Repeal and Replace

Yes if were willing to commit more and more money to it.

But that does not address my question.
What is the purpose of repeal first and replace later?

If the repubs can't pass a bill today why would anyone think they can pass a bill in 6 months?

When the dems passed their bill I thought it was the wrong way to go.

Were going to spend a fortune on insurance company admin fees.

I still think the way to get a grip on this is a single payer non profit system.

Cost is spread across the nation, not by state or by region.

...till you are at a place where they can put the new tires on.

If it will get you political points.

Getting new tires on the car will be tomorrows problem.

Medicare for all citizen.

Part 1 and part 2.

Part 1
Annual wellness check and immunizations.
Free to all citizens.
Paid by the fed.

Part 2
Doctor visits and hospital.
You will be billed based on your income.
Some people below a certain income level will get it free.
Paid by the state and the fed.

If a provider does not want to participate in medicare that's their business.

Since the plan will cover the entire country and be non-profit, no multi-million salaries for exec's, no share holders wanting a profit, I would think premiums would go down.

Taxes won't change it will just be a line item in the federal budget.
Instead of paying insurance company admin cost the money goes to paying for health care.

Billing.
Example.
Income 15k or less....free
Income 15k to 25k 1/2 the amount.
Income above 25k the full amount.
Congress can set income levels.
Medicare can cross check income with the IRS or other agencies.
Yes there will be people who game the system.


Providers.
Medicare is such a large system that it's normally not difficult finding a provider.
If a provider won't accept it then they have dropped out a very large amount of people.
Under single payer the amount of people gets even larger.

Medicaid now that can be difficult finding a provider just because their payment rates are so low.

Why hasn't anyone implemented it already? The government's solution seems to be to simply establish a money pot to pay for the expenses by shifting the burden of the cost onto those with the means to pay and those without the need to pay. Anytime there's a money pot in place, you're going to have someone wanting to visit it as often as possible. Your suggestion of income based prices aren't new and we already have an income based taxation system that's a debacle so why not make everything income based? If you make 15K or less, your groceries are free. If you make 25K or more, the government determines what you owe. After all, food is healthcare, is it not?

Of course I'm being facetious and no offense is meant but I think that the issue is too complex for simple solutions. It was my understanding that the main issue originally was the rising cost of medical care as compared to other expenses. The money pot idea doesn't seem to be working but still needs to grow at the same rate or faster than than that of medical care.

All I gave was a basic example.
There will be many 'what if's' which will need a lot of discussion.

I don't see any reason to be giving insurance companies billions of dollars when medicare, which we already have in place, can do the job much cheaper.

make basic medical care affordable without the need to purchase insurance other than for catastrophic conditions. In fact, I think such plans were already being mulled over decades ago by our congress. There can be no doubt that the insurance industry adds significantly to the cost of one's personal medical care. As well, so does the legal industry. These two interfering industries have grown to control just about everything medical care givers can and will do for their patients. In my view, this is a much larger issue than is trying to build a large enough money pot to pay for cradle to grave medical care for all. I'd venture to guess that the skilled doctors and nurses who provide direct care to patients represent the fewest persons on the payroll. Fix that first and, then, come back with plan to compensate the folks who actually serve the medical needs of our citizens.

I'm not saying single payer will be the only plan on the market.
Yes there will be somethings it will cover and somethings it won't.

If you like some other plan better get that one.

Now we have medicaid, medicare, va.
Each with their own admin group and expenses.....why?
Bring it all under one roof at least cut down on the admin cost.

government run health care/insurance plans....and stated "each with their own admin group and expenses....why?"

NONE of them should be in existence because NONE of them work as they were intended....why? BECAUSE THEY ARE GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED AND GOVERNMENT NEVER GETS IT RIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO SPENDING OUR MONEY.

IF the government should be involved at all, it's to allow military health care to be expanded beyond VA clinics and hospitals to the private sector, making it easier for vets to actually get timely appointments like the rest of us and have facilities closer to where they are easily accessible...with ALL payments coming out of the Pentagon expense budget. Our service members deserve no less....with NO Federal Contractors covered by anything other than their OWN insurance plans just like any other company in the USA that covers their employees.

And local facilities.

