|
Post by gregfordyce on Dec 3, 2019 23:17:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ErixonStone on Dec 3, 2019 23:51:39 GMT
Our employer-based private healthcare system is absurd. We are so indoctrinated against government, and it's hard to overcome.
Just this morning, my wife was telling me that a woman she works with (at a retail store) who recently switched from a full-time position to a part-time position lost her healthcare coverage - the primary reason for taking that job in the first place (her husband is a dentist, so money is not an issue). If she had retired, she would have been entitled to the healthcare, but since she only downgraded her position, she lost it.
Still, even though my family has been in danger of losing health coverage (I had COBRA for 17 of the maximum 18 months after switching jobs; the new job was a contract position), and after hearing about her co-worker - a woman she's known for over 20 years - she still won't embrace a public health insurance system. She cites the "waiting time" for some procedures - which is a bad-faith argument, considering the wait time for getting an appointment at certain doctors - and that some people come from countries with nationalized healthcare to the US sometimes, even though only the wealthy can actually do that.
Medicare for All would reduce overall healthcare costs for all but the wealthiest Americans. Gone would be copayments, deductibles, fighting with the insurance company, and out-of-network doctors. The private tax of premiums would be converted to a smaller public Medicare tax. Costs would sink because the government would become the sole payer and would have the leverage to negotiate fair prices for services and prescription medication. Additionally, administrative costs would decline by about 30%.
What about a public option?
A public option would be a disaster; here's why:
Without preventing private insurers from providing benefits covered by a public insurance plan, the door is left open for private insurers to offer extremely cheap, quality plans to only the most fit individuals. Basically, private insurers could insure a bunch of non-smoking, healthy twenty-somethings for really cheap - especially men who would not require prenatal care. The rest of the population would be priced out of the private plan and forced onto the public plan. This would overburden the public plan, costing taxpayers money.
Furthermore, doctors would be incentivized to participate in the private plans and not to participate in the public plan. This would preserve the in-network and out-of-network concepts, costing taxpayers even more money or restricting their choice of doctor and hospital.
After a few years of this terrible system, the American public would be bombarded with propaganda that the government plan is a complete failure. The argument would be compelling and would effectively kill any confidence in a public healthcare system. Medicare for All would not be a viable political plan for another generation or two.
I was 32 when my daughter was born. If my daughter's generation is going to be the one responsible for implementing Medicare for All, when someone her age is even old enough to become President, I'll be 67 and already be eligible for Medicare.
I don't want to wait generations for meaningful change.
It's time.
Register as a Democrat in your state and vote for Bernie Sanders in the primary.
|
|
|
Post by gregfordyce on Dec 4, 2019 14:32:13 GMT
THIS. Very well stated, I agree with every thing you said. Excellent summation of the reasons to support Medicare-For-All, and an excellent strike-down of all the BS lies spewed by the right and the corporate Dems about it.
|
|