Welcome to The Conservative Cave©!Join in the discussion! Click HERE to register.
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
IdaBriggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 08:55 AMOriginal messageHow much money would your household save if you didn't have to pay for medicine/health coverage? I finally watched "Sicko" last weekend, and of course it got me thinking.How much would the 'normal' household save if you didn't have to pay ONE CENT fora) Doctor Visitsb) Emergency Room Visitsc) Hospital Staysd) Ambulance Transporte) Prescriptionsf) Dental Careg) Insurance Costsh) Miscellaneous, Unlisted Health Related ExpensesWould you do me the favor of taking a quick look at your monthly budget, and tossing some numbers up? It would also be interesting to see how many people in your household are 'covered' (or not) for that amount of money.I'll post mine in a separate line to 'kick' the thread.
Belial Donating Member (317 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 08:57 AMResponse to Original message1. Maybe @ $6000 a year.. but I would pay the same in a tax increases if not more to cover the cost.. BTW thats with spouse and two children..
hobbit709 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 09:01 AMResponse to Original message5. My wife's COBRA alone is $365/mo. Her meds are are about $250/mo more. Her copays are about $300/mo. Luckily I'm on VA coverage so my meds are $8/mo each for 6 different ones.
slackmaster (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 09:04 AMResponse to Original message9. Between $2,000 and $3,000 per year, but someone would have to pay for it somehow The concept of a normal household (meaning I assume middle class with at least one source of income) not having to pay for medical care somehow, makes absolutely no sense.
Kalyke (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 09:19 AMResponse to Original message19. But you would have to pay taxes. Not that I mind that idea. I don't mind paying my taxes because I like roads and schools and libraries - and would love single-payer coverage.That said, I still think the cost to the average American, even with a tax increase to pay for it, would still be far less than the $3,000 - $10,000 most people spend out-of-pocket yearly for employer or personal-provider health insurance.
ContinentalOp (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 12:59 PMResponse to Original message54. Ouch "employer payroll tax of 4.5% an employee payroll tax of 3.3%" my healthcare costs would triple I'm fully in favor of single payer but I thought it would actually save me money. Sounds like it would be about 3x as expensive for my family.
ContinentalOp (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Fri Mar-06-09 01:06 PMResponse to Reply #5458. Actually, I redid the math and it would only be 2.5x more expensive than what we pay now. Still, ouch.
Bigmack (1000+ posts) Fri Mar-06-09 10:03 AMResponse to Reply #1 6. How do you know that? One of the advantages of single-payer health care is that admin costs go waaaay down. No advertising budget - or a very small one. Paperwork is minimized, too. Social Security has the lowest admin costs of any financial security account. Look and see who is fighting single-payer. Insurance companies. Before we went on Medicare, my wife and I figured we could pay $9K per year in higher taxes in return for health care, and it would be a wash. The bonus would be that everyone would get care.
How much money would your household save if you didn't have to pay for medicine could enslave the medical profession
IdaBriggsI finally watched "Sicko" last weekend, and of course it got me thinking.
A study by nationally recognized economist, Dean Baker, of the Center for Economic Research and Policy concluded that under H.R. 676, a family of three making $40,000 per year would spend approximately $1900 per year for healthcare coverage. Currently, (in 2007) the average annual premium for families covered under an employee health plan is $11,000. (National Coalition on Health Care.)
In 2005, without reform, the average employer that offers coverage was contributing $2,600 to healthcare per employee (for much skimpier benefits), or 217.00 per month. Under HR 676, the average costs to employers for an employee making $30,000 per year will be reduced to $1,425 per year; or about $119.00 per month.
demodonkey (1000+ posts) Fri Mar-06-09 10:54 AMResponse to Reply #31 35. Oh yes -- one more thing. Local, county, and state governments would pay less for their employees ...so you should get a tax cut in local and state tax.Right now some of these local and state governmental entities are paying 25-30 percent (or more) of their payrolls ADDITIONAL in employer-share of employees' healthcare and workers compensation costs. You as a "working" taxpayer have to pay for this in addition to your own healthcare costs, in the form of higher local and state taxes. This program would lower employer healthcare costs for local and state governments from 25-30 percent to about 11-12 percent of payroll. That is a huge savings that can go back to the "working people" in the form of lower local and state taxes.
Yellow Horse (350 posts) Fri Mar-06-09 11:14 AMResponse to Reply #20 43. You would only pay 3.3% of salary, & save the $2-3K you are paying now -- get lots more coverage. You would NOT get a 7.8% cut in your pay. The 4.5% employer payroll tax is paid by your employer -- NOT YOU (in lieu of what they are paying in healthcare coverage for you now.)
Yellow Horse (350 posts) Fri Mar-06-09 11:14 AMResponse to Reply #20 43. You would only pay 3.3% of salary, & save the $2-3K you are paying now -- get lots more coverage.
And let's see, that's $9000 my employer would have to pay, making my "medical insurance" $15,600 / year.Boy, that doesn't seem like a good deal to me.
It's not supposed to be. It is supposed to be a good deal for 'them'.KC
How much money would your household save if you didn't have to pay for medicine/health coverage?
We have a winner for dumbest post of the day!!"Dude, you're not getting it .... YOU don't pay for it, your EMPLOYER is paying for it! Don't you see ..... it is another way to stick it to the MAN! Yeah, we are gonna make the guy who writes our checks pay that 4.5% not you." /dummieKC
0 bongs.I've read IdiotBriggs for a few years now and have never seen her do anything which resembles "thinking."
Why doesn't the Idiot Briggs primitive ask something more sensible like "how much money would you save if you didn't have to pay rent [or mortgage, if applicable]?" or "how much money would you save if you didn't have to pay for groceries?"
We've been buying their groceries, paying their rent and paying for their healthcare for 45 years now.....that's why we have a national debt.......and just where would we be right now without a national debt?
The costs of this without severe rationing would be astronomical.DUmmy visits alone in their pursuit of getting removed from the productive workforce and society due to medical or mental issues would be more then anyone could imagine.