My point was why pay for three admin groups.

As for canceling them all.....baby steps.

should entirely be left up to individual States to not only decide whether to keep it for truly eligible people (and that standard will be set by the State itself), how to tax working people to pay for it, and what items are covered.....right now, States depend on the Federal Government to pay the bill (or at least fund most of it), incidentals like glasses, dental, home assistance, etc. and all FULLY paid for (whereas Medicare doesn't cover anything except short term home assistance which is ridiculous since only Medicare is taken from payroll checks and NOTHING is taken out for Medicaid). Let the States completely handle, if they choose to, anything to do with healthcare and relieve the Federal Government from all of it.

Medicare needs to be entirely reformed, eventually abolishing it completely because it's pretty much useless. Let taxpayers decide on their own what health insurance coverage they want for themselves and stop taking it from their paychecks or at the very least, INCREASE the amount taken out, go back to only covering people who have retired and not those on the Social Security Disability program, and cover glasses and dental since old people need those benefits badly......and put ALL of the Medicare funding from payroll checks into a separate, away from other government access account that ONLY can be used for Medicare payments. This should also be done with Social Security deductions. Both of those methods and reforms will actually make both program sustainable again.

But that's too easy for politicians who can't spend your money fast enough and have gotten used to giving away as much and more than possible. Look how quickly Italy and Greece, et al gave away the country and when they tried to pull back the people burned the place down with riots. Once you give something, people get used to it to the point that it can never be taken back. Look at what's happening right now over stupid Obamaphones........and that's just a tiny pull back. People feel ENTITLED to what they've been GIVEN, and don't care that OTHER people are paying dearly for it. It's always going to be a 'not in MY backyard' attitude, unfortunately.

In fact, I've heard it's going backward in some areas. But I'm 40 miles from a VA hospital, so I can opt to use a local one for many things. [New rule.] I don't, because I get around well enough to make the trip, and because the nearest full-service hospitals are the same 40 miles away.

You are all over the place with your comments and questions.....first of all, it's not the INSURANCE company refusing to let Charlie come here, it's the GOVERNMENT itself.

Second, IF you had children, wouldn't you do EVERYTHING you possibly could to keep YOUR child alive as long as possible, even if you KNEW he would eventually die (since everyone DOES, JP)?

Third, as for the cost...........there is already over $1MILLION in a fund available for Charlie's transportation and family expenses, and since it's an experimental treatment, the medical cost is free. (Also, as many times as Trump has paid out of pocket personally over his lifetime to help others that he never gets credit for, how do YOU know he hasn't already offered with his Trump plane ready to roll down the runway? You make asinine statements and assumptions every time you show up, JP.

how do YOU know he hasn't already offered with his Trump plane ready to roll down the runway?

We'll get you over here and put a bandaid on...after that you're on your own?

MY point exactly....giving them something they/the medical system can't afford....

And I also don't know that he has offered to let they stay at one of his hotels...(they would have to pay of course)

There are millions of kids all over the world that need operations and can't afford them(and the prospect is 100% success)...AND they/their parents/the mother country doesn't have the facilities....FOCUS ON THEM......

RE:You are all over the place with your comments and questions

TheRUMP's surrogates claim HE can walk and chew gum....So can I, Can YOU?

I noticed you had NO comment on insurance companies cutting off coverage?...It wasn't that long ago YOU were complaining they were leaving the state....They will leave the state BUT they would never cut off coverage? Would that be a "death panel"?

They want to use the kid as a "Guinea Pig"...pay for his "upkeep" AFTER the success OR failure of the "clinical trial"....

that even YOU can't keep track of what you really want the answers to, JP. You're throwing everything but the kitchen sink at this in your ok attitude that the child MUST die rather than TRY to do SOMETHING to either prolong his life (as his parents want) or possibly even find a CURE for his disease with an experimental treatment that ISN'T ALLOWED in the UK. I always knew you were pretty cold hearted with your crap, but now you've sunk to a whole new level by even blaming Trump for OFFERING the USA'S help (and perhaps even his own, since nobody knows if he has at this point, but he DOES have an extremely generous family).

1. Do you honestly believe only a 'bandaid' is being offered? Or are you just hazarding a crappy guess because of WHO is offering the aid?

