Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

If you think no one complaints about Medicare, you aren't paying attention.

roy

But see you are just like the stupid bunch in washington,,I said how it could be paid for not by the goverment,but by the people,and it would work the lobbiest out of it would be a big thing

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

Roy, if you are going to resort to insults, I suggest you do a little studying.

Your answer is "just do this", or "just do that".

You obviously.think very simplistically. If it was as simple as you want it to be, it would be done already. If Obama wanted to actually care for people, and it is as simple as you think, why didn't he do it?

I doubt you understand the magnitude of what you want. For instance, the price tag would be many times the entire.sales volume of pot. The tax is a drop in the bucket.

We are not talking thousands of dollars, not millions, not billions. TRILLIONS. Each year. One trillion is one thousand billion. That is one million millions. THINK.

roy

And you add some percentage of your pay,and theres many other ways to pay for healthcare,but nobody can think outside the box .If you took 20 working people in this country,i mean 20 that really work put them in a room they would come up with a working plan and a way to pay for it.The way it is it will keep sucking the working men and women dry with not alot to keep our economy going.

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

What you propose will suck them dry faster but you can't see that. People who don't work, don't spend nor pay tax. If you think welfare money is supposed to go to needy families who then will use that money to buy pot,....keep thinking.

No matter how you cut it, the working middle class would carry the load and they said NO MORE!

roy

Well the right says they going to put people who get welfare back to work so they can pay taxes an for their insurance.But will they stop corprate welfare,hell no their in line to get much more,do you like that

buffalo Loc: Texas

Could it be that the private, for profit health INSURANCE giants are LYING?

"The claim that corporations are losing money on Obamacare ignores the record-breaking profits and compensation packages that health insurers continue to collect.

Consider UnitedHealth, the nation's largest health insurer that is leaving the marketplace next year. UnitedHealth claims that Obamacare has reduced its 2016 earnings by $850 million. While they might have $850 million less than they wanted, UntedHealth’s profits are still soaring.

In fact, UnitedHealth announced record-breaking profits in 2015, followed by an even better year this year. In July 2016, UnitedHealth celebrated revenues that quarter totalling $46.5 billion, an increase of $10 billion since the same time last year. And company filings show that UnitedHealth’s CEO Stephen J. Hemsley made over $20 million in 2015. To be fair, that is a pay cut. The previous year, in 2014, Hemsley took home $66 million in compensation."

Why not subsidize health CARE and cut out the profit extracting middleman of health INSURANCE. Seems like a better deal for our tax dollars. Private, for profit health INSURANCE giants only want to insure less risky healthy people. Health INSURANCE giants, which by their very existence, must put profits above all else, will continue to disrupt and ration services when they can to make an extra dime.

Medicare operates more efficiently and has far lower overhead then private INSURERS. According the latest trustee report per-enrollee, Medicare spending growth has averaged 1.4% from 2010 to 2015, while overall health expenditures per capita growth is nearly three times that. Expanding Medicare to a younger, healthier population could create many benefits to the current program and future beneficiaries.

The naysayers that say it is not affordable because of the size of the US population are ignoring the fundamental principle of insurance to begin with. The bigger the risk pool the more the risk is spread. Medicare already covers those with the highest risks in medical CARE, the elderly and disabled. Adding millions of younger, healthier people into the pool of Medicare benficiaries would spread risks exponentially.

Medicare for All premiums (taxes) would cost a hell of a lot less than the high premiums charged by private, for profit health INSURANCE giants because those premiums would be eliminated and so would they be eliminated from fucking up the US health CARE system. Oh, and the RICH might have to pay a little more in taxes.

Just check this out:

UNDERSTANDING IMPROVED MEDICARE FOR ALL
… universal health care, single-payer health care, health care for all

What medical care will we get?

All medically-necessary services. Examples are primary care and prevention; approved dietary and nutritional therapies; inpatient care; outpatient care; emergency care; prescription drugs; durable medical equipment; long term care; palliative care; mental health services; dental services; substance abuse treatment; chiropractic services; basic vision care and vision correction; hearing services, podiatric care.
For more information:
See: Benefits (side-by-side comparison to current health insurance);
H.R. 676 Section 102 (benefits);
To link to this answer from another website use the following hyperlink:
http://www.mforall.org/p/830#whtcare


How much will health care cost me and my family?

Because payroll income is the only income that many Americans have, those individuals and families will pay only for an increase in the Medicare payroll tax. The expected increase in the Medicare payroll tax is in the range of 3.3% to 3.7%, raising the tax to about 5%.

If the Medicare payroll tax increases from the current 1.45% to 5%, then here is the total amount of employee payroll taxes for health care:
— $41.67/month = the health care payroll cost for every $10,000/yr of earned income
Example: $208/month for $50,000/yr of earned income.

