Opinion based on opinion (another T-P Passion Play): Oh, and Healthcare!

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

A way to rationalize the cost based arguments for and against The Dreaded Single Payer Plan©: 


I read this comment on the npr site regarding an story that, as usual, has nothing to do with the subject of the story

Wise Adz (wiseadz) wrote:
Ethan Carter: "I'd rather have higher taxes and single-payer healthcare."

Funny you should mention that. I asked my boss how much it costs to employ me (including health care), and it's roughly double my salary when you include payroll taxes and my health plan. If you consider all of the money that I earn, and call the rest "taxes", I pay a 67% "tax rate". If I'm paying such a "socialist" tax rate, why don't my neighbors have socialist access to medical care and socialist access to education?

But let's pretend that the health care plan is all that matters. The cost of my health plan is about $18k/year. My pre-tax salary is $60-something, and my post-tax salary is around $40-something. So, running the same thought-experiment on just my take-home salary and my pretax salary+healthplan, that still puts me just under a 50% tax rate. Again, this is the kind of "socialist" tax rate that Republicans like to scare me with - so where are the socialist benefits for my neighbors?

If anyone thinks that health plan only covers me, they're misinformed. It also pays costs for the uninsured to visit the emergency room, and the hospital overcharges me (and undercharges others) to make the bottom line work out.

Hat tip to Wise Adz. He said it as well as anything I have heard. And it got me to thinking.


Note his last comment. No matter what kind of private insured system there is, there will always be uninsured whose costs has to be paid by someone, typically us through high premiums. A premium is just like a tax. To my wallet, there is no difference. No amount of GOP whiny shrillness will drown out that simple fact. And this morals based society is not going to let too many people die for lack of basic care. Endgame: maintain the status quo with non sequitur rhetoric about TAXPAYER ENABLING OF THE LAZY.

I feel access to health care in a society that can technologically provide it (and health care only, draw no parallels with me on this one) is a fundamental right. I want my employees to have health care. But we can't afford it (see above). We would simply labor cost ourselves out of existence. How DARE the GOP spout pro-business doublespeak. Supporting the Obamacare program is helping small business and families. Much more than any trickle downs every GOP politician insists will be the result of repealing 'unwanted' aspects of the program.

I don't claim to know all the facts and figures and arguments with tax charts and Bruceisms. I am just telling you from my practical business experience business needs this program. American's need this program. Either in its current form, or modified. the cost of the healthcare business is not going to change direction, and that is not a good direction to go.

Premium or tax. If you want healthcare with less administrative, and more R&D and preventative programs do you think the premium based system is the answer, or the tax supported system? Maybe some of both?

Now for the obligatory factual visual thingie. This time it is a collection of the most commonly used terms when discussing 'healthcare' on the internet.


 Note the word insurance is bigger than the word people.

And that is a problem.

Comments

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

So if the ACA were struck down and somehow Romney gets elected, what could we expect from our luminaries in the new Republican adminstration? How would they solve these issues?

Too bad we can't look at the models used in the entire rest of the industrialized world but no sense doing that!

[hikarugenji.livejournal.com]

How would they solve these issues?

Lower taxes, less regulation. That's the Republican solution for everything. When Mitt Romney, apparently in all seriousness, used lower taxes and less regulation in a discussion about women's issues, it went beyond the point where it's even possible to parody the Republican position.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

In other words, Somalia.

This is why we can't have nice things.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

less regulation for women's issues...meaning...not banning abortion?

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

Hush now that's just partisan/nonsense/talk.

[fizzyland.livejournal.com]

Maybe I got used to politics in Canada - where the majority party can actually get things done. And then if the voters don't like it, they elect the other party.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I'm loathe to do yet another health care debate when there's not much new to say and we have the Supreme Court ruling coming down the pike.

But...

Note the word insurance is bigger than the word people.

And that is a problem.