2."giving them something they/the medical system can't afford"...do you even KNOW how experimental treatments work in the USA? They are called 'clinical TRIALS' for a reason and they are ALWAYS free for the patient, and sometimes include free transportation, housing and meals for the families.

3. I don't know about your hospitality rules, JP...but here, at least, when someone OFFERS TO LET YOU STAY AT THEIR "HOUSE", THEY DON'T CHARGE YOU FOR DOING SO. But then again, you always assume the worst when it comes to Trump.....and again, nobody knows WHAT Trump has offered in the way of help. You just jump to your own unfounded conclusions and throw it out there (fake news).

4. I don't need to focus on the rest of the world's issues, JP. I'm focusing one ONE child right now who is being held prisoner by his own country by refusing to allow him to leave. (And there are already plenty of Doctors Without Borders, Hospital Ships, Church/Missionary medical teams, etc. from all over the world who actually DO travel all over the world giving aid, including surgeries, for free.

5. I'm STILL complaining about insurance companies....however, you continue to get the news story wrong, JP. They aren't leaving the STATE....they are leaving OBAMACARE. Huge difference that you refuse to acknowledge. They still operate as PRIVATE insurers just like they always did and will continue to do so......unfortunately, we still can't cross State lines to purchase from other companies because of OBAMACARE not allowing that amendment to go through which was why so many insurance companies merged with other ones in order to keep signing people up across the country. And even IF/WHEN an insurance companies DENIES coverage for something, that doesn't automatically give you a freaking death sentence because here in the USA we actually have the RIGHT and ABILITY WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE to leave the State or even the COUNTRY itself and go anywhere in the world that can provide optional treatment.

6.Your last sentence is so hatefully hideous that I won't even comment on it.....

6.Your last sentence is so hatefully hideous that I won't even comment on it.....

hatefully hideous?

You don't like "guinea pig"?

Well, I'll comment on yours


The 'myth' of the clinical trial guinea pig

But despite this overall positive view from the public, it is seen as being a risky business - using patients as "human guinea pigs" to test new drugs. So is this image justified?

You are also very closely monitored while you are taking part in a study, so the chances of something going wrong are incredibly slight.

That leaves us with the "guinea pig" idea.

Closely monitored...but still a "guinea pig"

YOU want to focus on my use of the term "guinea pig" rather than the rest of my statement .pay for his "upkeep" AFTER the success OR failure of the "clinical trial"....

Are you willing to use American tax payers dollars to provide medical care this child?

The Pope has way more "feelings" toward this child than TheRUMP...I wonder IF TheRUMP thought HE needed a boost in his ratings and jumped on the Popes bandwagon on this one.

Never let a human interest story go to waste?

"Crossing State Lines" with health insurance means the same as it does with car insurance....you don't have to MOVE in order to buy car insurance from Montana to insure your car tagged and parked in the State you live in, say Virginia. But with health insurance it's not allowed....YET. That's why people living in Virginia who have their health insurance provider drop out of Obamacare exchanges, wind up with only one or no provider to pick from.....because Obamacare refused to include an amendment allowing people to shop across State lines.

Stop the stupidity of replacing Obamacare......just repeal it and allow people to shop all over for their insurance PRIVATELY. I AM blaming the Feds for lack of coverage....and it has nothing to do with demographics....if it wasn't for the "Feds" shoving something down the throat of the people that they didn't want and then to refuse to allow the insurance providers to sell via the exchanges across State lines, there was only one direction that Obamacare could go.....straight down. When there is no competition in the market place, you end up with a monopoly, which is exactly what Obamacare was BUILT to do. It was entirely geared deliberately to FAIL so a Federally run one-pay system would 'appeal' to the people and finally happen like Dems have wanted since forever.

auto insurance in that the rates vary by one's domicile. Actuaries determine the probability of one being involved in an accident based on a number of factors so you'll pay more or less for the same coverage depending on where your vehicle is garaged. However, I'd really avoid using Judge Judy as the final word on getting legal advice. <big grin here>

I've never lied to an auto insurance company or a life insurance company about where I live with my vehicle, even though the insurance companies are actually located outside of that State. Do you believe that Prudential or State Farm doesn't have 'branches' everywhere in the USA? When you live in Ohio, take out insurance on your life and car, then move to another State, that insurance company transfers your address in their files, but the coverage doesn't end. The rate may or may not change depending on the new State, but the coverage doesn't. The reason for a rate change is based on statistics....in Cleveland, Ohio, a particular car may be more popular for thieves but in rural town Virginia, that car isn't as popular as, say a pickup truck, so the rate would go down instead on the car in Virginia compared to Ohio. It's happened to me personally, so I actually know what I'm talking about.

Derek has all of his vehicles tagged to my address, legally, because he is military and never stays in one duty stationed area for long, has had the same insurance company (State Farm out of my town in Virginia) covering all of his vehicles since 2002 when he bought his first vehicle in California, has filed claims a few times, and has never been denied.

I believe that buying insurance for health coverage over State lines would also work the same way......it doesn't matter where you live, JP, and you wouldn't have to move to have coverage. Insurance is already sold over the internet for vehicles, boats, businesses, and lives.....why not health, too?

Don't get sarcastic or nonsensical with your replies.....just be factual and precise with your reasons why you believe otherwise.

A link to a site that sells auto insurance is narrating a false story?


Since you don't believe them( an auto insurance company website)....what could anyone else say to get you to admit you could be/are wrong....you are reading the facts straight from the horse's mouth....and you still won't admit it....

Enjoyed reading your stories...doesn't change the facts.....Get insurance in the state you live in...IF you don't, you're committing fraud....

They're' not facts....they're ALTERNATIVE FACTS? Kellyanne Conway reference....

RE:.why not health, too?

Perhaps IF/WHEN the doctors and hospitals in Virginia get their shirt together the insurance companies will offer the same plans as neighbouring states.....

It's NOT Obamacare's fault when something is available in ONE state and not another state...It's the states fault.....

RE:Don't get sarcastic

YOUR words? Do you even bother to LISTEN to yourself

Are you holding me to a higher standard than you hold yourself?

I'm already there, so you can take a break....

When I put in a change of address to move to VA from Ohio, State Farm automatically transferred my auto and house insurance to VA (a local broker)....I didn't HAVE to lie about where I live, anymore than Derek had to lie about HIS location in Norfolk to cover his vehicles from my address, JP.....the RATES changed (due to vehicle popularity amongst thieves, traffic patterns for accidents, etc.), but NOT the insurance company and nobody has ever been denied a claim. There is NO fraud committed regarding the contracts.

Your link implies that ALL insurance companies would deny benefits....however, if, under the Trump administration, a NEW NATIONWIDE agreement among insurance companies for health insurance coverage would cover ANYONE, ANYWHERE when someone purchases that insurance from another State different from where they live, JUST AS MOST, IF NOT ALL, AUTO insurance companies do, then nobody would be denied benefits they aren't paying for.

That link is using typical Dem/liberal scare tactics because they don't WANT insurance to cross State lines......BECAUSE MONOPOLIES BENEFIT THE INSURANCE PROVIDER, WHICH WAS WHY DEMS REFUSED THAT AMENDMENT AS OBAMACARE WAS BEING WRITTEN.

However, even YOU have to admit that now that those same monopolies are LOSING money by not allowing OTHER States' people to buy from them, they are all pulling out of Obamacare....especially since the Federal subsidies promised to them for their losses are shutting down........so, please finally admit that Obamacare is a failure, is collapsing upon itself, and it's time to go has now come to fruition. It was a forced experiment that blew up in the faces of the Democrats.......fortunately, the hard lesson was learned by the people who suffered and continue to suffer under it, and it WILL disappear just as prohibition laws did.

Yes, there are some die hards who refuse to give up on their 'legacy', just as hilLIARy's health plan failed (even with Dems back then). Those die hards are still in the House and Senate, but they no longer have the same clout they did during BO's time, their Congressional base is willing to work with Trump's administration (even Schumer is now talking in that direction, but he wants a 'fix' and not a 'repeal', so he's irrelevant), and their tired 'you're going to die under Republicans' chants will fall on deaf ears because millions of people never saw the benefits they were promised.

What they had before BO was CHOICE...even if that choice was to have NO insurance.......and they want that back.