HolidayBuyer's Guide

Speakeasy forum

General discussion

'Health Care system' cracking badly for average American

by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / August 3, 2004 2:25 AM PDT
Fewer getting insurance through jobs.
" The percentage of people who get health insurance through employers fell sharply from 2001 to 2003, resulting in 9 million fewer people with employer coverage after accounting for population growth, researchers said Tuesday."
This is every bit as detrimental to the economy as a tax increase -- could skyrocketing medical costs be one reason for the continuing falloff in consumer spending, engine of the economy and job growth? Meanwhile, you better believe that the vast majority of Bush's true constituency, who got the big tax cuts, have insurance through their jobs. But all too many have-not lemmings continue to vote against their own economic interests, and those of the country as a whole. We're upper middle class, and it's sure squeezing us -- our out-of-pocket medical costs have gone from zero to around $7000 a year over the last 25 years. Add that (with interest) to our 401ks, and we'd be able to retire now.

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: 'Health Care system' cracking badly for average American
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: 'Health Care system' cracking badly for average American
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Add the cost of nationalized health care ...
by Evie / August 3, 2004 2:52 AM PDT

... to your tax burden and you'll be working longer and getting a lower quality of service. Many lifestyle changes can drastically alter a person's medical cost. For example exercising and healthy diet should have the benefit of fewer visits to the doctor. Yes, there has to be a better way to help those with chronic conditions (no reason states can't handle this, however) but there is no such thing as "free" healthcare.

Of course the second man on your ticket has done much to help rising costs.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: Add the cost of nationalized health care ...
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / August 3, 2004 4:54 AM PDT

Hi, Evie.

If we take back the tax cuts for the wealthy, there'd be more than enough money for national health care. Further, it would slow the drain of American jobs overseas, part of which comes because companies in other first world countries have national health care, so that's not a cost of doing business for their companies. Besides, as Kerry said in his speech, "it's the right thing to do."

-- Dave K.
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Re: Add the cost of nationalized health care ...
by Edward ODaniel / August 3, 2004 8:42 AM PDT

Why should high income people have to pay more of a percentage of their income to subsidize pay welfare checks, pay low income wage earners a welfare based on their earnings and subsidize your own health care in addition to paying for their own?

A flat tax on all income above whatever the base poverty level is determined to be would be fair and would tend to force government to rethink social programs that the Constitution NEVER authorized the Fed to get involved in. Defense spending is authorized but welfare never was--that was the reason Churches are not taxed.

Redistribution of wealth didn't work for the Communists either Dave.

Collapse -
You don't really believe that do you?
by Evie / August 3, 2004 10:38 PM PDT

Just the prescription drug program will cost in the hundreds of billions. The tax cuts on the "rich" total $80 billion ... the numbers just don't add up.

I am amazed that Kerry claims he will give us nationalized healthcare within his first hours of office when Hillarycare was such a dud a decade ago after much work over many months. Oregon soundly defeated socialized medicine in that state recently which should be an indication of just how much most Americans oppose such an approach.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Re: You don't really believe that do you?
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / August 3, 2004 10:56 PM PDT

Hi, Evie.

>>when Hillarycare was such a dud a decade ago<<
"Hillarycare" was never tried, so how can you call it a dud? Most thinking Americans have come to realize that they'd be much better off had the Clinton health care plan been enacted. All the restrictions warned of in the (industry-sponsored) commercials that scuttled the plan before it even got completed have come into place anyway under "managed care," which is the norm for the majority of those fortunate enough to have coverage in the first place. But instead of the savings going to help those who would otherwise be uninsured, they're being squandered as exorbitant salaries by insurance company higher-ups, and profits for investors. Further, the duplicative administrative costs and procedures add a healthy chunk to the overall cost of "medical care," and drive doctors nuts. OTOH, there are a lot more jobs for paper-pushers than if there were a single-payer system.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Dud ...
by Evie / August 3, 2004 11:08 PM PDT

... as in soundly rejected by Congress and the American people.

States could do more to make coverage for the self-employed and small businesses to buy into their plans. Catastrophic real insurance, medical savings accounts and other innovative plans are the way to go. We dropped our dental insurance last year because it wasn't worth it. For $140 my hubby and I purchased membership in a plan that is not insurance but dentists charge us the insurance rate. No paperwork, no pre-existing, no pre-approval, no annual limits. So far my savings has recouped the cost. I've seen similar things pop up for healthcare. There are also doctors that now cater to the uninsured offering discounted services. They don't have to deal with the insurance bureaurocracy and pass the savings along to the patient that pays just for their actual care. What a novel idea LOL.

Evie Happy

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

HOLIDAY GIFT GUIDE 2017

Cameras that make great holiday gifts

Let them start the new year with a step up in photo and video quality from a phone.