To everybody who thinks they want Medicare for all, check this out.

As a simple example, lets just put our “imaginary” senior (Medicare Part A, Medicare Part B, no Medigap plan, Medicare Part D) in “good health” with one hospital admission for the year and estimated yearly expenses:

Medicare Part A $0.00/ yr premium

One admission to hospital, 30 days $1.068.00 deductible

Medicare Part B $100 / month = $1200 / yr premiums

Medicare Part D $39.60 / month = $475.20 premium

Medicare Part D (est drug cost) $35 /month = $455/yr

Doctors Visits $135 + 20% = $375-500/yr

est Total Costs / year = $3698.20

Do you realize that's well over $300 a month. Medicare is NOT the panacea you think it is.

my mom has the supplemental she pays $72/month.

I on the other hand have employer based care and

I pay $600/month for a family of four. I have a $2000 deductible for all care.

After that I have to pay 20% of the allowable until I hit a $4000k out of pocket and then they will pay 100% past that point.

So I am paying $7200 year for healthcare just to have it. If I use it for each one of us I have to pay all the bills for the first $2K.

So $9200 and then if we are really sick it goes up to $13,200 out of pocket max for the year.



edit: I also want to add that the employer wants to dump health insurance and go to HSA's.

That will be far more expensive. All 4 of us have chronic but not life threatening illnesses, the cost could skyrocket.

working (now retired) he paid $335/mo for family coverage. The deductible was $150 for visits to the Dr, and $100 for hosp.

I'm not saying that things wouldn't be better for some who are being raped by the ins. co's if we went to a Medicare for all system. I just wanted everyone to realize that it's not the panacea a lot of people think it is.

And rising, and rising faster than wages.

Medicare isn't perfect - perhaps your point. But it would be a vast improvement over what we have now.

have some control via my vote. the problem now is that i have no control. i love my job, my insurance sucks. i have tenure and loads of vacation but shitty medical. my husband is looking to see if he can find another job to get better medical. that has added stress to our family situation.

i am not looking for something that is free. i would gladly pay the $7200 a year in taxes if it just paid for all expenses but it doesn't. The problem is that that expense goes up and I am not even sure why. think about it, $7200 goes to what and to who if i never use that insurance? and not using it is bad too, because well visits and other such things should be paid for because i should get at least that for what i am paying but no.

private insurance has gotten a lot more expensive over time. At one point, I paid something like that. Now we are paying $1700/month because my husband is a diabetic.

i'm on the hook for the 20% not covered- and my income is my SS disability- which is over 12% less than it should be, because a former and now long bankrupt former employer never paid into the system the fica money that was deducted from my paychecks over the course of the 2+ years that i worked for them.

i'm 48, and i won't be able to get the supplemental coverage until i turn 65.

am i bitter?

kinda.

have qualified for medicaid to back it up. I have always assumed that was what people meant when they talk about enhanced Medicare.

As it currently exists Medicare covers the most expensive segments of our population, the aged and the disabled.

But, like any other insurance, if you add in a large pool of people who wont use it much for decades, the average cost per insured person would drop dramatically.

And insurance companies should be backing medicare for all and get busy designing a whole range of new supplemental products for younger individuals, families, middle class, working poor, etc. Seems like a no-brainer.

Think about it they get like 20-30% of 1/6 of GNP Eto play with VERY YEAR, 3% plus is pure profit (everyone is paid, expenses, ads, etc in the 20-30%), and they are almost triple inflation as well.

The amount of money that goes through their hands is staggering. 4-5 trillion a year and growing, maybe? That's massive power and 3 or 4 percent of that is a pretty penny to clear.

No the supplemental are a good game for honest people that want to make money to provide a service but that pie would shrink the bottom line and influence too much for the robberbarons to even bother. They are now cracked out on crazy dollars.

If you are talking about the premiums listed in the OP, you have a rude shock coming.

About 75% of SMI costs are paid from the general fund - those premiums for drug coverage and the monthly premium for doctor's visits don't cover much of the cost at all.

And hospital insurance is paid for by the 2.9% payroll tax.

Now add the whole population to Medicare, and you have a problem. Currently less than 1/6th of the population is on Medicare, and you are not going to add everyone else without a major increase in taxes. Obviously the people who are working now and paying for insurance through their employer would be covered under Medicare, so their employers would be able to give them a raise and pay part of the additional payroll tax. I doubt they would give the raise in the current economy, but maybe.

We would need to have a total payroll tax of between 17.5%-20%. You could reasonably split that between the employer and employee, but self-employed people would have to pay the whole thing.

But that still doesn't cover all the costs, because the reason private insurance keeps going up and up is that Medicare and Medicaid don't pay enough for services to keep hospitals in business and physicians have to limit their Medicare patients because part of their fees are really covered by the higher fees paid by uninsured and privately insured people.

People covered under private insurance pick up a lot of the cost for physicians and hospitals that treat Medicare, and that is why you are seeing the very big yearly increases in costs. Your private insurer is probably paying 3-4 times more for most hospital-type services than Medicare. In some cases they are paying more than 10 times as much.

So we would still have to cut Medicare coverage so that we could increase payment for services.

So figure 9% of your wages plus the premiums listed above, plus the copays (and remember that most people will have a period each year in which they have to pay for all drug costs) and realize that Medicare for all will cover less than it does now. That is a more realistic method of figuring out whether it would be better.

From my POV, I think it would be better not because it is cheaper, but because it lessens the insecurity everyone now has. I think it would be more expensive for most people, not less. It would definitely be more expensive for higher-paid workers - right now the monthly premium goes up even for retirees with incomes above 80K. The drug coverage in particular would be less comprehensive than many employees now have.

But it would be very good for people with chronic conditions and older people who lose jobs, and it would greatly aid older people in finding new jobs. As it is now, your employer pays a pretty hefty premium for covering older people, and one of the easiest ways for employers to cut their insurance costs is to just lay off older workers.

and the benefits it provides aren't sufficient. That is why they have "supplement to Medicare" plans for sale - to fill in the holes.

These supplemental plans are costly, oh yes they are - very costly in some cases. What they provide beyond Medicare depends on what sort of supplemental plan you might have.

Thank you for posting this!

:dem: :kick: recommend.

Boy are they going to be in for a big surprise. They do not realize yet that they will have to purchase private medical insurance at a high cost. A lot of them will change their mind about retiring at 66 (their full retirement age) when they figure out they can't afford it. And, retiring is exactly what they need to do to ease the high unemployment numbers.

and that was just for her COBRA, copays on doctor and meds. An emergency would only have been 80% on top of that. She was earning $1500 a month at a 30 hours/wk job and paying those kind of expenses.
We would have been happy at $300+ a month.

it's not the teriffic thing that a lot of people think it is.

is a terrific deal. If you're on private insurance that's a guarantee you're getting raped royally.
A friend of mine checked into private insurance. He's comfortable-has enough money to not worry about things-the cheapest he could find as a 50+ male was $1000/mo with no prescription coverage and a $5000 deductible and a $1 million cap on expenses. He decided that it was actually cheaper for him to self pay.

I've never known the difference between Parts A, B, D, whatever, but now I want to know more.

But your conclusion is confusing. So, part A is 0 dollars a year, but D is 475 a year, B is 1200 a year... huh? what is your total of 3700 a year refer to? A, B, D?

I'm no math wiz, so that's probably why I'm not getting what you are saying.

Part B us $97.mo and deducted from your SS check. Part D is the coverage for drugs and can vary depending on what ins. co you go with. The example was the average. Part A covers hos[italization, Part B covers Dr. visits, and Part D covers drugs.

If you are not drawing SS - and most 65 year olds are not, then you have to pay it quarterly in advance. Neither of my older siblings (66 and 68) are drawing SS yet so they pay in advance.

I called to enroll for Medicare just recently - I am not yet 65. They tried everything they could to switch me to the SS operator and have me start drawing my SS early. I guess they really don't like to do the billing for folks not drawing SS.

[ayment on SS. It would save them a lot of $$ if everyone took early SS at the lower rate.

Now at 6% a year most are leaving it with the government. My brother started taking his a couple of years ago and then he realized there was no place to invest it at that sort of guaranteed return. He stopped his SS payments and paid back what he had taken out.

so he could retire. I didn't because I wouldn't have been eligible for Medicare and we couldn't afford the cost of ins. while living on SS. The other thing that scared me was that if you opt for early withdrawl, youRe locked into that forever. What if I live a long time and SS doesn't keep up with inflation? I couldn't afford to survive!

matched by your employer. This is to cover hospitalization and it has a deductible of $1,068 per year. I have personally paid into this fund since 1966. Wow - what a return.