Let's be fair - the debate has been about Constitutionality of health care and insurance mandates lately, which is a major issue outside of the people-oriented issue. To pretend we're not focused on the right issue based on this is a little misguided, imo.

[allisnow.livejournal.com]

Let's be fair - the debate has been about Constitutionality of health care and insurance mandates lately, which is a major issue outside of the people-oriented issue. To pretend we're not focused on the right issue based on this is a little misguided, imo.

Oh hell no you did not just insult the analytical prowess of wordle.net.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Personally I don't care about the Constitutionality argument. If it's a good idea then we should do it. If it's somehow unconstitutional then that's a problem with the Constitution.

Of course whether or not it's a good idea is up for debate, but if it is, the Constitution shouldn't get in the way.

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Then why have a Constitution?

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

There are procedures for modifying the Constitution in that type of case.

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

I'm not talking issues. I am talking priorities.

And most of my posts are a little misguided anyway, so there are no surprises at that level :D

Facts have little to do with politics and you know it.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Seriously the US debate on health care completely mystifies people who live in countries with universal health-care and single-buyer pharmaceuticals.

Why on earth do you want to pay more for worse outcomes?

[usekh.livejournal.com]

For FREEDOM! of course.

Actually usually it boils down to "I don't want to pay for someone else's healthcare" even if the result is better for you as well.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

... even if the result is better for you as well.

And everyone else as well. This is the perplexing matter, and it suggests a level of mental truncation. Surely, it is evident that a society of healthier people is advantageous to everyone, over and above the individual benefits.

It's rather like people being, oh, say competent at obeying traffic signs. It's not just the driver that benefits.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

The people against it don't believe it's a worse outcome. They're indoctrinated to think otherwise.

This is a problem that can't be solved without education. In America, ignorance is a source of pride.

[hikarugenji.livejournal.com]

If you get your news and opinion from right-wing sources, then you believe that all these other countries with universal health care have worse care than the US and have crumbling economies due to the social programs. Whereas the US' economy is crumbling because of high taxes and too much regulation.

[nairiporter.livejournal.com]

I notice that the word cloud shows "companies" being mentioned almost as frequently as "people". That must be saying something but I am not sure what it is! :-)

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

companies are people too.

didn't you get the memo?

[eracerhead.livejournal.com]

Overhead for employment certainly is a factor. The thing is, though that it works differently than you imply. The insurance premium (aka tax) is on employers making American labor more expensive and less competitive with companies that have the health care costs externalized to the taxpayer. It isn't a tax on you because employers likely would not increase your salary to cover it, they would use it to reduce costs. You have already negotiated what you're willing to live on so you won't see a $12K raise in your paycheck. They'd rather hire someone who will do it for less. The reason why we need single payer health care paid for by taxes is that it will make American business more competitive.

The issue of taxes potentially going up to cover it is another matter. We could pay for all of it by a reduction in military spending which IMO is currently way too high compared to other nations.

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

The reason why we need single payer health care paid for by taxes is that it will make American business more competitive.

That smacks of a partisan sound byte. One only a simpleton can get

I like it!

ETA: Paying for it - How about we just raise taxes a little, instead?

[737-700.livejournal.com]

When I was working at a call centre here in Canada that handled calls from US customers, the company decided to move the jobs from the US to Canada as it would be cheaper to use Canadian labor and they paid a higher wage to the Canadian employees. (8.25/hr in the US, vs 13.00 in Canada.)

Healthcare costs in the US was cited by the company higher up's as the reason to transfer the call centre to Canada and would allow them to pay a higher salary as well.

[onefatmusicnerd.livejournal.com]

I do not think that people realize how much damage our "healthcare system" does to our economy. It does not matter how wage or production competitive we are, places like Germany, that do not have a secret healthcare cost, are going to be much more attractive for manufacturing and other transient industries.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

I find it interesting that the discussion is almost always about insurance rather than, you know, health.

Insurance is a means to gain care, why is it always depicted as being an end?