The fantastic savings we get in return when the U.S. has Improved Medicare for All:
— No premiums to health insurance companies for covered services.
— No major medical bills for covered services.
— No co-payments (co-pays), deductibles or coinsurance.
Examples: co-pay for doctor's office visit;
coinsurance (a percentage of the total cost) after a hospital stay.
— A positive contribution to lowering federal, state and local taxes due to the elimination of many of our government health programs and the reduction of governmental employee health care costs. The latter costs would include the health care costs for public school employees.
— No more need for fund-raisers and applying to the hospital to request possible reductions in the prices on the amounts charged. There won’t be any major medical bills.

See: the long and significant list of Side Benefits: Costs and Savings,
See: Costs - Lower for Government, Costs - No Major Bills
See: H.R. 676 Section 211 (funding),
To link to this answer from another website use the following hyperlink:
http://www.mforall.org/p/830#cost


How is it possible to get more, pay less and cover every American's health care costs?
Or: How will we pay for health care efficiently?

We will drastically reduce administrative costs.
The U.S. is the only free-market country with out-of-control health care costs and without some kind of health care for all system. The one dramatic difference between the U.S. and all the other free-market countries is “overhead”. We will establish excellent benefits by cutting unnecessary administration costs: over $400 billion per year. Those cuts are possible by cutting unnecessary administration activities within the government, the health insurance companies, and the supporting bureaucracy. Other cost-cutting examples are: negotiating the lowest prices for drugs and medical equipment due to our large population; eliminating the cost of unnecessary testing and procedures due to “defensive medicine”; and cutting the amount of fraud and abuse within a simpler system that’s easier to manage.

There will be some degree of cost reduction by having a healthier population, but that's hard to quantify.

The United States will have the best health care for all system due to the addition of increased efficiency to the health care of our large population.

http://www.medicareforall.org/pages/Answers

roy

I totaly agree with you,if this was explained to trump i believe he would agree also,but the peions would never explain something like this to him.The only thing they want is what the insurance companys want and pay them very well .

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

What I think is that your crystal ball is cloudy and you have no idea of what the future holds.

On one hand we have the right trying to find a way for poor unemployed people to get off welfare, back on their feet, and become assets rather than liabilities. Seems like a good idea.

On the or her hand we have you, predicting what you guess may happen, and completely ignoring that you are exactly describing what Obama did by making the rich richer, poor poorer, and crippling those in between.

What I don't like is people like you who live in denial and cry over your predictions rather than applaud reality.

roy

We are living reality,that women had blood all over her face,from a face lift

buffalo Loc: Texas

And the reality that you can't through your brain fog is the fact that corporate welfare has already dwarfed social welfare way before obammy and continued through his sorry administration. We spend over 3 times as much on corporate welfare every year then all forms of social welfare combined...yet, you never hear anyone on the "right" side of the bird complain about this.

I’m also happy to see that not everyone on the left has abandoned their distaste for corporate subsidies now that their subsidy-loving guy (that would be obammy) is in the White House.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Common Dreams’ criticisms and math do eventually veer into confused, anti-business mumbo-jumbo, but here’s what they get exactly right:

1. $870 for Direct Subsidies and Grants to Companies. The Cato Institute estimates that the U.S. federal government spends $100 billion a year on corporate welfare. That’s an average of $870 for each one of America’s 115 million families.
This is definitely (and depressingly) correct: as I noted in my 2012 Cato paper on global subsidy reform, the US government provides myriad taxpayer-funded benefits to agribusiness, g***n e****y, automobile manufacturers, and whole host of other US businesses. Even worse, the $100 billion figure is up significantly (about $10 billion) over the last two budget-strapped years.

2. $696 for Business Incentives at the State, County, and City Levels. A New York Times investigation found that states, counties and cities give up over $80 billion each year to companies… $696 for every U.S. family.
Again, 100% correct, and this is actually one area in which state competition harms taxpayers, as politicians from different states compete with each other to woo corporations by offering them buckets of other people’s money.

6. $870 for Corporate Tax Subsidies…. [T]he Tax Foundation has concluded that their ‘special tax provisions’ cost taxpayers over $100 billion per year, or $870 per family. Corporate benefits include items such as Graduated Corporate Income, Inventory Property Sales, Research and Experimentation Tax Credit, Accelerated Depreciation, and Deferred taxes.
Yep, and they also include all those g***n e****y tax breaks quietly thrown into last year’s Fiscal Cliff deal. Wouldn’t you say it’s time for a simpler, fairer, more globally-competitive corporate tax code?

