Unconstitutional! Can we have our $1 Trillion back now?

[BT]

EVERYONE, with an emphasis on EVERYONE, pays into a fund via fee/tax, and 1 entity, the Government (i.e. the tax payers) are billed and pays for everyone's healthcare, via that fund.  Which in this case is likely the same as SS, meaning, it just goes into the general fund, no lockbox

Medicare is a single payer system. Does everybody pay into it?

[BT]

And you pay for someone ELSE's Dr's visit.  Yea, let's just add on more taxes, that's the ticket

When you buy medical insurance those premiums go into a pool and from that pool someone ( if they belong to the plan) elses  Dr. visit is paid for from those funds.

If you have insurance with a major carrier, as we speak, you are paying for someone elses medical care.

So what is different?

[Christians4LessGvt]

That's the beauty of funding it with sales (VAT) tax. No one slips through the cracks.

As is always the case, the truth is in the details.
It depends what you are going to fund with a sales tax.
If you are going to fund full "everything is covered" sniffles to cancer for everyone including illegals.
Then that sales tax will eventually be enormous.
If you are just going to fund catastrophic care then it might be doable.
I think the best form of health insurance is some kind of medical savings account.
With medical savings account reality of costs are brought to bare.
Any system that allows patients to not care at all about costs is just not reality.
And ends up being extremely costly which in turn causes health care rationing.
The patient needs to be aware of costs and have incentives to lower costs.
Medical savings accounts do some of this.

I actually might support a law requiring health insurance
if you have it...you are exempt
if you dont have it....then your paycheck is garnished...like a tax.

[sirs]

EVERYONE, with an emphasis on EVERYONE, pays into a fund via fee/tax, and 1 entity, the Government (i.e. the tax payers) are billed and pays for everyone's healthcare, via that fund.  Which in this case is likely the same as SS, meaning, it just goes into the general fund, no lockbox

Medicare is a single payer system. Does everybody pay into it?

Every worker who pays taxes, with the government being the single payer, using those tax dollars to pay for it.  I love that you used Medicare....a system being crushed financially, will be unable to sustain itself without drastic cuts and/or massive tax increases, and a mere fraction of what Cash for Croakers will wroght upon us

And you pay for someone ELSE's Dr's visit.  Yea, let's just add on more taxes, that's the ticket

When you buy medical insurance those premiums go into a pool and from that pool someone ( if they belong to the plan) elses  Dr. visit is paid for from those funds.

ITS OPTIONAL BT.  FOLKS AREN'T BEING MADE TO BUY MEDICAL INSURANCE.  It's irrelevent how a pool works, that's never been the issue.  That's the proverbial strawman

If you have insurance with a major carrier, as we speak, you are paying for someone elses medical care.  So what is different?

CHOICE!!

[BT]

If you are going to fund full "everything is covered" sniffles to cancer for everyone including illegals.

I think i addressed that already.

I could see where flu treatment would be covered but in vitro fertilization wouldn't in the base plan. Catastrophic illnesses, like cancer treatments or cardio proceedures would be covered. Broken legs would be covered, plastic surgery wouldn't.

Things like BC pills and viagra could be covered under a supplemental plan much like the supplementals that go with medicare.

I understand your concern about illegals which is why a sales tax is a good idea, because even illegals buy stuff.

The whole idea is to increase the size of the pool.

Even with medicare only employed people on the books contribute, there has to be a better way to capture the others.

And think what the savings would be to a small business. Their employees are taken care of, but the owner doesn't shoulder the entire burden.

[BT]

CHOICE!!

You get to choose whose bills are paid with your premium?

[sirs]

I get to choose if I want insurance or not.  Maybe I'm really healthy and don't want any.  Maybe I'm financially stable and can pay as I go.  Maybe I'm inbetween jobs.  I'm a far better steward of my money, than the Government is, despite how noble your intentions are

[BT]

I get to choose if I want insurance or not.  Maybe I'm really healthy and don't want any.  Maybe I'm financially stable and can pay as I go.  Maybe I'm inbetween jobs.  I'm a far better steward of my money, than the Government is, despite how noble your intentions are

Yes but once that choice is made, you don't get to decide how your premiums are spent. And if you self insure or pay as you go you are still paying for others as the losses from other peoples failure to pay is built into your charges. That's why aspirin costs $10 a pill in the hospital.

[sirs]

I get to choose if I want insurance or not.  Maybe I'm really healthy and don't want any.  Maybe I'm financially stable and can pay as I go.  Maybe I'm inbetween jobs.  I'm a far better steward of my money, than the Government is, despite how noble your intentions are

Yes but once that choice is made, you don't get to decide how your premiums are spent.

Irrelevent

[sirs]

[BT]

Irrelevent

Is that a synonym for you don't have a valid rebuttal?

[sirs]

No, it's a synonym for strawman. 

I don't know what's this hang up you have with the pools.  You think, despite my consistent references to the contrary, that I still don't grasp how insurance companies works??  How single payer works??  That's not at issue here. 

CHOICE of deciding what or if you wish to have insured, as it relates to one's own health, it at issue.
PEOPLE having a better grasp of how to spend their own hard earned money, as it relates to one's own healthcare, is at issue
GOVERNMENT having no business dictating how I'm to take care of myself, via my healthcare choices, is at issue
CONSTITUTION providing no authority for Government to mandate that I must have health insurance, is at issue.

How pools work, is a non-issue, since no one is claiming insurance companies don't pool their VOLUNTARY funds

[BT]

Apparently government does have an interest in your healthcare as evidenced by the constitutionality of both medicare and medicaid.

BTW do you have an uninsured motorist rider on your auto policy?

[sirs]

Apparently government does have an interest in your healthcare as evidenced by the constitutionality of both medicare and medicaid.

2 systems, both going broke, both imploding with the weight of the financial burden they've become, and both a mere fraction of what Obamacare will undoubtedly bring

So, if SCOTUS rules in my favor, what then?

BTW do you have an uninsured motorist rider on your auto policy?

Once again, irrelevent, though to answer your question, IIRC, I do believe we CHOSE such a rider.  Government's mandate is liability only, for damage/injury to someone ELSE

[BT]

So, if SCOTUS rules in my favor, what then?

Obviously i will demonize my opponents and claim that Scotus is nothing but a group of 9 who rule based are partisan leanings and have not a concern in the world for what the founders intended, by their inclusion of the promote the general welfare clause.

2 systems, both going broke, both imploding with the weight of the financial burden they've become, and both a mere fraction of what Obamacare will undoubtedly bring

Their fiscal condition is irrevelant to whether govt has an interest in the nations health as it does in their interest in making sure its citizens have the financial means to compensate for accidents if they are found liable.