Obama seeks $634B over 10 years for health care

[Thump553]

I wonder if any poster here that complains bitterly about health care reform actually pays their own full health insurance premium (not the small portion employers pass on).

I doubt it greatly.

 

[Wreckem]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: Ozoned
What The op states is what you are using 634 over 10 years. What I am telling you is that the cost of insuring or providing health care for all americans will cost (at the current level of consumption) at least 1.25 trillion per year. I would guess that consumption will increase dramatically. The 634 billion over 10 years wouldn't even cover the administrative costs of uhc.

Where are you getting this $1.25 trillion figure?

What are Americans currently (privatly and publicly) spending on health insurance?

Edit:
The thing that bothers me about asking the "afluent" to give back their tax cuts from the Bush years is that those making between $100k and $500k are most likely AMT tax payers anyway, so they really saw none of this "tax cut", and thus are being asked to pay back what they did not really receive in the first place. The people that got the big tax breaks are those that make much of their money through passive income.

Personally, if you're going to go for something like this system, you should ask EVERYONE to give a little more, even if the people at just above the poverty line are giving $1.

The number will be more than $1.2trillion. And thats because the federal govt spends $600billion per year on medicare+medicad. Add in the state portion of medicad and wow, that per year number sure is much much much more than Obamas $650billion over 10 years. And that only covers a tiny subset of americans.

By 2020 we will be spending roughly $1trillion a year on just medicare. By roughly 2030 70% of the budget will be medicare, social security and debt payments. Thus massive tax increases will occur over the next two decades.

Anyone one who thinks Universial Healthcare is achievable is a tool. All you have to do is read CBO, GAO, etc reports on the longterm impact of medicare. To put it bluntly. The US cannot afford to cover every baby boomer, let alone every citizen.

Like I said, we are all fucked in 30 years. Bush may have run the country into the ground, so far all Obama is doing is digging the grave(further borrowing from future generations). There WILL come a point where 1. no one will be our govts debt 2. liabilites will be so massive the govt will have to have massive tax hikes. Any way you slice it the long term solvency of the United States government is in serious peril.

The government seriously needs to stop being reactionary in the short term, and should focus on solving serious financial problems due to debt and accrued liabilites.

 

[DukeN]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Still the simple math seems to elude. I'd love somebody to explain how a finite resource opened up to more customers is going to give them all the same quality of care. Please, enlightened ones, explain how the same number of doctors offering care to more people will not dilute the quality of what's already in place.

this is the exact problem. they should use that money to build new medical schools and pay people to become doctors. the price will take care of itself as we flood the market with doctors. and instead of these greedy leechy fuckers playing golf half the week while pulling in $250k reading xrays, they will be on par with the rest of us professionals.

The simple math point is accurate, but the general practitioner's incomes in the US have consistently declined for the last 10+ years as the number of doctor's has gone up consistently.

As to JS80's point, do you actually know what it costs to go to medical school? Something like 8-10 years, coming out with 300K in debt (if not more) plus the lost income from not working before. That cost will not change unless more schools are put in, and let me assure you $634B will not make much of a dent in that number.

I'm amazed at the anger against universal healthcare in here. Medicine is already socialized to a high degree, but making it universal would be the best thing the US could do to help the economy.

It is right now better to be on welfare and get free basic medical, than to make $15/hr and pay for healthcare. Also, the burden on business for healthcare costs drastically affects their ability to hire and compensate. Alleviate this significantly, and you would have higher wages and a boom in hiring.

And for those who hate the world universal, it doesn't mean you give everyone everything in the world to cover. Here in Ontario it covers anything critical (pretty much) but things are very controlled and effective. The only thing it doesn't cover are types of medications and some non-serious conditions. The specialists issue is addressed by only having referrals done after deemed necessary by a GP first. I pay $600 per person per year on my taxes but it's well worth it than paying whatever someone in the US would pay for health insurance who isn't a mid/high level employee in a decent sized corporation.

 

[MooseNSquirrel]

Originally posted by: Wreckem
...numbers and more numbers...

Anyone one who thinks Universial Healthcare is achievable is a tool. All you have to do is read CBO, GAO, etc reports on the longterm impact of medicare. To put it bluntly. The US cannot afford to cover every baby boomer, let alone every citizen.

Like I said, we are all fucked in 30 years. Bush may have run the country into the ground, so far all Obama is doing is digging the grave(further borrowing from future generations). There WILL come a point where 1. no one will be our govts debt 2. liabilites will be so massive the govt will have to have massive tax hikes. Any way you slice it the long term solvency of the United States government is in serious peril.

The government seriously needs to stop being reactionary in the short term, and should focus on solving serious financial problems due to debt and accrued liabilites

Those long term predictions are only true if things stay the same.

There are 3 big problems:

1. Over all cost of system rising

2. Number of people covered falling

3. Cost to employees rising

The biggest thing we don't really have in our current system is cost control.

A Universal Health Care system would make it possible for us to do that.

Reimbursement from a single source alone would reduce costs tremendously. The cost of malpractice insurance would go down as well as there would be no need to cover future care.

Doctors would cost less as well for obvious reasons.

Right now cost predictions for Medicare/Medicaid include current rates...which are higly inflated compared to other industrialized nations.

Think of health care as part of a country's infrastucture and I think the picture becomes clearer.

S&M

 

[idiotekniQues]

the same people that have defended a trillion dollar + war will be the first to say they really caer about spending taxdollars.

a bunch of fake small gubm't conservatives

 

[babylon5]

Dismantle our entire military industrial complex = money for UHC

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: winnar111

And the wheel keeps rolling. The best part is that this is only half the budgeted cost of Obamacare, and that healthcare costs always increase faster than politicians say they do because we insist on giving Cheney quality healthcare to those who don't merit it.

The only health care Cheney merits is a montly visit to his cell at Guantanamo. :|

If you don't have health insurance, you have the same option as those dumbass Republican governors who would rather let their citizens suffer than accept any Federal assistance -- You can decline to accept any help getting it. If you lose the bet, the world won't miss you.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

In most countries in the world we go to the doctor when we're ill (beyond a regular cold or flu, it'll have to be something persistent) and that is probably why the US system uses more taxpayer money than any other nation on Health Care where the overwhelming amount of money isn't even paid by the state.

You have the worst combination of all systems you could possibly ever think up, it costs more for the taxpayers, it costs a LOT more for private enterprises than what it costs for the taxpayers (which is of course holding the economy back since it goes to non productive savings for insurance companies) and on top of that you don't even have universal healthcare NOR the best healthcare.

But at least it's as corrup... i mean capitalistic as possible, right?

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: babylon5
Dismantle our entire military industrial complex = money for UHC

Fix it, it costs more per patient in taxpayer money today than any other nation pays.

That is WITHOUT counting the insurance money they get which you ALSO pay for (albeit indirectly).

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
In most countries in the world we go to the doctor when we're ill (beyond a regular cold or flu, it'll have to be something persistent) and that is probably why the US system uses more taxpayer money than any other nation on Health Care where the overwhelming amount of money isn't even paid by the state.

You have the worst combination of all systems you could possibly ever think up, it costs more for the taxpayers, it costs a LOT more for private enterprises than what it costs for the taxpayers (which is of course holding the economy back since it goes to non productive savings for insurance companies) and on top of that you don't even have universal healthcare NOR the best healthcare.

But at least it's as corrup... i mean capitalistic as possible, right?

And your country has 10s of millions of illegals who suck the system dry? The US is a different case with a open boarder. The second UHC passes anyone south of our boarder with a serious illness comes across the boarder to suck hundreds of thousands of dollars in treatments. The democrats will not stop it. I am still waiting for those who advocate UHC were all these country's with 10s of millions of illegals. We could lower health care costs pretty damn fast by deporting the illegals and controlling the southern boarder. After that is is up to the people to lead more healthy lives to help bring down costs. Then maybe we can get UHC in this country that won't bankrupt the nation.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
It's going to be interesting when politicians tell doctors how to practice medicine. That will really screw things. Sure insurance companies make some things hard but they can't legally compell them to do so. That's going to such

Oh but they can and they do (all the time, actually).

Many hospitals and clinics are owned by Insurance Companies.

They can make "policy" decisions regarding level of care, number of patient appointments (monthly quotas) and what treatments can be discussed with patients.

If the Docs don't follow their protocol they can be punished both financially and professionally.

What about criminally? What about off label uses of medications? What about that? What punishments will health care providers have to face for not complying with a Congressmans edicts?

Hell, I spend hours resolving insurance issues completely unrelated to my professional practice. I know all about it, more than you unless you also are a health care provider. Believe me there is no comparison between being audited by an insurance company and the state or feds. Only the latter can act against your license.

I don't like the idea of the practice of medicine run by those with little more comprehension than those posting here. That's my main fear, and from where I sit, it's a troubling one.

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
It's going to be interesting when politicians tell doctors how to practice medicine. That will really screw things. Sure insurance companies make some things hard but they can't legally compell them to do so. That's going to such

Oh but they can and they do (all the time, actually).

Many hospitals and clinics are owned by Insurance Companies.

They can make "policy" decisions regarding level of care, number of patient appointments (monthly quotas) and what treatments can be discussed with patients.

If the Docs don't follow their protocol they can be punished both financially and professionally.

What about criminally? What about off label uses of medications? What about that? What punishments will health care providers have to face for not complying with a Congressmans edicts?

Hell, I spend hours resolving insurance issues completely unrelated to my professional practice. I know all about it, more than you unless you also are a health care provider. Believe me there is no comparison between being audited by an insurance company and the state or feds. Only the latter can act against your license.

I don't like the idea of the practice of medicine run by those with little more comprehension than those posting here. That's my main fear, and from where I sit, it's a troubling one.

It sucks we have a department that is pretty much dedicated to proving our Medicare/medicaid claims are valid and follow the rules. I can only imagine how many people we would have to add if the hospital had to do it for all patients. If UHC is anything like medicare/medicaid no thank you.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: quest55720

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
It's going to be interesting when politicians tell doctors how to practice medicine. That will really screw things. Sure insurance companies make some things hard but they can't legally compell them to do so. That's going to such

Oh but they can and they do (all the time, actually).

Many hospitals and clinics are owned by Insurance Companies.

They can make "policy" decisions regarding level of care, number of patient appointments (monthly quotas) and what treatments can be discussed with patients.

If the Docs don't follow their protocol they can be punished both financially and professionally.

What about criminally? What about off label uses of medications? What about that? What punishments will health care providers have to face for not complying with a Congressmans edicts?

Hell, I spend hours resolving insurance issues completely unrelated to my professional practice. I know all about it, more than you unless you also are a health care provider. Believe me there is no comparison between being audited by an insurance company and the state or feds. Only the latter can act against your license.

I don't like the idea of the practice of medicine run by those with little more comprehension than those posting here. That's my main fear, and from where I sit, it's a troubling one.

It sucks we have a department that is pretty much dedicated to proving our Medicare/medicaid claims are valid and follow the rules. I can only imagine how many people we would have to add if the hospital had to do it for all patients. If UHC is anything like medicare/medicaid no thank you.

We had a huge witch hunt about a year ago in NY state. Inspectors were going around and looking for things like times written on prescription blanks for phoned in med orders. The government realized it could make millions on "fraud" like that. One store got fined close to 6 million dollars for clerical errors. All the services provided were legit too. No one billed for anything they didn't do. The requirement is buried in some hundreds of pages of regulations you can't even find, but they knew that. It was a way to make money.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: quest55720

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
In most countries in the world we go to the doctor when we're ill (beyond a regular cold or flu, it'll have to be something persistent) and that is probably why the US system uses more taxpayer money than any other nation on Health Care where the overwhelming amount of money isn't even paid by the state.

You have the worst combination of all systems you could possibly ever think up, it costs more for the taxpayers, it costs a LOT more for private enterprises than what it costs for the taxpayers (which is of course holding the economy back since it goes to non productive savings for insurance companies) and on top of that you don't even have universal healthcare NOR the best healthcare.

But at least it's as corrup... i mean capitalistic as possible, right?

And your country has 10s of millions of illegals who suck the system dry? The US is a different case with a open boarder. The second UHC passes anyone south of our boarder with a serious illness comes across the boarder to suck hundreds of thousands of dollars in treatments. The democrats will not stop it. I am still waiting for those who advocate UHC were all these country's with 10s of millions of illegals. We could lower health care costs pretty damn fast by deporting the illegals and controlling the southern boarder. After that is is up to the people to lead more healthy lives to help bring down costs. Then maybe we can get UHC in this country that won't bankrupt the nation.

I was talking about your current system, i'm sorry if i typed to fast for you, i'll type this reply slower so you can read it before you reply next time.

UHC is cheaper anyway you try to calculate it, that is, if you stop the extreme overpricing of doctors, examinations and medicine (you pay up to 30x what we pay in the UK for medicine designed and manufactured in the US) you might get rid of a lot of what they are actually stealing from the taxpayers.

Now if you didn't go to the doctor every time you have an ingrown hair or a headache, imagine how much could be saved.

The illegals do more for your economy than they benefit from, in fact, it's the ONLY group of people in the US that does that.

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: quest55720

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
It's going to be interesting when politicians tell doctors how to practice medicine. That will really screw things. Sure insurance companies make some things hard but they can't legally compell them to do so. That's going to such

Oh but they can and they do (all the time, actually).

Many hospitals and clinics are owned by Insurance Companies.

They can make "policy" decisions regarding level of care, number of patient appointments (monthly quotas) and what treatments can be discussed with patients.

If the Docs don't follow their protocol they can be punished both financially and professionally.

What about criminally? What about off label uses of medications? What about that? What punishments will health care providers have to face for not complying with a Congressmans edicts?

Hell, I spend hours resolving insurance issues completely unrelated to my professional practice. I know all about it, more than you unless you also are a health care provider. Believe me there is no comparison between being audited by an insurance company and the state or feds. Only the latter can act against your license.

I don't like the idea of the practice of medicine run by those with little more comprehension than those posting here. That's my main fear, and from where I sit, it's a troubling one.

It sucks we have a department that is pretty much dedicated to proving our Medicare/medicaid claims are valid and follow the rules. I can only imagine how many people we would have to add if the hospital had to do it for all patients. If UHC is anything like medicare/medicaid no thank you.

We had a huge witch hunt about a year ago in NY state. Inspectors were going around and looking for things like times written on prescription blanks for phoned in med orders. The government realized it could make millions on "fraud" like that. One store got fined close to 6 million dollars for clerical errors. All the services provided were legit too. No one billed for anything they didn't do. The requirement is buried in some hundreds of pages of regulations you can't even find, but they knew that. It was a way to make money.

I am just in IT but now it makes sense why we a while ago had to add a report generator to make sure Doctors sign verbal orders with in 24 hours. We also added prescription printers with special paper. That is on top of the servers to that will transmit prescriptions directly to pharmacy's around the area.

 

[quest55720]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Originally posted by: quest55720

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
In most countries in the world we go to the doctor when we're ill (beyond a regular cold or flu, it'll have to be something persistent) and that is probably why the US system uses more taxpayer money than any other nation on Health Care where the overwhelming amount of money isn't even paid by the state.

You have the worst combination of all systems you could possibly ever think up, it costs more for the taxpayers, it costs a LOT more for private enterprises than what it costs for the taxpayers (which is of course holding the economy back since it goes to non productive savings for insurance companies) and on top of that you don't even have universal healthcare NOR the best healthcare.

But at least it's as corrup... i mean capitalistic as possible, right?

And your country has 10s of millions of illegals who suck the system dry? The US is a different case with a open boarder. The second UHC passes anyone south of our boarder with a serious illness comes across the boarder to suck hundreds of thousands of dollars in treatments. The democrats will not stop it. I am still waiting for those who advocate UHC were all these country's with 10s of millions of illegals. We could lower health care costs pretty damn fast by deporting the illegals and controlling the southern boarder. After that is is up to the people to lead more healthy lives to help bring down costs. Then maybe we can get UHC in this country that won't bankrupt the nation.

I was talking about your current system, i'm sorry if i typed to fast for you, i'll type this reply slower so you can read it before you reply next time.

UHC is cheaper anyway you try to calculate it, that is, if you stop the extreme overpricing of doctors, examinations and medicine (you pay up to 30x what we pay in the UK for medicine designed and manufactured in the US) you might get rid of a lot of what they are actually stealing from the taxpayers.

Now if you didn't go to the doctor every time you have an ingrown hair or a headache, imagine how much could be saved.

The illegals do more for your economy than they benefit from, in fact, it's the ONLY group of people in the US that does that.

Not even close they are a drain on the system. They avoid taxes and use up services. Look at California it is bankrupt thanks to services to illegals.

If we were not a nation of 300 pounds with all the related health issues we would save a ton of money. The whole system needs a overhaul from providers to the public. Throwing money at the problem is just going to bankrupt this country.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: quest55720

Not even close they are a drain on the system. They avoid taxes and use up services. Look at California it is bankrupt thanks to services to illegals.

If we were not a nation of 300 pounds with all the related health issues we would save a ton of money. The whole system needs a overhaul from providers to the public. Throwing money at the problem is just going to bankrupt this country.

Services to illegal immigrants are not the cause of California's budget problems, please educate yourself.

 

[Pneumothorax]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
and medicine (you pay up to 30x what we pay in the UK for medicine designed and manufactured in the US) you might get rid of a lot of what they are actually stealing from the taxpayers.

We've been through this before, our country's healthcare system pretty much subsidizes the rest of the world's medicine as we pay for the majority of the R&D. Mind you, I still believe meds are still overpriced, but get the rest of the world to pitch in the R&D costs (but you know the world won't)

Now if you didn't go to the doctor every time you have an ingrown hair or a headache, imagine how much could be saved.

This isn't going to change unless you start charging high copays

The illegals do more for your economy than they benefit from, in fact, it's the ONLY group of people in the US that does that.

Nope, thanks to them and their anchor babies, my little family is going to pay an extra $8000 in taxes over the next 4 years and probably more as they've bankrupted my state (CA)

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: quest55720

Not even close they are a drain on the system. They avoid taxes and use up services. Look at California it is bankrupt thanks to services to illegals.

If we were not a nation of 300 pounds with all the related health issues we would save a ton of money. The whole system needs a overhaul from providers to the public. Throwing money at the problem is just going to bankrupt this country.

Services to illegal immigrants are not the cause of California's budget problems, please educate yourself.

So do you think that California's massive buildup of government services and infrastructure didn't factor in the millions of illegals living there?

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


The illegals do more for your economy than they benefit from, in fact, it's the ONLY group of people in the US that does that.

It's official, you're a moron.

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: quest55720

Not even close they are a drain on the system. They avoid taxes and use up services. Look at California it is bankrupt thanks to services to illegals.

If we were not a nation of 300 pounds with all the related health issues we would save a ton of money. The whole system needs a overhaul from providers to the public. Throwing money at the problem is just going to bankrupt this country.

Services to illegal immigrants are not the cause of California's budget problems, please educate yourself.

So do you think that California's massive buildup of government services and infrastructure didn't factor in the millions of illegals living there?

It did, but luckily they produce far more wealth than they take in social services. They're not bankrupting CA like Orange used to.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Sacrilege

Originally posted by: Carmen813
What people don't realize is that healthcare costs will go down with more people enrolled. More people enrolled = more people receiving regular care = less instances of catastrophic illness = less cost.

But you've forgotten, that Republicans hate the poor and want them to suffer in medical misery. They also hate people of color. So the fewer Americans with health care, the better. It's a moral issue.

+1

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Oh please. You have NO IDEA what some people go through. You hit a bump in the road, but you managed. Did you even have to declare bankruptcy? I assume not or you would have said so.

It is you ignorance (and a little arrogance too) that is showing.

It's CAD. He has no idea what a catastrophic illness really is. A premature baby and a wife that can't work? Sure, that's trouble for anyone. I don't want to hear catastrophic though. As I've said in other threads, when I was diagnosed with cancer last year at the ripe old age of 28, I racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills in the span of 12 days. Not only that, but the chemotherapy regimen I had to undergo was 9 hours a day, 8 days out of every 21. When you add in the week or so of vomiting, anemia, and pain caused by the drugs and the medication necessary to repair your compromised immune system, you're talking 2 weeks out of every 3 out of commission. How are you going to work your way around that one? THAT'S a catastrophic illness.

As for Skoorb's mention and others, if you look at the US' per capita allocation of doctors and nurses it is lower than countries with UHC, but not that much lower. (about 15% for doctors, and about 2% for nurses) This is certainly an issue to be addressed, but it's hardly insurmountable. In addition, preventative care, like say with cancer for one, can massively reduce the cost of an illness to the system as a whole.

Our system has proved unsustainable, it's on its way out. Everyone here pretty much knows that at least a partially socialized system is in our future, it just depends on how long it will take this one to collapse. It's been proven over and over again with examples from all sorts of other OECD countries to provide better care at less cost.

I've been through a similar situation. My wife had Leukemia at age 20. I was diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma at 21. I'm now 24 and just entering the work force. My treatment cost around $800,000. My wife's was well over $1.2 million. These types of illnesses are debilitating when they happen, and can cause complete financial ruin very quickly. After finishing treatment, they make you question why you fought so hard to survive in the first place. We are both as healthy as we're likely to get now, and I've worked hard to finish college and begin looking for a job. We aren't asking for freebies, we're asking for a chance to succeed.

Great series of posts Carmen!

The Republicans see you as a cipher. You will never contribute back to society the amount of money we've spent to save you, or so they think. Ditto for your wife. Your life only has value if you are contributing in excess of your cost. The moral lepers on the Republican right, many of whom claim to be Christians, think this way. Humanism has no place in Republican 'values', such as they are.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: ericlp
I think it should be free like canada. I mean if we gonna spend the money on this crap why not just make it free for all?

Universal health care is the obvious answer. We need the American equivalent of England's NHS, but we need to run it properly and fairly, unlike the way the English run it. (Political favors are rife in funding the local health care trusts.)

Politically, no politician can say the words universal health care, and actually mean free health care for all. That's why you see government health care in bits and pieces. For instance, we have the following government health care programs:

1. VA health care;
2. Medicare;
3. Medicaid;
4. Schip;
5. Numerous state programs.

All of these programs should be killed and combined into two programs, VA health care and National Health Care. VA health care should be gradually phased out, leaving one health care system, free for all citizens, and with limited care for alien visitors and illegals.

The English deliver health care at about ONE QUARTER THE COST OF US HEALTHCARE. We have a horrible system of delivery of health services.

Furthermore, the Europeans have very very low levels of lawsuits against health care providers, such as doctors, nurses and technicians.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Wreckem

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Originally posted by: Ozoned
What The op states is what you are using 634 over 10 years. What I am telling you is that the cost of insuring or providing health care for all americans will cost (at the current level of consumption) at least 1.25 trillion per year. I would guess that consumption will increase dramatically. The 634 billion over 10 years wouldn't even cover the administrative costs of uhc.

Where are you getting this $1.25 trillion figure?

What are Americans currently (privatly and publicly) spending on health insurance?

Edit:
The thing that bothers me about asking the "afluent" to give back their tax cuts from the Bush years is that those making between $100k and $500k are most likely AMT tax payers anyway, so they really saw none of this "tax cut", and thus are being asked to pay back what they did not really receive in the first place. The people that got the big tax breaks are those that make much of their money through passive income.

Personally, if you're going to go for something like this system, you should ask EVERYONE to give a little more, even if the people at just above the poverty line are giving $1.

The number will be more than $1.2trillion. And thats because the federal govt spends $600billion per year on medicare+medicad. Add in the state portion of medicad and wow, that per year number sure is much much much more than Obamas $650billion over 10 years. And that only covers a tiny subset of americans.

By 2020 we will be spending roughly $1trillion a year on just medicare. By roughly 2030 70% of the budget will be medicare, social security and debt payments. Thus massive tax increases will occur over the next two decades.

Anyone one who thinks Universial Healthcare is achievable is a tool. All you have to do is read CBO, GAO, etc reports on the longterm impact of medicare. To put it bluntly. The US cannot afford to cover every baby boomer, let alone every citizen.

Like I said, we are all fucked in 30 years. Bush may have run the country into the ground, so far all Obama is doing is digging the grave(further borrowing from future generations). There WILL come a point where 1. no one will be our govts debt 2. liabilites will be so massive the govt will have to have massive tax hikes. Any way you slice it the long term solvency of the United States government is in serious peril.

The government seriously needs to stop being reactionary in the short term, and should focus on solving serious financial problems due to debt and accrued liabilites.

Controlling costs comes with controlling health care. A national health care system would control drug prices, doctors wages, hospital costs, etc. Compare the cost of USA care to care in England, Canada, Australia, or Japan. Are you saying Australia can afford universal health care but the USA can't?

-Robert