If you add these altogether, you see that federal, state and local governments force American families to give, on average, $2436 per year to companies that certainly don’t need the handouts (or shouldn’t be in business if they do). That $2436 could go a long, long way for most families, whether it was spent on food and clothing, vacation, a college fund, or wh**ever mom, dad and the kids most need. Indeed, considering that the average American family spends around $6500 per year on food, eliminating these corporate subsidies and returning the savings to taxpayers could pay for about 4.5 months-worth of groceries.

http://thefederalist.com/2013/09/30/calculating-the-real-cost-of-corporate-welfare/

Corporate Welfare

Robbing from the Poor to Give to the Rich
How much does the government really spend on welfare? (and by the "government" we mean taxpayers)

Social welfare: $59 billion

Corporate subsidies: $92 billion

$70 billion goes to gas and oil industries

The numbers behind corporate welfare expenses
$2.1 billion amount of tax dollars lost due to loophole of classifying earned income as capital gains

$58 billion amount given to corporations in tax breaks for offshore profits

encourages large companies to conceal their profits in offshore accounts
$59 billion amount of taxes avoided by wealthy taxpayers

capital gains and dividends are taxed at only 15% and provides the bulk of new wealth
$700 billion amount given in bank bailouts considered corporate welfare because there were no strings attached / no accountability for spending it

$9 trillion on low and no interest loans to major corporations and banks from the Federal Reserve

The prize for worst thing to buy with welfare money goes to:

Subsidies for private aircraft

those will private planes are able to:
use accelerated tax write-offs

claim that the aircraft is for security avoiding personal taxes

use air traffic control funded by ticket purchases for commercial flights

Subsidies for private equity and hedge funds

"carried interest" allows those earning the most to categorize their income as capital gains

capital gains are taxed at a much lower rate (max. 23.8% vs. max. 39.6% for earned income)

Subsidies for yachts

Mortgage-interest deductions now also cover the purchase of yachts and beach homes

The purpose of deductions was to encourage middle class home purchases

Now we're also helping the wealthy to keep their yachts‚

Subsidies for corporations from cities, counties and states

$80 billion a year in subsidies to companies to persuade them to operate locally

funded by individual cities, counties and states

the companies often take the subsidies and relocate their facilities elsewhere

Examples of Companies on Welfare:

Walmart

According to a report from U of C Berkeley Walmart's low employee wages are costing $86 million in publicly funded gov't assistance programs

Walmart justifies low wages with low prices, but this means giving the extra responsibility to taxpayers

Walmart also has it's own publicly funded control tower at Rogers Municipal Airport in AK
the tower cost $81,000 to operate in 2013

Big oil companies BP, ConocoPhillips, Exxon, Shell and Chevron

$4 billion in tax breaks annually

These breaks are meant to flow down to consumers yet prices remain on the rise
in one year, there was an 11% price hike on gasoline
2012: the average American household reached a 4 year spending high of about $3k on gasoline

Oil companies are still making record profits

2012: oil companies earned $118 billion in profits with $72 billion in cash reserves

http://www.masters-in-accounting.org/corporate-welfare/

Defunding some welfare programs sounds like a great idea. Let's start with the most expensive:

buffalo Loc: Texas

Your first sentence is a LIE! How in the hell do the private, for profit health INSURANCE giants profit $500 BILLION annually from the millions they insure? By insuring mostly healthy people, that's how. What is insurance but people paying into a risk pool? 320 million would be the largest risk pool on earth. Instead of $1000.00/month premiums to health INSURANCE giants, $200/month in 5% Medicare taxes for a family of 4 earning $50,000/year. Taxing ALL incomes (annual stock increases, investment incomes and capital gains) for the 5% Medicare tax. Not to mention the savings from cutting out the $400 BILLION the health INSURANCE industry hauls in for bloated administrative costs.

If the Medicare payroll tax increases from the current 1.45% to 5%, then here is the total amount of employee payroll taxes for health care:
— $41.67/month = the health care payroll cost for every $10,000/yr of earned income
Example: $208/month for $50,000/yr of earned income.

The fantastic savings we get in return when the U.S. has Improved Medicare for All:
— No premiums to health insurance companies for covered services.
— No major medical bills for covered services.
— No co-payments (co-pays), deductibles or coinsurance.
Examples: co-pay for doctor's office visit;
coinsurance (a percentage of the total cost) after a hospital stay.
— A positive contribution to lowering federal, state and local taxes due to the elimination of many of our government health programs and the reduction of governmental employee health care costs. The latter costs would include the health care costs for public school employees.
— No more need for fund-raisers and applying to the hospital to request possible reductions in the prices on the amounts charged. There won’t be any major medical bills.

See: the long and significant list of Side Benefits: Costs and Savings,
See: Costs - Lower for Government, Costs - No Major Bills
See: H.R. 676 Section 211 (funding),
To link to this answer from another website use the following hyperlink:
http://www.mforall.org/p/830#cost

People from Canada are NOT flocking here in any significant numbers....ANOTHER LIE!

Docadhoc Loc: Elsewhere

What are you talking about?