How will we pay for Obama's universal healthcare?

A plan that maintains private insurance companies in the mix makes no sense to me, and was the principal reason I favored Clinton over Obama.

And getting rid of the costly occupations, trimming the military budget, and no more "no bid contracts" with the like of Halliburton et al...

er-start research for CURES, LIKE BEFORE THE REAGAN DAZE

if all of those redundancies in our new health care system were eliminated? Seems like it would involve a lot of jobless people.

that actually do things that help humanity instead of harming humanity.

in the current environment we have for health care. The current alternative is to use the insurance industry or do without.

Also, I'm not talking about the top of the insurance food chain, I am talking about the rank and file workers. It isn't like jobs are just created out of the blue. And having the market flooded with thousands of out of work people with the exact same skill set would not be a good thing.

needed rank and file workers also.

The cogs are just as vital as the motor that drives them.

you work quick.

about where our current rulers are leading us go ahead.
As for me I was raised with the idea of Never Forget-Never Again.

Why is it, anytime someone brings up that we need to transition to single-payer, someone comes along and says, "but we can't kick out all the paper-pushers"? Look, one, they can start pushing paper for single-payer in handling payments, and two, very few people give a rat's ass about all the offshoring and inshoring going on in this country; even if some of those workers lose their job, why are their jobs sacrosanct, but textile workers, nurses, IT workers, carpenters, etc. jobs aren't, and are being offshored and inshored like crazy? Their jobs aren't more important than any other worker losing his or her job due to rampant off/inshoring.

All of the others are equal travesties I agree. However, in the position some here seem to take that on XX-XX-XXXX date the health insurance industry as it currently is ceases to exist and we completely switch over to single-payer, I see nothing but chaos. Simply put, it would not take nearly as many people to run that system. Could some of them get jobs under that system, yes. But it needs to be a gradual switch to the new system. Allow people a chance to adjust to the new paradigm. Sorry to bring in a cliche, but Rome wasn't built in a day.

this out:

http://www.ontheissues.org/social/Barack_Obama_Health_Care.htm

Billary lost. Get over it. On every substantive issue, there was no difference between Hillary and Obama. Are Hillary people going to be sniping from the sidelines for the next five months?

besides.. if the house and senate are full of dems, they should be able to pass a bill that gaurantees health care... that's there job.. Obama is not the dictator in chief.. He can push for congress to get him a health care bill that works, but he cannot pass the damn thing.. which is why I beleive his policies are somewhat vague when it comes to specifics. He understands that an idea that goes in, comes out looking and smelling like something else.. He may not take PAC money or lobbyist money, but most of them do.. You think Miss Diva Pelosi wants to be un-invited to the next party she can attend..

when the Dems had control of both houses, it didn't happen during the Carter years when Dems controlled both houses and things were much more liberal, and it didn't happen during Johnson's administration when he was pushing his Great Society with a Democratic Congress (although admittedly, health care costs were much more affordable back then). With the current crop of Dems, I wouldn't hold my breath.

more likely to begin the process.. because of the DINO's and DLC'rs and life long DC insiders who are beholden to the corporations.

That's what I have now. Premiums are based on family income. The insurance covers all necessary procedures, including dental. The government pays 70% of treatment and drug bills up front with no hassle. Supplemental private insurance can be purchased if desired. Patients can see any doctor they want to who is in the program (and most are).

I believe that there can be no for profit health care insurance. Obama's plan will involve the insurance companies to begin with and the n slowly make them irrelevant by slowly swithing the program totally to a government based system, by making it unprofitable for insurance companies to stay in the business. Look at hurricane policies.

Look at the number of insurance companies that have pulled out of states where they lost way too much money on hurricane coverage - they lost so much money and could not raise rates high enough to make money. - See ya. I think the same will eventually happen with health care...it is a natural progression of capitalism. Anytime anything becomes way too expensive, it becomes unprofitable - you cannot raise prices enough to make money, so just exit the business. It will take a number of years, but I believe that Obama's plan will force the hand of the insurance companies and the system will have to go public, because we cannot let the whole thing just collapse as the for profit insurers begin to exit.

But Clinton's plan also maintained private insurance companies in the mix. With the exception of Kucinich, every plan I heard maintained private insurance companies, although Edwards' plan did give people a choice of Medicare type insurance or private health insurance.

Kucinich's Plan was the BEST!

If we used the same formula, employers pay a portion for each employee, self-employed people pay a portion for themselves, and the US actually pays for services - rather than denying care to make a profit, we won't be in any more debt than we are currently for health care.

People end up going to the ER to get treatment, which normally makes that part of the hospital bleed red ink. The cost of treating the uninsured or underinsured is still passed along to those who have private insurance.

I'd also find a way to have hospitals confront the fact of increasing administrative costs. That does not seem to be part of the equation right now. I've talked to physicians dismayed at the swelling of the ranks of the MBAs and MSNs in their facilities. A good portion of these places are top-heavy to put it politely. That has to change.



Welcome to DU!

Anyone including insurance companies in the mix is looking out for insurance companies, not those in need of health care.

Merchants of war vs. life and health for the country. Freedom isn't free? Well, neither is life. It's time we started paying for people to have good healthcare and join the rest of the civilized world.

Germany has mandatory health coverage for all citizens through insurance companies. The premiums are taken out of your paycheck like SS and are based on your income. If you make above a certain level you may opt out of the plan to buy your own but once you opt out you can never, ever opt back in.

It turns the entire population into a single insurance pool which reduces the cost.

The other point I'd make is that we're paying for universal coverage now but not getting it. Hospitals cost-shift the unpaid bills (30-40% of hospital bills are uncollected) to insured patients. Many indigent patients wait until they can be treated in the emergency room where treatment is mandated by law regardless of ability to pay. That means an illness that might have been cured with a shot of anti-biotic gets very expensive to treat plus the expense of emergency room treatment.

This is a gross over-simplification but you get the drift.

You won't be able to do anything until the war has ended and the troops are brought home.

How will we pay for it? That remains to be seen, however several other modern industrial democracies have implemented universal healthcare through mandate programs that also retain private insurance. Japan France and Germany come to mind. The trick is in the implementation details. I, like you, favor expanding medicare to everyone. That does not appear to be in the cards right now, however I think we can evolve in that direction. A mandate system should offer a public run program as an alternative to private insurance, it should also regulate fees, abolish risk based pricing, mandate portability, mandate basic coverage, set cola adjusted income levels to qualify for subsidized coverage, and mandate employer contributions. With a firm control of congress and a democratic administration, development and implementation of a well thought out program is very possible.

The ONLY difference between Clinton's and Obama's plans was that Clinton required everyone to purchase (or have purchased on their behalf) insurance from a private company. Obama's only mandated it for children.

Neither provided universal coverage because both required individuals who might not be able to afford it to purchase insurance. Personally, my family's insurance costs more than $20,000 a year since pre-existing conditions limit all three of us to employment sponsored or open enrollment plans. Fortunately my employer picks up most of that amount, and fortunately I have a job that pays enough that I can afford to pick up what the employer doesn't. If those conditions did not exist, no amount of mandating that I have insurance would make it possible for me to purchase insurance.

ditto......have got to get the for profit out of it, period. nuff said. :bounce: But ever getting to that, will take quite a long, long time...... but that is the only way. :patriot:

he takes the money from the defense budget...

War on terror, war on drugs. End those wars and we have a good down-payment on health care. And, there may need to be additional taxes to pay for universal health care.

But, favoring Clinton over Obama on health? I think both of them would utilize existing insurance companies in the private sector. There are minor differences in the details, but those are things that would have to be hammered out in congress, no matter which one was president. In fact, Clinton may be in a more influential position as Senator than as President, or at least in a good position for a partnership in this effort.

...pay for it by payroll deduction (like Social Security...mandatory, not optional).

I know that Obama doesn't want to make it mandatory, but he's going to have to.

That's why I was a Clinton supporter. Obama will hopefully do great things for America, but healthcare reform will not be one of them, unless Clinton is by chance his veep choice. Mark my words, bookmark this post.

It would be worth it to me to see Clinton as veep just to get it passed, but even that is just a drop in the bucket of America's problems. Until we can once again become a manufacturing nation with good paying blue-collar jobs with decent benefits, we will continue to decline.

I think Obama should chose whomever he wants for veep. I hold faith in his decision because he is OUR nominee. We have rolled the dice with his being the nominee, and I sure hope it comes up 7/11! I know, we all do!

At least with an Obama administration, we may not have to keep a grip on our asses.

