dflprincess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Sep-10-09 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #19 |
| 20. Forgetting, of course, that if we had Medicare for all |
|
we wouldn't be spending money on premiums and large out of pockets for the health insurance companies.
That's how we'd pay for it, take the money we're giving the crooks and put it in a pool that covers everyone. Besides, how are mandated premiums any different than a tax? Except we'd have a better shot at actually getting care if we were paying into a single payer rather than a for profit system.
|
| -My biggest issue with this bill is it will take 4-5 years to kick. This worries me, |
ej510 |
Sep-09-09 10:32 PM |
#0 |
 -
Me, too. But I can see that it would take a while to set up these new systems, |
Honeycombe8 |
Sep-09-09 10:35 PM |
#1 |
 -
The democrats better hold onto the majority, because the repukes |
ej510 |
Sep-09-09 10:39 PM |
#2 |
| -
Yup, 4 to 5 years to get "the system" going, 100,000 more Americans dead as a result of no health |
avaistheone1 |
Sep-09-09 10:41 PM |
#3 |
| -
4 to 5 years means it's not a priority. That kind of time line will give them a chance |
Raineyb |
Sep-09-09 10:52 PM |
#5 |
| -
Yep. |
Zoeisright |
Sep-09-09 10:59 PM |
#6 |
| -
Oh, but Obama says single payer would be "starting from scratch" |
dflprincess |
Sep-09-09 11:36 PM |
#13 |
| -
Who would pay for that? Do you have an estimate of the cost? |
Honeycombe8 |
Sep-09-09 11:40 PM |
#16 |
 -
Medicare is going bankrupt because it can't negotiate drug prices |
dflprincess |
Sep-09-09 11:43 PM |
#18 |
| -
Yeah, that's a big part of it. Huge. Even so, it's going bankrupt. YOu didn't answer the Q. |
Honeycombe8 |
Sep-09-09 11:47 PM |
#19 |
| -
Forgetting, of course, that if we had Medicare for all |
dflprincess |
Sep-10-09 12:03 AM |
#20 |
| -
Here's how a Single Payer Medicare system can be funded. |
avaistheone1 |
Sep-10-09 12:34 AM |
#23 |
| -
When I add up my share of the premium, |
dflprincess |
Sep-10-09 08:42 PM |
#28 |
| -
He never said a thing about the pharmaceutical industry. |
ej510 |
Sep-10-09 12:13 AM |
#21 |
| -
+1 |
invictus |
Sep-10-09 08:51 PM |
#29 |
| -
Medicare was implemented in less than a year. |
SharonAnn |
Sep-09-09 10:42 PM |
#4 |
| -
4-5 years means the health care bill will be shit by the time it's ready. |
ej510 |
Sep-09-09 11:03 PM |
#8 |
| -
If voluntary buy-in to Medicare is allowed, there is NO set-up time whatsoever. n/t |
eridani |
Sep-10-09 04:22 AM |
#24 |
| -
I hear you. The time line bothers me too. But I did hear the |
JimWis |
Sep-09-09 11:02 PM |
#7 |
| -
There's a reason Obama wants to phase in reforms after the 2012 election.. |
girl gone mad |
Sep-09-09 11:12 PM |
#9 |
| -
To repeat - MEDICARE WAS IMPLEMENTED IN 11 MONTHS. |
kath |
Sep-09-09 11:29 PM |
#10 |
| -
The message is that this is too difficult to accomplish- so we'll toss out a few platitudes |
depakid |
Sep-09-09 11:32 PM |
#11 |
| -
Amazing isn't it? |
dflprincess |
Sep-09-09 11:34 PM |
#12 |
| -
I'll take "because he's bought and paid for". |
kath |
Sep-09-09 11:39 PM |
#15 |
| -
Please phrase your answer in the form of a question. |
dflprincess |
Sep-09-09 11:41 PM |
#17 |
| -
True. |
ej510 |
Sep-10-09 12:15 AM |
#22 |
| -
But in what year? |
treestar |
Sep-10-09 08:12 AM |
#26 |
| -
It is mostly a budget move. Starting faster puts it on the books and it jacks up the accounting.(nt) |
TheKentuckian |
Sep-09-09 11:38 PM |
#14 |
| -
That gives us 4-5 years to bring in Single Payer. n/t |
NecklyTyler |
Sep-10-09 04:59 AM |
#25 |
| -
me too!! |
flaminbats |
Sep-10-09 08:42 AM |
#27 |
| -
The budget window is 10 years. All the plans seek to collect revenue |
TheKentuckian |
Sep-11-09 02:10 AM |
#30 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread