visionary Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Healthcare for everyone at a fraction of the cost vs more money for some already really rich people ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 7 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Healthcare for everyone at a fraction of the cost vs more money for some already really rich people ? Why didn't Cali do single payer? The fraction is greater than you think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, twa said: Why didn't Cali do single payer? The fraction is greater than you think About 40% of California's budget is required to go to Education. This is via Prop 98. So any increase in state budget has a portion that has to go to education as well. It makes raising that unfunded portion (the 25% or so that Medicare/MediCal doesn't cover) of single payer a little harder. Recent estimates that portion is about $100 billion. Healthy California (single payer bill) did pass the California State Senate this past year. It was then tabled by the Assembly Speaker (Rendon). It's not dead, but it's not moving either. Edited September 14, 2017 by The Evil Genius 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 (edited) 10 hours ago, The Evil Genius said: About 40% of California's budget is required to go to Education. This is via Prop 98. So any increase in state budget has a portion that has to go to education as well. It makes raising that unfunded portion (the 25% or so that Medicare/MediCal doesn't cover) of single payer a little harder. Recent estimates that portion is about $100 billion. Healthy California (single payer bill) did pass the California State Senate this past year. It was then tabled by the Assembly Speaker (Rendon). It's not dead, but it's not moving either. The other thing that has kept single payer out of CA is actually pressure from the nation Democratic party after passing Obamacare. If CA goes single payer, then the exchanges in CA fail, insurance companies lose a lot of customers to spread the risks and administrative costs over, and that hurts Obamacare (and the health care situation nationally). A single payer system in CA likely raises rates for the rest of us (which hurts Obamacare's viability). Edited September 14, 2017 by PeterMP 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbear Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 Thanks Peter, Quick question, aren't the exchanges bound to single states? I understand how CA exchange might fail with single payer because everybody would already have minimal coverage and the exchange would be solely for secondary coverage. Thus the exchange for primary health insurance would fail without buyers. How does this impact other states? I thought insurance companies were already looking at viability of each of the states individually. Isn't that why they have already pulled out of many states without enough patients for a good risk pool and/or too few providers to get any competition on price?How does CA change WA? Is it because patients might cross state lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 On 9/13/2017 at 9:52 PM, twa said: Why didn't Cali do single payer? The fraction is greater than you think Ok, I'm certainly no expert in the subject but right now, we give money to insurance companies and they pay for our medical expenses. Under single payer, we give money to the United States of America, and they pay for our medical expenses. The cost of the medical expenses doesn't change, right? The only thing that changes is that the United States of America doesn't make a profit. So, when you take away the billions and billions of dollars that insurance companies are profiting each year, how do we not end up paying less? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 19 hours ago, gbear said: Thanks Peter, Quick question, aren't the exchanges bound to single states? I understand how CA exchange might fail with single payer because everybody would already have minimal coverage and the exchange would be solely for secondary coverage. Thus the exchange for primary health insurance would fail without buyers. How does this impact other states? I thought insurance companies were already looking at viability of each of the states individually. Isn't that why they have already pulled out of many states without enough patients for a good risk pool and/or too few providers to get any competition on price?How does CA change WA? Is it because patients might cross state lines? I believe the MLR (only 20% of overhead) applies to the whole company. More people means more people to spread the overhead costs over. It is easier to pay my CEO $20 million if that as over head costs is being spread over an extra 3 million people vs. if I lose those people to a single payer system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 WTF is with these guys? Need another push people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 I wonder if Trump realizes that if he signs this mess, he owns it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 16 hours ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said: Ok, I'm certainly no expert in the subject but right now, we give money to insurance companies and they pay for our medical expenses. Under single payer, we give money to the United States of America, and they pay for our medical expenses. The cost of the medical expenses doesn't change, right? The only thing that changes is that the United States of America doesn't make a profit. So, when you take away the billions and billions of dollars that insurance companies are profiting each year, how do we not end up paying less? What is the cost of govt administration though? Will they negotiate better rates? From what I have seen govt procurement is costly. Colorado passed on single payer....must not have wanted to save Billions right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 31 minutes ago, twa said: What is the cost of govt administration though? Will they negotiate better rates? From what I have seen govt procurement is costly. I bet you can point out all the hospitals where Medicare pays more than Blue Cross does, for the same procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 7 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: WTF is with these guys? Need another push people. Gotta get those taxes cut! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 15, 2017 Share Posted September 15, 2017 Just now, Larry said: I bet you can point out all the hospitals where Medicare pays more than Blue Cross does, for the same procedure. You have solved the problem...we obviously need two ins policies http://www.bcbsm.com/medicare/help/faqs/works/difference-original-medicare-advantage.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 5 minutes ago, twa said: You have solved the problem...we obviously need two ins policies http://www.bcbsm.com/medicare/help/faqs/works/difference-original-medicare-advantage.html Which has absolutely nothing to do with what I said (or with what you said, which I was responding to.) I'm shocked. Here, I'll help you out: On the actual topic of your claim that 1 hour ago, twa said: govt procurement is costly CNN: Medicare vs. private insurance: Which costs less Quote Wonder why some doctors grumble when a Medicare patient walks in the door? It's likely because the government program typically pays only 80% of what private insurers do. Go read it. There's a line in it that you can cherry pick, and try to pretend that the article actually says the opposite of what it actually says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 who is supposed to pay the other 20%..of covered procedures my link tells ya, go on, read it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 54 minutes ago, twa said: who is supposed to pay the other 20%..of covered procedures my link tells ya, go on, read it Well, that was quick. It's only taken you two posts to run from "single payer is unacceptable because the government pays too much" to "single payer is unacceptable because the government doesn't pay enough". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 Your reading sucks. but keep comparing apples to oranges and calling them peaches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 13 minutes ago, twa said: Your reading sucks. but keep comparing apples to oranges and calling them peaches Quoted from the guy who just tried to run from claiming that the government pays too much for health care, to being presented with the fact that the government actually pays less than private insurers, and tried to pretend we were talking about the fact that Medicare has a copay. (Just like private insurance does.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 What I claimed is the cost of govt administration is costly....but don't let that get in your way. When ya gonna get one of these Blue states to take the plunge into single payer?....when they quit have to balance the books? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sacks 'n' Stuff Posted September 16, 2017 Share Posted September 16, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, twa said: Colorado passed on single payer....must not have wanted to save Billions right? I couldn't say why. Maybe it was a poorly constructed version of single payer. Maybe it was put together too quickly or too hastily and voters just weren't ready for it. I guess I could look it up... I'm not gonna but I could. Anyway, one thing I've previously looked up is that every single developed country besides us somehow manages to pull off a system where the government covers a significantly la Edited September 16, 2017 by Sacks 'n' Stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now