll be getting "free money" now. And hopefully down the line I can afford to pay a lot more into the system and I'll be helping subsidize folks as I was subsidized.

You see, I don't have an issue spending money to help others with basic needs like food or healthcare. I have an ounce of empathy for my fellow humans and am happy to volunteer, donate, and pay taxes to try to help those less fortunate than I have been. Because we're all in this together, we're not a nation of 327 million isolated individuals.

[Machismo]

Alright, so is the issue, "BUT OTHERS WILL PAY MORE THAN YOU!" which you implied it was and I said it was fine with or, "BUT THE NUMBERS I AM GOING TO THROW OUT WON'T BE AFFORDABLE!"?



Alright, then I'll be getting "free money" now. And hopefully down the line I can afford to pay a lot more into the system and I'll be helping subsidize folks as I was subsidized.

You see, I don't have an issue spending money to help others with basic needs like food or healthcare. I have an ounce of empathy for my fellow humans and am happy to volunteer, donate, and pay taxes to try to help those less fortunate than I have been. Because we're all in this together, we're not a nation of 327 million isolated individuals.

SO, how do you convince those paying more, to pay even more? Socialism is easy to sell to those receiving the free stuff. It's a lot harder to sell it to those paying for it.

[Zan15]

I agree, younger people are healthier, and older people are damned expensive to keep alive. I never said otherwise. That's why I was going by the average healthcare costs for All Americans.

The issue is that you are going to have to basically shut down and reconfigure one of the biggest industries in the country, and they like their profits. You are going to have to convince a lot of people that "socialism is great." So far, the marketing hasn't been very good. We saw in 2010 that pushing even the ACA crushed the Democrats. Do you think Pelosi is ready to risk her job, once again?

But the average healthcare cost will not change by putting them all under the same risk pool. The proposals allow for broader powers to negotiate prices and save money. a single plan run non profit like Medicare is way more efficient and cheaper than private insurance. Just that change alone would save employers Hundreds of Billions a year. Hell the amount of money they would save by not having to manage healthcare coverage for their employees would be huge on its own.


Also you Don't have to convince them socialism is great because its not socialism, unless of course you consider Medicare and Social security socialism, then there is no need to convince since they support it already by a huge margin.


I do agree its a hard sell to a particular group of uneducated voters and people of this country whom are told lies by the minority trying to keep the system as it is today because of the huge amount of profit they are making.

- - - Updated - - -

SO, how do you convince those paying more, to pay even more? Socialism is easy to sell to those receiving the free stuff. It's a lot harder to sell it to those paying for it.

Where do you get the idea people will be paying more for healthcare coverage?

[Edge-]

SO, how do you convince those paying more, to pay even more? Socialism is easy to sell to those receiving the free stuff. It's a lot harder to sell it to those paying for it.

Taxes. Like the other developed nations handle health care payments.

[Machismo]

But the average healthcare cost will not change by putting them all under the same risk pool. The proposals allow for broader powers to negotiate prices and save money. a single plan run non profit like Medicare is way more efficient and cheaper than private insurance. Just that change alone would save employers Hundreds of Billions a year. Hell the amount of money they would save by not having to manage healthcare coverage for their employees would be huge on its own.


Also you Don't have to convince them socialism is great because its not socialism, unless of course you consider Medicare and Social security socialism, then there is no need to convince since they support it already by a huge margin.


I do agree its a hard sell to a particular group of uneducated voters and people of this country whom are told lies by the minority trying to keep the system as it is today because of the huge amount of profit they are making.

- - - Updated - - -



Where do you get the idea people will be paying more for healthcare coverage?

The average cost may not change, but can you guarantee that some people won't end up paying a shit ton more? That's where the hard sell comes in. People are wary after the abortion that was the ACA.

It is socialism, because it's the government controlling the means of an industry.

If people supported it by a wide margin (In the United States), then you don't need me. You already have all the people you need. Let's see if you can get it done. I'm willing to bet a wager that it doesn't happen by 2024. You care to make that wager?

- - - Updated - - -

Taxes. Like the other developed nations handle health care payments.

And Americans tend to bristle at taxes, as a whole. And the real kicker will be HOW those taxes are implemented, and how they are divided up.

[Edge-]

And Americans tend to bristle at taxes, as a whole. And the real kicker will be HOW those taxes are implemented, and how they are divided up.

See, now we're getting to the meat and potatoes of this rather than just whinging about needing to pay for others and how nobody will want to do that.

Taxes aren't popular, you're right. And that's largely driven by the Republican party driving the notion that taxes bad or wrong, which is fucking stupid. Pointless taxes are dumb and wrong, but taxes are literally how a country is able to operate. We should all be excited to pay our taxes. Why? Because it makes sure that the agencies regulating food and drink are able to ensure that we're getting safe stuff. It makes sure that we can pay for our military. It pays for TSA agents and customs agents to screen folks coming in. These are all great things.

How do we divide it up? Well, we'll need to look at the costs associated with it and then figure out a progressive tax system that's capable of funding it. That's the hard part, and it's not something that randoms in a politics forum in a MMO fansite are going to be able to provide you conclusive answers on.

[Machismo]

See, now we're getting to the meat and potatoes of this rather than just whinging about needing to pay for others and how nobody will want to do that.

Taxes aren't popular, you're right. And that's largely driven by the Republican party driving the notion that taxes bad or wrong, which is fucking stupid. Pointless taxes are dumb and wrong, but taxes are literally how a country is able to operate. We should all be excited to pay our taxes. Why? Because it makes sure that the agencies regulating food and drink are able to ensure that we're getting safe stuff. It makes sure that we can pay for our military. It pays for TSA agents and customs agents to screen folks coming in. These are all great things.

How do we divide it up? Well, we'll need to look at the costs associated with it and then figure out a progressive tax system that's capable of funding it. That's the hard part, and it's not something that randoms in a politics forum in a MMO fansite are going to be able to provide you conclusive answers on.

But, taxes are also not popular for moderates, not just the GOP. You are never going to convince the GOP, not going to happen. The Democrats may lose an election or two over jacking up taxes. The GOP would implode, possibly for good. Now, that's not to say they don't like their taxes, they do. They just like to hide them.

That last part is the problem, there aren't really many plans out there that politicians have managed to compile. There's lots of rhetoric, but nearly enough wonks trying to get the numbers nailed down. This is a sales pitch, and as it stands, the left is losing, badly.The GOP merely needs to scream that taxes are bad. The Dems have to show exactly how much money people will be saving, how they will save that money, and how it will be an efficient model, and not a clusterfuck like the ACA. So far, I have yet to see much of anything. I remember looking through Bernie's plan, and it was a pipe dream filled with "what ifs."

[Zan15]

The average cost may not change, but can you guarantee that some people won't end up paying a shit ton more? That's where the hard sell comes in. People are wary after the abortion that was the ACA.

It is socialism, because it's the government controlling the means of an industry.

If people supported it by a wide margin (In the United States), then you don't need me. You already have all the people you need. Let's see if you can get it done. I'm willing to bet a wager that it doesn't happen by 2024. You care to make that wager?

- - - Updated - - -



And Americans tend to bristle at taxes, as a whole. And the real kicker will be HOW those taxes are implemented, and how they are divided up.

They will be paying under the same logic that they currently pay for under Medicare and their private insurance.

with a single pool, efficiencies and savings, You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would be paying "a shit ton more". I am willing to bet A LOT more people pay a SHIT TON less for their healthcare and the people paying a SHIT TON are more than likely the people whom would not even notice the change or even care.


As far as the big bad "socialism" word you keep using.....
Is our education system is socialist since the govt controls the whole industry? Highway and road system socialist? Military is socialism, can I opt out of paying for that and take my chances with China on my own? shit i could save 25% on my taxes every year!! If you support it Then You DON'T NEED ME right?? You already have all the people you need.

You throw that word around a lot very generically while describing half of the current very popular services provided by the govt that everyone supports.


I can only imagine what other things you want to "opt out" of. Sorry that is not how this country and its taxes/services work. You might want to move.



oh and I agree national healthcare is dead till the next major depression/recession and 50+ million people lose their coverage. Or till corporate America decides that they can save enough money then they will pay their way through our govt to get national healthcare passed so it helps their bottom line and stock prices

[Machismo]

They will be paying under the same logic that they currently pay for under Medicare and their private insurance.

with a single pool, efficiencies and savings, You'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would be paying "a shit ton more". I am willing to bet A LOT more people pay a SHIT TON less for their healthcare and the people paying a SHIT TON are more than likely the people whom would not even notice the change or even care.


As far as the big bad "socialism" word you keep using.....
Is our education system is socialist since the govt controls the whole industry? Highway and road system socialist? Military is socialism, can I opt out of paying for that and take my chances with China on my own? shit i could save 25% on my taxes every year!! If you support it Then You DON'T NEED ME right?? You already have all the people you need.

You throw that word around a lot very generically while describing half of the current very popular services provided by the govt that everyone supports.


I can only imagine what other things you want to "opt out" of. Sorry that is not how this country and its taxes/services work. You might want to move.



oh and I agree national healthcare is dead till the next major depression/recession and 50+ million people lose their coverage. Or till corporate America decides that they can save enough money then they will pay their way through our govt to get national healthcare passed so it helps their bottom line and stock prices

Yes, they are socialistic endeavors. I would LOVE to have the ability to opt out of programs, I'm a huge fan of voluntary governance.

The issue is that we have talking points and buzzwords, but no real plans. We had Bernie's plan, but the math in it was sooooo wrong, that it was dead before it began. The issue is that the amount saved (or not saved) is speculative, because it's nationalizing a major industry. There's going to be so much haggling and pushback, that they will try to draw it out for decades.