MANDATORY health insurance

[UberBeaver]

Originally Posted by maycocksean

But the insurance companies don't FUND research and innovations!

In fact, guess who one of the major sources of funding for research in the medicine is?

:whisper: the federal government

You mean that same federal government that has DEATH PANELS?

[maycocksean]

Originally Posted by UberBeaver

You mean that same federal government that has DEATH PANELS?

mmmhmmm.

[trojanchick99]

Originally Posted by INDY500

First, wouldn't you rather own your health insurance instead of being tied to your employer? Hopefully you are satisfied with your job but wouldn't it suck to have to cling to a lousy job you hate, simply for the health benefits. What kind of freedom is that?

I am currently fortunate enough that the health insurance offered to me by my employer is excellent. When I was first hired, there was NO WAY I could afford a plan on my own. My mother on the other hand has NO choice in her health care, as 40+ year smoker, there is NO way she could get coverage privately and is forced to take her employer's (family owned farm) coverage. I believe she would be better served by the Insurance Exchange where there would be many options to choose from.

Second, ask your employer, if they don't already, to estimate the value of your health benefits and then calculate that as a percentage of your total pay. Then be alert to the proposed penalty that Congress would impose on employers that fail to offer their employees health coverage. 8% is the figure I've heard thrown around most often.

Actually, on my paystub is what my employer is contributing to my health care and it is more than 3 times what I pay. Like I said, I'm extremely fortunate. That being said, if I worked for a small business they might be happy to just pay an 8% tax on my pay to allow me to choose my own coverage.

The Trojan horse that many of us fear in a public option is this. What will happen to employer provided insurance if congress mandates mandatory coverage that is more expensive than the penalty not to provide insurance?

What would you do if you were an employer?

It depends on how competitive the job market is for that particular industry. If I were competing for top candidates I would make it a priority to have excellent benefits.

The point is that small businesses, this shouldn't effect large employers, will now have a choice as well and that will make for happy employees.

[U2isthebest]

Originally Posted by UberBeaver

You mean that same federal government that has DEATH PANELS?

I wish the death panels would kill any chance Sarah Palin has at a future in politics.

[HyperU2]

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' - Yahoo! News

Wow.

[melon]

Originally Posted by HyperU2

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' - Yahoo! News

Wow.

I think the next push now should be for Congress to repeal their own publically-funded health insurance, and be forced to purchase their own in the private sphere, just as they want members of the public to do so.

After all, we wouldn't want a "death panel" to decide which members of Congress live or die.

[Tiger Edge]

Originally Posted by HyperU2

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' - Yahoo! News

Wow.

Congress' proposals, however, seemed likely to strike end-of-life counseling sessions. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session "death panels," a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, declined to criticize Palin's comments and said Obama wants to create a government-run panel to advise what types of care would be available to citizens.

"In all honesty, I don't want a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats setting health care for my aged citizens in Utah," Hatch said.

Right because a bunch of nameless, faceless "noble entrepreneurs" and their pencil pushing drones are so much better. I'm in the middle of a sixth month battle with Cigna for them to cover a simple dental cleaning from freaking January. I can't have my next check up until it's paid. What now?
Not to mention I work in a business where insurance companies regularly deny to fit people with prosthetics that they need in order to function like normal human beings.
Fantastic.

What's that line again?

...same as it ever was

[kellyahern]

Originally Posted by HyperU2

White House appears ready to drop 'public option' - Yahoo! News

Wow.

So how would that help people who have lost their insurance because they have been laid off?

Oh right, it wouldn't.

Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate, especially in rural states such as his own.

How can you afford to buy insurance if you're not working?

[Se7en]

typical. democrats are worthless.

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally Posted by kellyahern

So how would that help people who have lost their insurance because they have been laid off?

Oh right, it wouldn't.

exactly. especially given the economy right now, no one seems to be thinking about or talking about what the hell all the unemployed people are supposed to be doing right now. yes, they have extended cobra benefits and provided discounts, but if you're unemployed, you might not be able to shell out $300/month to pay for the insurance. and getting it from another company is even more expensive than that.

the fact that this plan will be dropped, something that is absolutely necessary to have, is appalling. i really try to always keep open-minded about things and realize not everyone has the same opinions and such but with this it's hard. i view healthcare as a right, not a privilege. it should be a basic human right, not something only for the wealthy and employed. i just don't understand how anyone can think there are people in this country who don't deserve healthcare. anyone who is against having the choice (because that's all this is about, providing ALL americans another choice for insurance) of government-provided insurance, i'd love to know what they would do if their child or spouse or anyone they care about needed a surgical procedure and were told insurance would not cover it because it was too risky or denied for some other b.s. reason. we're not talking about someone wanting bigger breasts, but, to use tiger edge's example, people who have lost limbs and being told they cannot have a prosthetic one - unless they want to pay 100% out of pocket for the limb itself and any associated costs.

[Tiger Edge]

Here's a sad example to get you all started!

Recent college graduate (he's going to be a lawyer) goes jet skiing a few days after graduation as a "celebration." His arm was strangled in what was described as a "freak accident" with a rope or something. He lost his arm about halfway between the elbow and the shoulder.
Prosthetic cost? $90,000
Insurance? None. He is too old to be insured under his parents and wasn't working at the time, I guess.
Solution? Parents maxed out all credit cards just to pay for half of that. I don't even want to know what they did to their mortgage to pay for it.

We secretly want him to become a lawyer and an advocate for amputees.

[INDY500]

Sad story to be sure, but what if a high-deductible catastrophic health insurance plan had been available to him? You pay out-of-pocket for routine trips to the doctor and someone that young would have very low monthly premiums. Insurance only kicks in for long hospital stays, major surgeries or "freak accidents."

I'm telling you, if I was just outta college I'd be all over that type of insurance, not some government run plan laden down with all kinds of mandated coverage I most likely will never need.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Sad story to be sure, but what if a high-deductible catastrophic health insurance plan had been available to him? You pay out-of-pocket for routine trips to the doctor and someone that young would have very low monthly premiums. Insurance only kicks in for long hospital stays, major surgeries or "freak accidents."

I'm telling you, if I was just outta college I'd be all over that type of insurance, not some government run plan laden down with all kinds of mandated coverage I most likely will never need.

You're much more likely to need everything but long hospital stays, major surgeries or "freak accidents," even as a recent college graduate...probably especially as a recent college graduate.

[VintagePunk]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Sad story to be sure, but what if a high-deductible catastrophic health insurance plan had been available to him? You pay out-of-pocket for routine trips to the doctor and someone that young would have very low monthly premiums. Insurance only kicks in for long hospital stays, major surgeries or "freak accidents."

I'm telling you, if I was just outta college I'd be all over that type of insurance, not some government run plan laden down with all kinds of mandated coverage I most likely will never need.

I read comments like this and realize how fortunate we are here in Canada not to have to choose between treating catastrophic injuries or mundane illnesses. It's very unfortunate that this is often what it comes down to in the US, though.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Sad story to be sure, but what if a high-deductible catastrophic health insurance plan had been available to him? You pay out-of-pocket for routine trips to the doctor and someone that young would have very low monthly premiums. Insurance only kicks in for long hospital stays, major surgeries or "freak accidents."

Yes, and then they would do their best to get out of paying... I've seen it happen, insurance company did a private investigation(after the cops had declared it an accident) tried to claim the kid was intoxicated, negligence, etc... dragged their feet so long that full recovery was never abtained by the time they said they would pay for the treatment. If they had treated right away the kid would more than likely be fine, it's been 6 years since the accident and he still isn't 100%, he finally won his claim against the insurance company about 6 months ago.

[INDY500]

Never in 100 years would I think I'd find an ally at Whole Foods. Wouldn't be caught dead in one, until now.

I've highlighted the areas that I've been stressing the past week.

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare
By JOHN MACKEY

With a projected $1.8 trillion deficit for 2009, several trillions more in deficits projected over the next decade, and with both Medicare and Social Security entitlement spending about to ratchet up several notches over the next 15 years as Baby Boomers become eligible for both, we are rapidly running out of money. These deficits are simply not sustainable. They are either going to result in unprecedented new taxes and inflation, or they will bankrupt us.

While we clearly need health-care reform, the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system. Instead, we should be trying to achieve reforms by moving in the opposite direction—toward less government control and more individual empowerment. Here are eight reforms that would greatly lower the cost of health care for everyone:

• Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts (HSAs). The combination of high-deductible health insurance and HSAs is one solution that could solve many of our health-care problems. For example, Whole Foods Market pays 100% of the premiums for all our team members who work 30 hours or more per week (about 89% of all team members) for our high-deductible health-insurance plan. We also provide up to $1,800 per year in additional health-care dollars through deposits into employees’ Personal Wellness Accounts to spend as they choose on their own health and wellness.

Money not spent in one year rolls over to the next and grows over time. Our team members therefore spend their own health-care dollars until the annual deductible is covered (about $2,500) and the insurance plan kicks in. This creates incentives to spend the first $2,500 more carefully. Our plan’s costs are much lower than typical health insurance, while providing a very high degree of worker satisfaction.

• Equalize the tax laws so that that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits. Now employer health insurance benefits are fully tax deductible, but individual health insurance is not. This is unfair.

• Repeal all state laws which prevent insurance companies from competing across state lines. We should all have the legal right to purchase health insurance from any insurance company in any state and we should be able use that insurance wherever we live. Health insurance should be portable.

• Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover. These mandates have increased the cost of health insurance by billions of dollars. [/b]What is insured and what is not insured should be determined by individual customer preferences and not through special-interest lobbying.[/b]

• Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.

• Make costs transparent so that consumers understand what health-care treatments cost. How many people know the total cost of their last doctor’s visit and how that total breaks down? What other goods or services do we buy without knowing how much they will cost us?

• Enact Medicare reform. We need to face up to the actuarial fact that Medicare is heading towards bankruptcy and enact reforms that create greater patient empowerment, choice and responsibility.

• Finally, revise tax forms to make it easier for individuals to make a voluntary, tax-deductible donation to help the millions of people who have no insurance and aren’t covered by Medicare, Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

Many promoters of health-care reform believe that people have an intrinsic ethical right to health care—to equal access to doctors, medicines and hospitals. While all of us empathize with those who are sick, how can we say that all people have more of an intrinsic right to health care than they have to food or shelter?

Health care is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges. A careful reading of both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution will not reveal any intrinsic right to health care, food or shelter. That’s because there isn’t any. This “right” has never existed in America

Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments.

Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor’s Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million.

At Whole Foods we allow our team members to vote on what benefits they most want the company to fund. Our Canadian and British employees express their benefit preferences very clearly—they want supplemental health-care dollars that they can control and spend themselves without permission from their governments. Why would they want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an “intrinsic right to health care”? The answer is clear—no such right truly exists in either Canada or the U.K.—or in any other country.

Rather than increase government spending and control, we need to address the root causes of poor health. This begins with the realization that every American adult is responsible for his or her own health.

Unfortunately many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese. Most of the diseases that kill us and account for about 70% of all health-care spending—heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes and obesity—are mostly preventable through proper diet, exercise, not smoking, minimal alcohol consumption and other healthy lifestyle choices.


Recent scientific and medical evidence shows that a diet consisting of foods that are plant-based, nutrient dense and low-fat will help prevent and often reverse most degenerative diseases that kill us and are expensive to treat. We should be able to live largely disease-free lives until we are well into our 90s and even past 100 years of age.

Health-care reform is very important. Whatever reforms are enacted it is essential that they be financially responsible, and that we have the freedom to choose doctors and the health-care services that best suit our own unique set of lifestyle choices. We are all responsible for our own lives and our own health. We should take that responsibility very seriously and use our freedom to make wise lifestyle choices that will protect our health. Doing so will enrich our lives and will help create a vibrant and sustainable American society.

—Mr. Mackey is co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods Market Inc.

None of this, with the possible exception of Medicare reform, is in any of the Democrat's healthcare bills. This is the alternative that I hope to see Republicans, independents and blue-dog Democrats get behind.

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by INDY500

Wouldn't be caught dead in one

Why's that?

[KhanadaRhodes]

Originally Posted by Diemen

Why's that?

the pesticides and growth hormones in non-organic food makes them taste better

[anitram]

It's not where REAL Americans shop. Only Liberal elite pansies in Manhattan and San Fran....

[VintagePunk]

Even in countries like Canada and the U.K., there is no intrinsic right to health care. Rather, citizens in these countries are told by government bureaucrats what health-care treatments they are eligible to receive and when they can receive them. All countries with socialized medicine ration health care by forcing their citizens to wait in lines to receive scarce treatments.

Although Canada has a population smaller than California, 830,000 Canadians are currently waiting to be admitted to a hospital or to get treatment, according to a report last month in Investor’s Business Daily. In England, the waiting list is 1.8 million.

At Whole Foods we allow our team members to vote on what benefits they most want the company to fund. Our Canadian and British employees express their benefit preferences very clearly—they want supplemental health-care dollars that they can control and spend themselves without permission from their governments. Why would they want such additional health-care benefit dollars if they already have an “intrinsic right to health care”? The answer is clear—no such right truly exists in either Canada or the U.K.—or in any other country.

That is such a gross mischaracterization of the way things are here. The information in those couple of paragraphs range from flat out lies to facts taken completely out of context. It irks me to no end when right wingers lie about our health care to bolster the case against government administered health care plans.