Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on June 22, 2009, 03:54:49 AM
-
June 22, 2009
Simple Healthcare Math
By Randy Fardal
The Obama media seem to be wringing their hands over the possibility that President Obama's attempt to nationalize America's healthcare could go down in flames, despite ABC's upcoming White House telethon. Politico reluctantly acknowledged that a trillion dollars does seem like an awfully large number to most voters:
That is why Democrats admit that it was a public relations disaster this week when the Congressional Budget Office issued a report this week concluding, from a partial draft of a Senate health committee bill, that the plan would cost $1 trillion over 10 years but only provide coverage for 16 million of the estimated 50 million Americans who are uninsured.
The Washington Post reported that the CBO cost estimate for another draft version of the bill is $1.6 trillion. In the same story, Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) was quoted as saying the price tag easily could reach $2 trillion. For sake of argument, let's assume the middle estimate of $1.6T is valid and it would cover 16 million Americans.
Why didn't Mr. Obama downplay the $1.6T CBO report as sensationalism, and point out that it actually would cost a "mere" $160 billion, on average, per year? Perhaps it is because once he starts to break down the number into understandable chunks, he risks spotlighting the relatively high per-capita cost of his program.
A hundred and sixty billion dollars per year is $13.3B per month to insure only 16 million people. That works out to about $833 per subscriber. That might be a good price for a 75-year-old, but Medicare already covers them. Mr. Obama wants taxpayers to insure Americans in their 30s, 40s, and 50s.
A quick scan of the Anthem Blue Cross website shows that society could get a much better deal in the private sector -- even without a 16-million person group rate. A Santa Monica, California 50-year-old male can get a $3500 deductible HSA policy for $172 per month. That includes drug coverage and no co-pay for office visits after the deductible is met.
If the subscriber is healthy enough not to reach the deductible amount in a given year, his average variable cost ranges from zero to $292 per month, plus the $172 fixed cost, or a maximum total of $464. And since that is a health savings account policy, the $292 reduces his taxable income. If the Santa Monica resident's combined marginal state and federal tax rate is 30 percent, his total monthly after-tax cost is no more than $204 to cover the deductible amount, plus $172 for the insurance premium, a maximum total of $376.
Granted, women in their childbearing years pay more for maternity coverage, but having a baby is a voluntary step (especially with free abortion clinics), theoretically taken by those that can afford it. Policies with no maternity benefits are available for 30-year-olds at well under a hundred dollars per month.
________________________ ________________________ _
Is it that hard for politicians to pull a damn calculator out once in a while????
-
3366,
Here is a fact:
* USA is spending more of the GNP for health care than other civilized nations.
I'm not making a judgement on what USA specifically should do.
But something obviously needs to be done.
The insurance companies are always gonna lobby that the angle that it will become more expensive if they lose control.
I don't know.
I just think it would be a smart thing to do to look at a way to somehow slice the costs.
Instead of blocking the efforts? ???
-
3366,
Here is a fact:
* USA is spending more of the GNP for health care than other civilized nations.
I'm not making a judgement on what USA specifically should do.
But something obviously needs to be done.
The insurance companies are always gonna lobby that the angle that it will become more expensive if they lose control.
I don't know.
I just think it would be a smart thing to do to look at a way to somehow slice the costs.
Instead of blocking the efforts? ???
Here is the problem, ANYTHING the govt does makes it more expensive and less efficient.
Additionally, the Govt is already massively involved in health care as it is and those are the programs that are bankrupt!
We have tons of regulations on the insurance companies that make it more expensive than it should be. I could go into this with you, but I dont feel like doing a term paper at 8 am in the morning.
-
Here is the problem, ANYTHING the govt does makes it more expensive and less efficient.
Additionally, the Govt is already massively involved in health care as it is and those are the programs that are bankrupt!
We have tons of regulations on the insurance companies that make it more expensive than it should be. I could go into this with you, but I dont feel like doing a term paper at 8 am in the morning.
LOL
I get your point.
However, one point I'd like to make though, is that Emergency Care is the most expensive.
And the sooner you can treat someone, the less you have to spend.
So all these people in the USA being uncovered are really a big cost for the USA.
Because chances are they'll end up in the ER sooner than later.
It be much better if they would get fast and minimal treatment before there is any severity.
-
LOL
I get your point.
However, one point I'd like to make though, is that Emergency Care is the most expensive.
And the sooner you can treat someone, the less you have to spend.
So all these people in the USA being uncovered are really a big cost for the USA.
Because chances are they'll end up in the ER sooner than later.
It be much better if they would get fast and minimal treatment before there is any severity.
Do you want a dirty little secret????
1/3 of those who the democrats are screaming about being uninsured are illegal aliens who use the emergency room as primary care.
-
Do you want a dirty little secret????
1/3 of those who the democrats are screaming about being uninsured are illegal aliens who use the emergency room as primary care.
I think one pressing issue is to send out illegal aliens and to shut the borders.
Real tight.
You're not helping anyone by keeping them around.
You're only killing the unions and the average hard working man.
-
I think one pressing issue is to send out illegal aliens and to shut the borders.
Real tight.
You're not helping anyone by keeping them around.
You're only killing the unions and the average hard working man.
Illegal aliens have had a terrible effect on black people too in this country.
Whether it be brown on black crime, taking jobs away because they will work under the table for much less $$$$, etc, illegal aliens have really had a bad effect on this country.
-
send out illegal aliens and to shut the borders.
Real tight.
+1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
-
hedge we also have 2,3,4 and 5 times as many ppl as those countries you are comparing the US to and that doesnt count the illegals...
-
hedge we also have 2,3,4 and 5 times as many ppl as those countries you are comparing the US to and that doesnt count the illegals...
The comparison isn't the TOTAL cost.
It's the percentage of the the GNP.
Ie, how many percent of what is generated in USA per year that is spent on health care.
As far as your illegal number... I'm not so sure the Brits would agree with you on that.
They got plenty of unlisted citizens, not accounted for.
I'm sure steevo or NS can fill you in more.
And UK is a pretty big nation too.
-
The comparison isn't the TOTAL cost.
It's the percentage of the the GNP.
Ie, how many percent of what is generated in USA per year that is spent on health care.
As far as your illegal number... I'm not so sure the Brits would agree with you on that.
They got plenty of unlisted citizens, not accounted for.
I'm sure steevo or NS can fill you in more.
And UK is a pretty big nation too.
And the UK has higher taxes. Thats the point I am trying to make. There is no way to enact this without imposing higher taxes since the politicians have no other way to pay for this.
-
Here is the problem, ANYTHING the govt does makes it more expensive and less efficient.
...
Sounds like more bullshit 'facts' from the Peter Schiff/Ron Paul crowd. Get over your irrational hatred of government. It makes more sense to treat people up front than to wait for that spot to become a giant tumor. That makes costs go up.
We could take the Schiff/Paul approach - tax write offs for insurance premiums that the poor cannot afford anyways, but then we'd still have 50 million uninsured people dragging down our collective costs.
Sorry boys, it costs more to not have nationalized healthcare than it would to have it.
Every fucking comparable country on the planet has some form of nationalized healthcare except for the US.
-
Ok...I'm not a Canadian or a Brit. Ur not entitled to healthcare or my money. Ur health is not my problem.
-
And the UK has higher taxes. Thats the point I am trying to make. There is no way to enact this without imposing higher taxes since the politicians have no other way to pay for this.
The US has a comparativley moderate tax burden. The only people that think we're overtaxed are the weeping Glen Becks and fellow tea baggers.
-
The US has a comparativley moderate tax burden. The only people that think we're overtaxed are the weeping Glen Becks and fellow tea baggers.
Its not just income taxes. When you tally local, state, federal, sales, excise, energy, etc - the total tax burden is staggering.
-
Yeah..um thats not for u to say is it. We are way over taxed. We're paying for to many social programs and too many worthless hangers on.
-
Decker, if you look at the government ran health systems, they are loosing the most money. Medicare, Medicaid and the VA. I have several veterans who transferred to me for care because the VA is so bad. They get their prescriptions filled at the VA pharmacies and I write bloodwork to be done at the VA but they choose to see me because the system sucks.
As I have posted before, I'd like to see the government regulate the medical system, not run it. I agree something needs to be done and ER visit care is a huge waste of money. Unfortunately, a lot of poor people use the ER as primary care...I don't know how to change that. End of life care is an even larger expense.
-
The US has a comparativley moderate tax burden. The only people that think we're overtaxed are the weeping Glen Becks and fellow tea baggers.
So what? when did it become the job of the federal government to provide health care? Was there an amendment to the constitution that I didn't get the memo on? There is a reason the constitution was written the way it was, and that was to keep government in check. Taxes are supposed to be used for the federal government's constitutionaly mandated duties, not every pet project or perceived injustice.
-
So what? when did it become the job of the federal government to provide health care? Was there an amendment to the constitution that I didn't get the memo on? There is a reason the constitution was written the way it was, and that was to keep government in check. Taxes are supposed to be used for the federal government's constitutionaly mandated duties, not every pet project or perceived injustice.
There is simply not enough money to fulfill every wet dream of a liberal.
-
Its not just income taxes. When you tally local, state, federal, sales, excise, energy, etc - the total tax burden is staggering.
When you tally state and federal taxes, the US's burden is only 28% of GDP. The UK's is 37.1, Ireland-37, Sweden- 49.1, France- 44.2, Luxembourg
35.9 and so on.
Relatively speaking, we have a light tax burden.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2009/04/bartlett-time-to-tea-bag-the-tea-parties.html
-
Sounds like more bullshit 'facts' from the Peter Schiff/Ron Paul crowd. Get over your irrational hatred of government. It makes more sense to treat people up front than to wait for that spot to become a giant tumor. That makes costs go up.
Why listen to the guys that were right?
-
Decker, if you look at the government ran health systems, they are loosing the most money. Medicare, Medicaid and the VA. I have several veterans who transferred to me for care because the VA is so bad. They get their prescriptions filled at the VA pharmacies and I write bloodwork to be done at the VA but they choose to see me because the system sucks.
As I have posted before, I'd like to see the government regulate the medical system, not run it. I agree something needs to be done and ER visit care is a huge waste of money. Unfortunately, a lot of poor people use the ER as primary care...I don't know how to change that. End of life care is an even larger expense.
Yet Social Security is one of the most efficient financially sound gov. systems ever. Modeling the insurance paradigm on that would be a great step forward.
SS blows private insurance companies out of the water for both cost and efficiency. It's not even close.
-
When you tally state and federal taxes, the US's burden is only 28% of GDP. The UK's is 37.1, Ireland-37, Sweden- 49.1, France- 44.2, Luxembourg
35.9 and so on.
Relatively speaking, we have a light tax burden.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2009/04/bartlett-time-to-tea-bag-the-tea-parties.html
And those economies are just doing great right????
-
So what? when did it become the job of the federal government to provide health care? Was there an amendment to the constitution that I didn't get the memo on? There is a reason the constitution was written the way it was, and that was to keep government in check. Taxes are supposed to be used for the federal government's constitutionaly mandated duties, not every pet project or perceived injustice.
Good point.
-
Good point.
Ok Decker - HOW DO WE PAY FOR ANOTHER TRILLION DOLLAR GOVT PROGRAM????
-
And those economies are just doing great right????
No economy is booming at the moment.
-
Ok Decker - HOW DO WE PAY FOR ANOTHER TRILLION DOLLAR GOVT PROGRAM????
When we had the will to kill a few thousand brown people, conquer their country, and spend hundreds of billions to that end, we had no problem raising the funds.
NOw that we are on the track of caring for our own, the well is suddenly dry?
IF it were up to me, I'd slash defense spending by 60% for the next year, raise corporate taxes and taxes on individuals (not households) earning over 100,000 a year with the largest increase on those earning 330,000 a year. I would kill corporate welfare, close tax loopholes and anything else I can think of to raise revenue during a crisis such as this.
-
When we had the will to kill a few thousand brown people, conquer their country, and spend hundreds of billions to that end, we had no problem raising the funds.
NOw that we are on the track of caring for our own, the well is suddenly dry?
IF it were up to me, I'd slash defense spending by 60% for the next year, raise corporate taxes and taxes on individuals (not households) earning over 100,000 a year with the largest increase on those earning 330,000 a year. I would kill corporate welfare, close tax loopholes and anything else I can think of to raise revenue during a crisis such as this.
It's a good thing it's not up to you. :D :P
-
Ok, considering that Obama is not proposing those things, and the CBO says it will cost far more than they are projecting:
HOW DO WE PAY FOR THIS?????
-
It's a good thing it's not up to you. :D :P
Thanks for the captain obvious retort.
-
Thanks for the captain obvious retort.
Lighten up man. You know I got respect for ya. You're usually right when you're not wrong but mostly you make no sense. :)
-
Lighten up man. You know I got respect for ya. You're usually right when you're not wrong but mostly you make no sense. :)
I thought I was joking.
I think I've had enough.
-
Being that the U.S has one of the highest rates of corporate taxation in the world, that would be a further economic hit. If we kill private industry, we kill the majority of the jobs in this country. Any plan to raise corporate tax is disasterous.
The key is to cut spending across the board....including defence spending.
You mention social security, which may be efficient, but even that program will run out of money faster than we planned. Which is another reason why we must cut spending (we need to save this program).
-
Being that the U.S has one of the highest rates of corporate taxation in the world, that would be a further economic hit. If we kill private industry, we kill the majority of the jobs in this country. Any plan to raise corporate tax is disasterous.
The key is to cut spending across the board....including defence spending.
You mention social security, which may be efficient, but even that program will run out of money faster than we planned. Which is another reason why we must cut spending (we need to save this program).
SS is a disaster. Too many promises based upon a flawed model.
-
No economy is booming at the moment.
This is somewhat of an impossible statement, since the world economy is in theory a closed system than losses on side are gains on the other side.
Anyway, free Iran!