Part B is what you can enroll in when you turn 65 - doctor visits and tests. It costs a flat amount each month and is based on your gross wages from two years prior. If an individual made less than $85,000 in prior years they pay in $96.40 a month. If they made more than $85,000 its about $135 a month. I forget where the next break is where they pay more for Part B. Part B has a deductible of $135 per year. You cannot enroll in Part B for these monthly premium rates unless you have contributed through your wage reductions for a period of 10 years.

Basically for Parts A & B medicare pays 80% of most things and you pick up the 20%. Some stuff is not covered at all by Part A and B. Comes out of individual's pockets.

Part D is $40 a month and is for prescription medicine because A & B don't cover any prescriptions. I don't know enough about the co-pays and doughnut hole to talk about it.

I pay $75 a month for advantage plan which takes care of the other 20% but you have a $10 co-pay for doctor and first 5 days in hospital $100 a day.

I also pay thru my husband's retirement $70.00 for prescription plan, vision and dental. The dental is at 50%, the vision is okay but if you want a decent frame you are out of there for between $150 to $300 for a frame. Prescriptions are $140 for three months...so it is expensive but I was paying my $75 yesterday at Blue Shield/Cross and the lady next to me in her early 50's was asking about the 1% increase starting today. Her premium for her alone was $658.

This is ridiculous...we should not be paying this much..none of us. HR676 would have covered all of us for a reasonable fee $75 a month 100% of medical, dental, chiropractic, hearing, mental, even acupuncture. I am not happy as I cannot afford this amount I'm paying. Will probably drop the advantage because I need the $150 dollars a month for both me and my husband.

system and as noted above if younger people in the system were enrolled that would change the equation as well.

Canada can do it and they spend significantly less.

:shrug:

I mean total cost, not just what you pay after your employer pays for some of it. Anything under $1000/mo is impossible to find for an individual as far as I know.

it's likely to have a high deductible. Mine is $5,000.

(i.e. much lower claim risk people) were included.

I don't think anybody ever claimed it was a panacea, but the problem you raise isn't a serious one. Even if it were $300/month.

I have Medicaid QMB. It pays my Medicare premium. It also blocks me out of buying a Med-sup policy to help with the 20% not paid by Medicare. That 20% is rather pricey for cancer surgery, extended hospital stay, treatments, etc. I wrote to each account and explained my circumstances and enclosed a check for $5 or $10 and asked their patience in allowing me to pay off the debt. Most were very willing.

Having been among the uninsured for a number of years, during which time I spent about a week out of each month crawling on the floor because of the pain caused by bone slivers embedded in the spinal nerve, I'm very glad that I now have Medicare. It's nowhere near perfect, but it's a damn site better than having no access to medical care at all.

it covers you with no loopholes for pre-existing conditions, no rescission if they find out something you didn't report, no limitation on which doctors you can see (unless the doctor doesn't want to accept Medicare), simple co-pays, no lifetime cap and a long enough history now that all the kinks (which did exist in my parents older years) have been ironed out. If it was any better there would be even more resentment against the old than there is (including on DU), so I'm content with it.

Part A (hospital insurance): It costs nothing to enroll and you don’t pay monthly premiums (with a few exceptions to eligibility), but there is no annual cap on out-of-pocket expenses. The more services you use, the higher your expenses in the form of co-payments for outpatient care (usually 20 percent of the cost) and inpatient care. Currently, a $1,068 deductible covers your first 60 days in the hospital, but if you stay longer, you will be charged $267 a day from day 61 to day 90, and $534 per day from day 90 to 150--plus all costs after 150 days. Part B deductible is $135 for 2009.

http://www.emaxhealth.com/1024/49/30578/medicare-out-pocket-expenses.html

do people honestly think that universal coverage, or any reform will be free?

You either pay on hte way in (High taxes) or on the way out. But nothing is free.

Those who believed that this would lead to free health care... well I have one thing to say, delusional.

is that Medicare isn't run for profit, so doesn't have the incentive to disapprove treatment. They also don't drop you if you get really sick or have a pre existing condition.

For many people, those without insurance, those who have pre existing conditions, it is indeed the panacea that they need. Or at least a good start.

As I understand it, most seniors use AARP for the additional 20% . . .

And, I know my mother up to 3 years ago never paid more than $80+ a month.

