Page 11 of 53 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 526
Thanks Tree349Thanks

Thread: Funding Single Payer

  1. #101
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    25,882
    Thanks
    15339

    From
    Under the boardwalk
    Quote Originally Posted by MaryAnne View Post
    California is doing just that! Could it be because they have a smart,Democratic Governor who has balanced the budget and can do thi?

    You know,old Governor Moonbeam himself ,who believes in Theology? The real one,not the faux Evangelical Right Wing kind.
    Great. We will have an opportunity to see how that works out.

  2. #102
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,414
    Thanks
    21125

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    California is drowning in debt. the "balanced budget" is nothing more than pencil whippery and debt deferral. The mountain of unfunded pension and medical benefit liabilities are not on any "balanced" balance sheets.

    But I do hope they try single payer....all that liberal 'compassion' for illegals will vanish, toot sweet.
    When an "illegal" goes to the ER now, who pays?

  3. #103
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    25,947
    Thanks
    9485

    From
    on the river
    Quote Originally Posted by labrea View Post
    If someone is employed in Nevada, but lives in California, how would that work? (California residents don't pay tax on out of state income, and Nevada doesn't have a state income tax. Also, in the area Im thinking of, the nearest doctors and hospitals would be in Nevada.
    You're not saying people would avoid paying for Single Payer, are you?

  4. #104
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    13,214
    Thanks
    4859

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    I'm reading a lot of posts, but I'm not seeing much talk about the nuts and bolts of financing. I see talking points about 'how much money we can save'....which, and correct me if I'm wrong, was also repeatedly sold as a huge benefit of Obamacare. which, of course, hasn't panned out.

    Which makes me suspicious. Which makes me think Single Payer advocates aren't really interested in how it's financed, or, more importantly WHO is on tap to finance it, they're just interested in another entitlement.
    start with replacing the existing tax codes with the following:

    for employees:
    all compensations are taxable in excess of $ 40,000 for individuals, $60,000 for families or individuals with dependents. individuals are subject to 10% tax stating from $0 to cover medicare and medicaid up till the limit based on current standards. after the excess deductible, all compensation will be taxed at 25% in excess of such applicable excess deductible. the EITC will be eliminated. there will be no deductions or exemptions for individuals.

    for employers:
    all businesses get the $60,000 deductible. they may deduct the actual cost of labor and raw materials used in their business. they may also deduct all compensations paid to employees for benefits. they may not deduct the 10% matching contribution for social security and medicare. all income from business will also be taxed at 25% for income over the deductible.

    then you re-prioritize the budget using percent of revenues instead of hard numbers (as we currently do) - when you run out of budgets, you're done until the next month. of course, 2% of revenue is automatically held "off the top" as a reserve fund.
    Last edited by bonehead; 18th March 2017 at 06:35 AM.

  5. #105
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,414
    Thanks
    21125

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoom View Post
    That's what government involvement historically does.

    Constitutionally speaking, correct.
    In that case, we should privatize our military, courts, and police systems.

  6. #106
    Shiny Purple Member namvet69's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,559
    Thanks
    2638

    From
    Englewood, Fl
    Very simplistic view of how things really work. Trump has taught you well. It doesn't work at the state level for a bunch of reasons not the least of which is that states like Ca. with a young population as opposed to say Florida with an aged population have very different needs and so in this example, Ca would have lots of healthy folks who don't drain the piggy bank nearly as much and as fast as Florida would. But, a national system would even things out because of sheer numbers. As far as these proposed block grants to the states for instance, what will happen is a fixed budget or allowance would be doled out and unlike medicaid, there would be no expansion of services due to cost over runs or changing demographics. One size fits all and when the shortfalls begin to appear, the fed can simply blame the governors for mismanagement etc. taking the heat off of the Trump people. They look upon this as a benefit of this drastically uneven and unfair bill. We all know Trump will do or say anything to shift the blame away from himself. State administered healthcare with strict limits on benefits and no real price controls is a recipe for failure and would be the Death Panels that the GOP likes to label ACA as.


    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    money is money, costs are costs, debt is debt. If Single Payer works, it would work on a state level.

  7. #107
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,414
    Thanks
    21125

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoom View Post
    I prefer to look at results over rhetoric. Nearly every politician leaves office far wealthier than when they entered. Coincidence? Is that "serving the needs of the citizens"?
    Please provide a link.

  8. #108
    Little Old Lady Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    43,256
    Thanks
    26825

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by bonehead View Post
    while I agree with taking care of funding, there are fair methods to do so without undue burden on the citizens - especially those who would be most at a disadvantage. there is no utopia - regardless of what many think. and, about that "richer half" - to whom are you referring?
    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    Your insurance could sue me to recoup those costs....attach wages, liens, destroy credit. Auto insurance carriers sue for uninsured/underinsured motorist (subrogation) all the time, as well.

    with health insurance -- save doctors and hospitals -- there's nobody to sue for criminal negligence....there's no way to recoup the costs associated with criminal levels of gluttony, or other unhealthy vices we humans engage.
    So, you object to universal care because it reduces the risk poor people will be punished for "bad choices"?

    This is a perverse attitude, inculcated by almost 100 years of propaganda. There is no objective measurement on which middle class people are better off if the poor are "punished" more.

    The fact is, universal care would significantly reverse the trend towards income inequality. If it is not adopted, YOU are likely to become one of the "despicable poor", because the middle class will disappear.
    Thanks from labrea, OldGaffer and Leo2

  9. #109
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,414
    Thanks
    21125

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
    So, ALL these other countries are able to figure it out but Americans are just too fucking stupid???
    Apparently.

    Let's outsource our health care system to a country that knows how to get it done.
    Thanks from Madeline and OldGaffer

  10. #110
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,414
    Thanks
    21125

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    Your insurance could sue me to recoup those costs....attach wages, liens, destroy credit. Auto insurance carriers sue for uninsured/underinsured motorist (subrogation) all the time, as well.

    with health insurance -- save doctors and hospitals -- there's nobody to sue for criminal negligence....there's no way to recoup the costs associated with criminal levels of gluttony, or other unhealthy vices we humans engage.
    How would that work if we had the same insurance company?

Page 11 of 53 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The ACA and Single Payer
    By Meursault in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 2nd September 2014, 05:52 AM
  2. How About Single Payer Instead Of ObamaCare?
    By SleeperCell in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 13th August 2013, 07:25 AM
  3. Vermont Passes Single-Payer Healthcare
    By Morgan in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 13th January 2012, 04:01 PM
  4. Obama wants single payer insurance.
    By THOR in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 18th October 2009, 05:03 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed