Posted on 11/04/2019 7:54:38 AM PST by SeekAndFind
> The author misses the whole point by a mile, the Libs will promise anything to get elected ... <
Right you are. If I were running in a tight Democrat presidential primary, I’d promise the following three things.
1. Free medical care.
2. Free college.
3. Middle-class tax cuts.
And if anyone asked how it was going to work, I’d just mutter something about greedy billionaires.
Two points. First, we were told a family of four would save $2,500 a year on insurance. That was a bold face lie, as premiums have skyrocketed.
Second, and most disturbing, was that we were told there were 40 million uninsured people and that when ObamaCare was implemented, everyone would be insured. Today, almost ten years after it passed (according to PBS) we have 44 million people without health insurance and 38 million people have "inadequate" health insurance - and the people that do have health insurance are paying out the a$$ for premiums.
Not mentioned is how this would affect the supply of doctors. We already have a shortage today. How many doctors would simply retire or find other careers? I think Warren knows exactly what she’s doing. It’s all part of the progressive plan to destroy America.
I think SeekAndFind is substantially correct. Yes, you get Medicare Part A automaticity - and for free - when you turn 65.
But suppose you then, for whatever reason, refuse it. You write Medicare and tell them to take you off their Part A enrollee list. In that case, you would lose your social security benefits! Weird, huh?
Look at the results of ObamaCare, took over 1/6th of the US economy, have control over who gets health care and who does not and was a way to reward donors. ObamaCare was about RAW POWER and nothing else!
She must realize that Medicare pays for about 80% for most costs. And that many people are shelling out a couple hundred dollars a month on supplemental insurance to pick up the rest.
Is her plan going to continue paying that? Or are they going to pay 100% for 100%? Because that’s going to cost a lot more than 54 Trillion.
That’s the ‘endgame’.
> She must realize that Medicare pays for about 80% for most costs. And that many people are shelling out a couple hundred dollars a month on supplemental insurance to pick up the rest. <
There is actually an easy way around that. Just force doctors who take Medicare patients to accept 80% as full payment for services rendered.
Of course, that would mean that even more doctors would opt out of Medicare completely. And the waiting time for Medicare doctors would increase. But why should Liz worry about that? Congress would be sure to exempt itself from her plan.
Can’t put out a million for cancer treatment if the patient’s dead.
That’s just great.
It can’t REALLY be that if you have blood in your stool or blood in your saliva or a lump in a woman’s breast that they can be made to wait as long as several month.
Can it?
I don’t know. I don’t know anyone from Canada.
Can’t put out a million for cancer treatment if the patient’s dead.
That’s just great.
It can’t REALLY be that if you have blood in your stool or blood in your saliva or a lump in a woman’s breast that they can be made to wait as long as several month.
Can it?
I don’t know. I don’t know anyone from Canada.
In Europe, the 'care they need' has become state enforced suicide for the old and infirm
Idiots.... If they offered medicaid for under employed, or for workers whose businesses are too small to offer, on a buy-in basis (5-10% of gross comp), while leaving private insurance alone, they may have a winning issue given the entitlement climate.
No, I don't think that is weird. They need a guaranteed pool of covered people to keep the costs down.
And why would you overtly refuse it? Just ignore it and nothing will happen. It's free so you are not charged anything for it. What's the point in refusing it?
Yeah, I read the entire article at your link but it was 2015 vintage. And one of the complainants was Dick Armey, saying it interfered with his congressional medical insurance coverage which was superior. Oh, cry me a river. Spoiled elites. If Medicare is good for their constituents, then it should be good for them.
Writing to the Medicare and asking them to take you off the Part A enrollee list is an unforced error.
If they take your Social Security away because you did that, you deserve what happens.
> And why would you overtly refuse it? Just ignore it and nothing will happen. It’s free so you are not charged anything for it. What’s the point in refusing it? <
Here’s one possible scenario. Let’s say you are 65. So you automatically have Medicare Part A. Medicare Part A covers your hospital bills completely.
Now let’s suppose you also have free private medical insurance from where you work. Not only does that insurance cover your hospital bills, it pays you $100 a day for each day you are in the hospital.
Here’s the catch. This private insurance only kicks in if it is your primary insurance. That is not uncommon. So if you have Medicare, the private insurer will say “Sorry. Call Medicare, not us.”
In this case it would be to your advantage not to even have Medicare Part A.
The doctors are mostly private, do not work for the government per se. HOWEVER it is illegal to PAY a doctor outside of the Canadian “Medicare” system.
Government Health Care
The efficiency of the DMV
The customer service of the Post Office
The compassion of the IRS.
She will LIE or say anything to get votes.
I was told by someone who lives here in the USA who conferred with a Canadian friend about the healthcare there. He reported to me that Canada had an excellent system, but that doesn’t seem to gibe with what I’m reading here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.