+ AARP --

Let's compare that with private insurance -- ?? !!

I currently live in North Carolina but will move in a few years to either a state in the midwest or one in the southwest. I have looked at the supplemental costs in all three states. N.C. supplemental rates are basically twice as high as the southwest state and one a half times as high as the midwest state. I was surprised at the big difference and my destination state will depend partly on the supplemental private insurance premium cost.

per year, but it appears that was given away for 8 billion a year.

:(

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6622945

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf

"...Allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices. The 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug
Improvement and Modernization Act bans the government from negotiating down the prices of
prescription drugs, even though the Department of Veterans Affairs’ negotiation of prescription drug
prices with drug companies has garnered significant savings for taxpayers.32

Barack Obama and Joe Biden will repeal the ban on direct negotiation with drug companies and use the resulting savings, which could be as high as $30 billion,33 to further invest in improving health care coverage and quality..."

It appears that we may have moved from a possible 300 billion over 10 years to 80 billion.

THREE HUNDRED per month is CHEAP compared to what MINE costs NOW!!!

And that's just the CO-PAY!!!

Thanks for telling us all HOW GREAT MECICARE FOR ALL would be!!!

only I know that wasn't what your are trying to SPEW...

You DO realize that the average person's cost is over a COUPLE THOUSAND EACH MONTH, if you include the Employeer's portion?

I knew you like to hide THAT "small" FACT!!!

Oh - I see - more CRAP from texASS...FIGURES!!!

It's SO REFRESHING not to have to hear any texASS accents in power now!!!

get the fuck LOST...

It sounds pretty good to me!

Private insurance would be, say $800 to $1,000

$300/month is a helluva a GREAT deal! (won't be much/any profit in there for the insurance companies, of course.....but nobody cares about THEM, except THEM, so pffffffft)

And I haven't had a claim in about 10 years or so.

No program being debated in Congress even comes close to the potential of Medicare for All.

for Medicare For All.

Imagine Obama telling the people that everyone will be covered under the same plan, including himself and every member of Congress.

Right now they keep us divided into groups.

:(

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=50402&mesg_id=50402

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjA3CV95i4

snips from the first video...

Speaking of the government paying for Medicare and Medicaid which props up insurance company profits by removing two segments of citizens who have high health care needs.

"Arnie Arnesen

"We left the insurance company with the youngest, healthiest people and no wonder they are making a profit, because we've taken away the most expensive part of healthcare, which obviously is going to constantly sink us like a stone. Because insurance is about spreading the risk, we don't spread the risk, in fact what we do is prop up the insurance industry. Which is why they are so frightened about changing anything in the way of a system because it is about their profits and their CEO's and not about our healthcare..."

Dennis Kucinich

"For profit insurance companies make money not providing healthcare..."

discussion. Currently we spend so much time discussing which groups of people will get what coverage or subsidy instead of trying to cover everyone at lower costs throughout the system.

:hi:

Kucinich Health-Care Program Part-2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FNp0wjAgfo

Do you want a 100% coverage policy that costs you nothing?

is coming form.

(It falls out of the sky from insurance company overhead, other waste, and fairy dust)

to go along with our Medicare.

$199 a month for my supplemental which covers all deductibles, including hospitalization (Part A) and doctor visits, lab tests, outpatient procedures (Part B).

Part D premium is a little over $15 a month for me; $93.50 for my husband. (Different types and quantities of medications require smart, difficult shopping for the right plan every year because the plans change annually — major pain in the neck, there.)

I don't pay a thing when I go to the doctor; neither does my husband.

Our share of the drug costs is quite high (well over that $35 monthly estimate). He hit the "donut hole" in April. I have to shop for a plan for him that helps with payments through that gap. My premium is lots lower because my drugs aren't as expensive as his, so I don't hit that gap.

I am pleased with our coverage, and I do wish that everyone had insurance as good as ours.

The major thing about Medicare for everyone is that hospitalization coverage, though. That's what's bankrupting people. My husband has arthritis in both knees. When he had surgery on his knees, the charge would have been $3,000 each for an uninsured person. Medicare and our supplemental paid $800 for each procedure. We paid nothing. But the poor person (who has no insurance company setting up agreements with the providers to obtain write-offs) gets stuck with that $3,000 bill (x 2). No wonder people without insurance are going bankrupt.

Me and my family have nothing. Any medical problems and we are toast - retirement and/or the kids college funds go right out the window (not that those things aren't pretty sketchy already).

To my better-provided boss's family it would also be pretty good - he pays $1000 a month, + deductibles.

It is a life saver.

With a supplement the senior may have no out of pocket at all.

"With a supplement the senior may have no out of pocket at all."

madfloridian, you seem to know quite a bit about Medicare and parts A,B,D, etc.

I currently have A, B and D and am looking for supplemental so I have no out-of-pocket hospital costs. I signed up for part "J" but haven't paid the premium yet and now I wonder if that is the best option. The yearly premium cost seems close to the hospital deductible cost. I think it was about $1.5K.

My mailbox overflows with AARP insurance info and it's difficult to figure out all the options.

I have a surgery and hospital stay coming up soon and want to minimize my cost. Trying to get anyone to help choose a plan is impossible at AARP. They just give options.

Thanks for any insight. :hi:

Before she went in, she was on Medicare, which she paid
nothing for. She had a BlueCross supplemental policy that
cost her $107.09 per month.

When I first started handling her affairs (about 4 years ago),
she was paying over $750.00 per month on DRUGS, sometimes MORE.

She had been over-prescribed HORRIBLY, a consequence of FREQUENT
hospitalizations (she is a hypochondriac, and viewed a hospital
stay like a cruise ship holiday).

I got that cut down to about $300.00 per month, then when the
Part D was offered, I jumped at it. She has about $90.00 taken
out of her SS to pay for it.

I know it was a give-away to pharma, but it saved her a TON.

She was a constant doctor visitor, and I feel that her $197
per month was a reasonable payment, considering she received
over a thousand a month from SS and her subsidized apartment
rental was only about $250.00/month.

my mom recently became eligible. It was such a disappointment.

It would save $300 billion in lower overhead and $100 billion in bulk purchasing power. Plus it would put the parasitic, useless, amoral health insurance companies out of business. Plus you cannot be kicked out of the system.

So it doesn't matter if you still have to pay $300/month. Its not a perfect system, but it is far better than what we have.

That will make Medicare look pretty damn good.

most 'children' can't afford to take on their parents medical bills. Heck, they can't even afford their own bills/mortgage/rent!

What a GODSEND Medicare is! (I'm NOT being sarcastic, btw).

If it weren't for Medicare, Granny/Granpa must die 'sooner' rather than 'later'.

and the ability to live longer on their own.

I mean that. Let the children check with the parents over 65, and tell them they are taking on their medical bills.

And when they start the hell on Social Security, tell them to ask their parents to come and live with them when the payments end.

That will do the trick.

The benefits is not worth the premium I would have to pay for.

Until it is fixed, and it REALLY needs to be fixed, I am rejecting Part D of my plan.

I have Part A, and Part B. I pay 20%.

Hawkeye-X

most supplementals do NOT have drug coverage.

That is THE reason for Part D.

If you have drug expenses that exceed the monthly premiums, you're money ahead to buy a plan. But it's a bear to figure out which one is best for you, and you have to shop for a plan annually, since they change every year.

is less than $16 a month, much less than my monthly drug costs. It pays for me to have the plan. I come out ahead with the plan I've chosen.

I signed up for Medicare part D. My drugs have not been more than a $5 copay per prescription.

Seems way reasonable to me.

then you are losing money by opting out of Part D. Some plans cost very little. Mine is only $15.20 per month. But the plan with the cheapest premium may not result in the cheapest overall option for you. It depends on exactly which drugs you take and how many of them.

I'm saving hundreds of dollars this year with my Part D insurance. It's important to reevaluate the plans each year during the enrollment period, though, because most plans change every year.

$5,000 a head deductible and spotty coverage available to me now. $300 sounds like a dream come true.

On edit: Actually, it's not available to me now as I have a pre-existing condition.

.... it sure is. $300 is a PITTANCE.

If you've come up with a cheaper alternative that would actually cover those uncovered tens of millions, I could get on board.

Just don't discard the idea of extending Medicare to those who have no coverage. Even if not all of those people would be able to afford it, there are many who would love the opportunity.

if you were over 65 and sick?

Oh yeah. You wouldn't be able to GET private health insurance.

Medicare is a bargain, plain and simple.

insurance. I only pay $200 a month, which includes life insurance, eye care, disability, dental and medical care and covers perscriptions.