They both still work with the insurance companies. Clinton's plan would make coverage mandatory for all, Obama's mandatory for children only.

They're both using bandaids on a sinking ship.

Heartless.

The primaries are over. Obama won.

will not help rein in costs. Imagine if all the $billions paid in salaries (wages and commissions), paperwork, hardware, printing, postage, etc. to private health insurance carriers was actually paid for the delivery of health-care? Here is a list of the compensation private company CEOs receive just to help "you" pay for "your" health-care:

* United Health Group
CEO: William W McGuire
2005: 124.8 mil
5-year: 342 mil

* Forest Labs
CEO: Howard Solomon
2005: 92.1 mil
5-year: 295 mil

* Caremark Rx
CEO: Edwin M Crawford
2005: 77.9 mil
5-year: 93.6 mil

* Abbott Lab
CEO: Miles White
2005: 26.2 mil
5-year: 25.8 mil

* Aetna
CEO: John Rowe
2005: 22.1 mil
5-year:57.8 mil

* Amgen
CEO: Kevin Sharer
2005:5.7 mil
5-year:59.5 mil

* Bectin-Dickinson
CEO: Edwin Ludwig
2005: 10 mil
5-year:18 mil

* Boston Scientific
CEO:
2005:38.1 mil
5-year:45 mil

* Cardinal Health
CEO: James Tobin
2005:1.1 mil
5-year:33.5 mil

* Cigna
CEO: H. Edward Hanway
2005:13.3 mil
5-year:62.8 mil

* Genzyme
CEO: Henri Termeer
2005: 19 mil
5-year:60.7 mil

* Humana
CEO: Michael McAllister
2005:2.3 mil
5-year:12.9 mil

* Johnson & Johnson
CEO: William Weldon
2005:6.1 mil
5-year:19.7 mil

* Laboratory Corp America
CEO: Thomas MacMahon
2005:7.9 mil
5-year:41.8 mil

* Eli Lilly
CEO: Sidney Taurel
2005:7.2 mil
5-year:37.9 mil

* McKesson
CEO: John Hammergen
2005: 13.4 mil
5-year:31.2 mil

* Medtronic
CEO: Arthur Collins
2005: 4.7 mil
5-year:39 mil

* Merck Raymond Gilmartin
CEO:
2005: 37.8 mil
5-year:49.6 mil

* PacifiCare Health
CEO: Howard Phanstiel
2005: 3.4 mil
5-year: 8.5 mil

* Pfizer
CEO: Henry McKinnell
2005: 14 mil
5-year: 74 mil

* Well Choice
CEO: Michael Stocker
2005: 3.2 mil
5-year: 10.7 mil

* WellPoint
CEO: Larry Glasscock
2005: 23 mil
5-year: 46.8 mil

* Wyeth
CEO: Robert Essner
2005:6.5 mil
5-year: 28.9 mil


TOTAL 2005: 559.8 mil

TOTAL 5-Year: 14.9 billion
http://blogs.webmd.com/mad-about-medicine/2007/08/ceo-compensation-who-said-healthcare-is.html

No more $4000 bills for five stitches. No more $50 for a single Tylenol pill, or $10 bags of ice.

Make it single-payer, make everyone accountable, and you'll actually save money - same healthcare, more healthcare, but cheaper.

The reason why health care is so expensive is because the health insurance companies want it to be expensive. They want it to be priced out of reach of normal people, so normal people are forced to buy insurance.

:evilgrin:




For all those that don't watch Monty Python this is humor....

same way we pay for corporate, insurance company friendly medical "care" today.

Can't have everything.

You can watch them live on cnn.com. His answer usually goes something like:

1. Close corporate tax loopholes.
2. Roll back Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.
3. Focus on a health care system instead of a disease care system.
4. Make the health care industry more efficient (mentions things like record-keeping).
5. Calls McCain's health care plan one for the 'healthy and the wealthy'.
6. If we can spend x dollars for an unauthorized war in Iraq, we can spend x dollars in (insert city/state).

Obama will normally focuses on points 1 and 2 the most to explain how to pay for 'universal' health care, mentions point 3 and 4 to encourage fiscal responsibility in the future for health care to keep costs from their continued spiraling out of control, takes a shot at McCain with point 5, and ends with point 6 to get the crowd rocking! :rofl: