NEVER MIND!!!...sorry

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:37 pm

If you live in the United State of America please vote.

Pretend your current healthcare plan would end in 5 years and be switched to a universal healthcare plan.
Would you want to pay 6.83% more taxes, on each pay check you make, if it meant complete medical coverage? Also know that this number will change according to the total cost of healthcare. Edit: This healthcare plan would cover all people in the United States of America, including those who don't work and aliens.
Multiply your GROSS pay times 6.83%.
Here are some examples:
If you made $20,833.33 last month you would be taxed an extra $1,423.07 that month.
If you made $6,770.79 last month you would be taxed an extra $462.50 that month.
If you made $3,020.79 last month you would be taxed an extra $206.34 that month.
If you made $1,145.79 last month you would be taxed an extra $78.27 that month.

roid · Post by **roid** » Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:45 pm

Is this USA residents only?

(everyone in my country already has complete medical care provided by taxes)

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:47 pm

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:56 pm

If they go too far and cross the line I have drawn in the sand (consisting of 6 attributes some of which They are coming close to crossing), I'll be doing similarly to what Jeff Knaebel did. Would I want to? Nope, quite content with having shelter, utilities, and paper.

I voted No.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:24 am

I'm remembering the old Jeff MacNelly cartoon IRS form -
Q. How much money did you make last year?

Next line - Send it in !!

Sorry, there are just too many rutabagas in Washington. Don't trust 'em to run another entitlement program.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 1:42 am

Kill this BS once and for all. Go back and repeal the stupid special interest laws that \"broke\" the so called medical system. We didn't have problems like this in 60's.

This should have gone in the E&C forum.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:05 am

If we did it this way we'd actually be able to afford our 2.2 trillion a year healthcare bill. Even if the number was 4 trillion we'd be able to pay it with taxes. Isn't that better than people going to the hospital and declaring bankruptcy to avoid paying (this includes not affording the deductible on their crappy insurance or not having coverage for certain treatments). If we all paid an expensive 6%+ we'd be able to afford, what's now known as, the greatest healthcare system in the world. They money's there! Why not?

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 9:47 am

Issac, go back and remove the bottom two tax brackets from your calculations because those people don't pay any taxes. Now figure out how many of the total taxpayers you just eliminated from the revenue stream and reapportion the cost among the people left who do pay taxes.....then go back and remove all those who don't pay for other reasons and rework your numbers again....then plan to rework your numbers next year to cover the new group of voters who are given exemptions by who ever is in office and wants to buy their votes...

Now how much does it cost?

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 3:41 pm

So we have the two bottom extend from $0 to $60K (joint file goes up to 60K) who are taxed 10-15%. That's about 75 million people. You want me to cut them out?
Or should I just cut out those who made less than $500 and don't have to file?
I don't think you'd be getting money back on health care, like social security. It's just something you contribute to when you get paid.
edit:
I'll make the calculations after you confirm I made the correct population/income macro.

dissent · Post by **dissent** » Sun Feb 28, 2010 11:48 pm

Isaac, is this the information you're looking for?
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays- ... taxes.html

So it looks like you can just about double your estimate of 6.8% for the tax you think will be required. So, 13.6%.

So, how will you control costs in your new miracle health care system?

(more NTU @ http://www.ntu.org/news-and-issues/health-care/ )

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:56 am

dissent wrote:So, how will you control costs in your new miracle health care system?

It wont. As it goes up so will your payroll tax. If you want them to go down simply fight unemployment by letting the other markets have fewer restrictions.

dissent wrote:Isaac, is this the information you're looking for?
http://www.ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays- ... taxes.html

I've seen this but I would tax ALL people a flat 6.8%. I don't care how much income tax takes off since that's separate.

Here's where I'm stuck, I'm trying to see if this 6.8% will cover medicade and medicare. It should, and I want it to, but I need to work it out still. This 6.8% is part of a rough draft. It might go up to 7% before I iron everything out.

My guess is 13% would happen if we also include doctor's student loans AND insurance. This sounds bad until you realize how few GPs we have. If we go with Universal healthcare we need more of them. A lot more.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 11:04 am

I did a quick in-my-head calculation comparing my current contribution to the company healthcare plan, and the percent that you stated. I think they are about even.

I'm skeptical about how long that percentage would stay that low, though.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 12:17 pm

snoopy wrote:I'm skeptical about how long that percentage would stay that low, though.

I want to find the actual cost for running different medical business models. Multiply that cost times the amount those models exist in the United Sates and account for the size of each, then come up with a true prospective cost on healthcare. But I haven't even started that yet... if only I had Obama's resources this middle school level math problem would take no time at all to figure out.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 1:33 pm

The only way to really fix health care is to jump back in time to about 60-80 years ago and destroy all the insurance start-ups and prevent the big business friendly environment from forming, thus preserving the free market and competition that existed which kept prices under control.

Otherwise the solution is to cut all the government bailouts, stop the tax beaks, end the free lunch program, level the playing field and watch as the free market rips the system apart and disposes of garbage that has worked its way in. In other words: take it out back and use the shot gun to get it over with.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 3:22 pm

Krom wrote:Otherwise the solution is to cut all the government bailouts, stop the tax beaks, end the free lunch program, level the playing field and watch as the free market rips the system apart and disposes of garbage that has worked its way in. In other words: take it out back and use the shot gun to get it over with.

I'm trying hard to see the capitalist only version of healthcare that works better than the straight 6.8%+ tax. My version leaves no debt anywhere in the medical system. It renders a whole bunch of low level securities extinct.
I love capitalism, so help me see a simple straightforward way that works. The socialist way is simple and covers everyone on everything.
Show me god dam it! I want to see a single capitalist model that works just as well!!!

Once I finish my version I'm going to make the Google docs spreadsheet public and linked for you to see. I beg/dare people to find flaws in it.

Krom · Post by **Krom** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:10 pm

If there is a reason that serious health care (or pretty much any other sector that needs it) reform will not happen, it is because collectively America is suffering from battered wife syndrome.

Americans are made to feel that they deserve to be beaten, that they are worthless and don't deserve to live without these gigantic corporations (empires would probably be a more accurate word for them these days). No matter how much abuse we receive at the hands of these corrupt and power drunken industries we continue to stick to them like glue out of irrational reasoning and fear that we will be beaten even worse without them.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:13 pm

“The socialist way is simple and covers everyone on everything.”

I’m really sorry…but that is a major pipe dream. That’s your first flaw right there.

I have more to say, but it’s already been said in the many other threads, but I will say this much…

How’s this for a concept…

We all pay for our own health care, at a reasonable cost.

AlphaDoG · Post by **AlphaDoG** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 4:55 pm

TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY!

Bet51987 · Post by **Bet51987** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:03 pm

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:09 pm

I don't think people will pay for this:

After rechecking my math I came up with a much higher number: 29.69%
(monthly earned)/(monthly health care cost of USA)

$183,333,333,333.33/
$617,484,948,416.67 = 29.69%

The correct USA monthly gross pay (2007).
$617,484,948,416.67
The correct USA monthly healthcare cost (2007).
$183,333,333,333.33

29.69% is very high. I'm having second thoughts about it, but if everyone went with a cheaper healthcare plan they would still be using more than they were covered for. The 2.2 Trillion+ would not change. 29.69% so far is the only real solution. It renders our country broke, but it doesn't create debt by those slammed by high medical bills.
I'm done with 2007 numbers. I'm now trying this on 2009.

Bet51987 wrote:AFAIK Lothar and Foil are math experts. Maybe one will look it over but I like the whole concept.Bee

I'd welcome their opinions, but the math is pretty easy. And there's not much you can do with the numbers if your goal is to tax everyone fairly. Of course the upper class have cheap plans that cover very well and would be horrified to get the same thing at 29.69%.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 5:36 pm

......

that's kinda what a lot of us have been saying for a better part of a year.

but good job on running the numbers guy! nicely done!

Will Robinson · Post by **Will Robinson** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 6:47 pm

Krom wrote:The only way to really fix .... In other words: take it out back and use the shot gun to get it over with.

I just want to formally announce my intention to run for this office. I'm qualified, a pretty damn good shot, will provide my own weapons and ammo and even willing to work overtime at the regular rate.
Thank you for your support.

I'm Will Robinson and I approve of this message

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:40 pm

The problem is the capitalist version has never really been fully tried. Too many states allow only a select few insurance providers to operate within their state, thus stifling competition. Lawyers are given carte blanc to sue doctors and hospitals for the slightest of reasons. Drug are priced high by legislative fiat. Allow true competition to be practiced and i suspect you will see prices come down substantially.

OTOH, we can look at true socialist health care as performed in various countries like Britain. Is this what we want here?

Sirius · Post by **Sirius** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:39 pm

Eh, yeah, socialist health care usually works out OK. Most of the developed world has it, most of them don't have scary health statistics.

Proper competition definitely would work as well though. The problem is achieving it. Large companies tend to want to be anticompetitive, and insurance is something that only works with scale. You probably need regulations coming out your ears to get them to play ball.

And I agree, a health system that costs 30% of the national GDP is a little beyond a joke. That's the size of all government spending put together in countries like Canada or New Zealand. Both countries have socialised healthcare, incidentally, so I do wonder what happened.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Mon Mar 01, 2010 11:32 pm

Duper wrote:......

that's kinda what a lot of us have been saying for a better part of a year.

but good job on running the numbers guy! nicely done!

Thanks. I feel like I failed though.

Grendel · Post by **Grendel** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:20 am

The problem is the cost of health services.

Current estimates put U.S. health care spending at approximately 16% of GDP, second only to East Timor (Timor-Leste) among all United Nations member nations.
[..]
One analysis of international spending levels in the year 2000 found that while the U.S. spends more on health care than other countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the use of health care services in the U.S. is below the OECD median by most measures. The authors of the study concluded that the prices paid for health care services are much higher in the U.S.

Pandora · Post by **Pandora** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 7:30 am

woodchip wrote:OTOH, we can look at true socialist health care as performed in various countries like Britain. Is this what we want here?

as someone who is living in Britain I can attest that it works great. I would not want to miss it. Think about it: almost everything is covered for not much tax, and for everything else you want you can get extra insurance. What's not to like?

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 10:15 am

Whats not to like? BBC was reporting people pulling their own teeth out because they couldn't wait for the 6 months to see a dentist and have the bad tooth looked at.

Pandora · Post by **Pandora** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:05 am

we don't have such problems here. Sounds strange anyways ... they could always go to a private dentist if it is this problematic. And of course, not everything is perfect --- particularly in areas where there are not enough dentists --- but in general it works quite well.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:28 am

But, Isaac says it would cover everyone for everything…

Am I the only one that finds that this kind of over optimistic thinking a problem.

Oh, and I have heard a lot of the horror stories from abroad, I dismiss most of them right along with the ones I hear about from the left.

Duper · Post by **Duper** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:28 am

woodchip wrote:The problem is the capitalist version has never really been fully tried. Too many states allow only a select few insurance providers to operate within their state, thus stifling competition. Lawyers are given carte blanc to sue doctors and hospitals for the slightest of reasons. Drug are priced high by legislative fiat. Allow true competition to be practiced and i suspect you will see prices come down substantially.

Bingo!

THAT is how you "fix" a broken healthcare system.

snoopy · Post by **snoopy** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:31 am

I was curious about the Canadian healthcare system, as compared to the US system, so I did a bit of reading. This is all from wikipedia, but it looks like most countries have health care spending rates at about 10% GDP, while the US is around 17%. The interesting part is that the US's infant death rate and life expectancy are both worse than Canada's. BTW, the Canadian system funds ~70% of healthcare costs... 90%+ of hospital & physician costs; nearly 0% of dental & medication costs.

Here's what I'm getting from it the comparison:

1. The problem in the US is cost. Other countries are doing it for 7% GDP less than the US, at the same (or better) life/death results.

2. Maybe accessibility isn't all that it's cracked up to be. Make dire need accessible, and make \"my tummy hurts\" something you have to pay for yourself... or wait on.

3. Maybe there should be better definition between \"comfort\" and \"life and death\" coverages. Canada keeps the cost down by not covering things like dental care.... but at the same time they seem to do a really good job of taking care of, say, cancer patients. Privatization of the \"comfort\" health services makes people have choice when it comes to paying for, and benefiting from them.

I'm not saying that I'm convinced about social healthcare. I am convinced that the huge difference in healthcare spending between the US and other countries has to do with the sense that the US seems to have of entitlement to immediate care for minor discomfort that we can probably live with. The last 2-3 times I've been to the doctor, it's been over nothing.... pains or aches or whatever that turn out to be either just normal parts of life, or things that would have gone away if I had just waited a bit longer.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 11:34 am

I’ve been saying…no PREACHING that forever…

You should not be using insurance to pay for day to day expenses.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 12:04 pm

Spidey wrote:But, Isaac says it would cover everyone for everything…

Am I the only one that finds that this kind of over optimistic thinking a problem.

Yeah it comes with a 29.69% tax increase that still doesn't include lawsuit insurance so that it's more lucrative to be a general practitioner.
I can't see our nation being 30% more poor across the board, so the middle class and poor can afford all forms of healthcare.

I don't want to give 30% of my money. Especially when I hardly use our healthcare system.

Insurrectionist · Post by **Insurrectionist** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 5:00 pm

Well snoopy my tummy hurts went to the doc and now I need to have hernia surgery. So since my tummy hurts should I have to pay for this myself or have the insurance pick it up? Oh Spidey I also take meds everyday so that would be an everyday expense for me do I pay for this out of my pocket? When I pay for medical insurance I should be able to use it. Any way it's not like people suing the doctors and hospitals has anything to do with the cost of medical insurance or that some people actually believe the world owe them so they don't have to pay.

Oh besides this month is the beginning of my deductible for this year so I will pay for the surgery I need out of pocket.

If Canada’s health care is so good why did Danny Williams Canada’s Newfoundland Premier come to US for Heart Surgery

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2510700

Behemoth · Post by **Behemoth** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 5:08 pm

No.

Taxes are already pulling enough money out as it is, You think it a good idea to give them MORE?

Sorry, but no.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:10 pm

Behemoth wrote:No.

Taxes are already pulling enough money out as it is, You think it a good idea to give them MORE?

Sorry, but no.

.... Ok but where do you think the debt is going that's caused by the medical system? Or is that just pretend money you think we don't have to acknowledge?

Taxes or not, something needs to pay for, what will be, 4trillion+ a year. Either through higher insurance premiums, price inflation (not directly caused by...), or taxes you're going to pay for it one way or another. The system needs to be self sufficient. I can't see a system that works that way using a privatized system. I'm going to try to do the numbers, but unless you already have I can't agree with you.
I don't know how to make that more clear. Behemoth, keep up man. You're slipping.

Spidey · Post by **Spidey** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:21 pm

Insurrectionist

I pay for mine out of pocket…now you want to have an internet pissing contest to see who takes more…I have type2.

No, your surgery “should” be covered by your insurance, but not the doctor visit.

You’re missing the point…the fact that you want “everything” covered in your insurance is one of the reasons those of us who don’t have insurance get raped when we need care.

I hear it every time I go to the doctor…you have to pay more for that procedure, than someone with insurance…blah blah blah. The un-insured actually cover the loss doctors/hospitals take, because the insurance companies can negotiate for better rates than I can. (then I get accused of causing the problems…lol)

You know….if I could just go to the doctor and pay a fair price for my own care….I wouldn’t give a damn what the rest of the world was doing.

Isaac · Post by **Isaac** » Tue Mar 02, 2010 6:27 pm

True...

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:44 pm

Pandora wrote:we don't have such problems here. Sounds strange anyways ... they could always go to a private dentist if it is this problematic. And of course, not everything is perfect --- particularly in areas where there are not enough dentists --- but in general it works quite well.

This is working well?:

"Up to 1,200 people lost their lives needlessly because Mid-Staffordshire NHS Trust put government targets and cost-cutting ahead of patient care."

"The independent inquiry headed by Robert Francis QC found the safety of sick and dying patients was 'routinely neglected'. Others were subjected to ' inhumane treatment', 'bullying', 'abuse' and 'rudeness'."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ients.html

NEVER MIND!!!...sorry

Pay 6.83% more taxes to your gross pay.

NEVER MIND!!!...sorry

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: