Cont: Biden for President? Pt 3

[dirtywick]

I prefer the Australian model. The market can decide if public or private insurance is more viable.

 

[angrysoba]

From what I understand, Biden's public option + ACA plan is very similar to the healthcare systems of the first-world industrialized countries that Bernie Sanders keeps mentioning in his speeches.

Sanders' proposal "Medicare for All" is actually above and beyond that of what we see in the UK, Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Singapore.

It's definitely a step towards universal healthcare, it just isn't the single-payer brand MEDICARE FOR ALL that Berniecrats adamantly call for.

I think it comes down to this: how much would it cost you the patient if you had Covid or cancer? If you're in the UK, you get the treatment, and that's all. My understanding from forumites here is that even if you have great insurance in the US, you pay tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Seriously don't know where you get this unless you think that black people that aren't African American aren't actually black, or aren't black enough. You do know that there are a lot of black people that live in the UK, Europe, the Pacific countries, and even Central Asia none of whom are African Americans?



Totally incorrect, I'm trying to point out two things to people. First that not all black people are African Americans, not even all of those that live in the US. Mostly this comes from the comment that Emmanuel Acho makes in the video below at that 50-second mark where he says, "I have to address something y'all 'cause so many have asked. 'do I say black people or African American?' and the simple and shortest answer is black because it's not only most accurate it's also least offense. Keep in mind not all black people in America are African. There are Jamaicans there are Cubans but, also there's some black people that don't identify as African because that heritage got stripped from them during slavery."



Now that is a black man addressing that question and specifically pointing out that Jamaicans generally don't identify as African Americans, but rather as Jamaicans. Now Kamala might do so, I don't know, and if she specifically has stated it, then fine that's her choice and should she call herself an African American I won't argue with her. However, if she hasn't then as a Jamaican and Indian it would seem that addressing her as a Black Woman is the better option. This is not an attempt to belittle her or to "make a liar out of her" but rather to address her ethnicity in what we're told is the better and less offensive way.

Secondly, I'm also trying to point out that both Kalama and Obama are first-generation black Americans. This is something that I find interesting, that the first Black President and the first Black Vice President have black ancestry that comes from recent migration to the US rather than from those that were brought there as slaves in the 1800's.

It makes me wonder whether white people are more comfortable voting and electing people who don't have that ancestry. Again this isn't a criticism of either Obama or Kamala, but a query as to the racism in the US and if it is less towards those blacks that are recently arrived as to those who have had their roots in America for many generations.



You missed my point, it was never about whether Kamala had ancestors who were slaves, I am well aware that she did, but rather whether the distance, i.e. "her ancestors weren't slaves to our ancestors" has an effect on the way that white people view her, meaning are they are more accepting of her as a black woman than they would be a black woman who's ancestry was in the US.

Now I am totally okay with being proven wrong here, and my American wife tells me that racists don't see ancestry, just skin colour, and as she is Hispanic and also had experience of such, I am happy to accept that those that are openly racist would indeed just see skin colour. However, I am more interested in those that don't actually believe that they are racist, and how differently they react towards a black person that is a recent immigrant or born to one, and those blacks who have been oppressed in the country for generations.

I don't think this nit pick is worth this much passion.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think it comes down to this: how much would it cost you the patient if you had Covid or cancer? If you're in the UK, you get the treatment, and that's all. My understanding from forumites here is that even if you have great insurance in the US, you pay tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands.

It would be very strange to pay 10s of thousands or hundreds of thousands.

Cancer could add up to tens of thousands because of the multi-year nature of the disease. You could pay 10,000 dollars per year, multiple times.

Most US insurance has an "out of pocket maximum" per year. I think I had an out of pocket maximum of 12,000 dollars last year when I had an Obamacare plan. I could be wrong about that. I know i have had out of pocket maximums that were around 6,000 dollars.

Typical US insurance plans have a deductible, which is the amount you have to pay before the insurance company pays anything at all. After the deductible is met, the insurance plan pays most of the cost, perhaps 80% or 90%, unitll you have paid the "Out of pocket maximum", which may be 10,000 dollars. After that the insurance company pays everything. If you have "great insurance", your out of pocket maximum is probably around 5,000 dollars. I think that's what mine is right now, and I have pretty great insurance.

If you run up more than that, then there's something odd going on.

It's kind of nuts.

 

[shemp]

From what I understand, Biden's public option + ACA plan is very similar to the healthcare systems of the first-world industrialized countries that Bernie Sanders keeps mentioning in his speeches.

Sanders' proposal "Medicare for All" is actually above and beyond that of what we see in the UK, Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Singapore.

It's definitely a step towards universal healthcare, it just isn't the single-payer brand MEDICARE FOR ALL that Berniecrats adamantly call for.

And then there's Trump's healthcare plan: "I prefer people who don't get sick."

Biden's plan may not be quite what Bernie wants, but it's far better than what we have. It's like we have a cheap hamburger right now, Biden offers a Porterhouse Steak and Bernie wants Filet Mignon. I'm fine with the Porterhouse steak.

 

[dirtywick]

Prescriptions are separate from deductibles and out of pocket though. And then there’s in and out of network costs.

 

[Meadmaker]

Prescriptions are separate from deductibles and out of pocket though. And then there’s in and out of network costs.

I guess it must vary by plan. My prescriptions are part of both my deductible and out of pocket.

 

[angrysoba]

It would be very strange to pay 10s of thousands or hundreds of thousands.

Cancer could add up to tens of thousands because of the multi-year nature of the disease. You could pay 10,000 dollars per year, multiple times.

Most US insurance has an "out of pocket maximum" per year. I think I had an out of pocket maximum of 12,000 dollars last year when I had an Obamacare plan. I could be wrong about that. I know i have had out of pocket maximums that were around 6,000 dollars.

Typical US insurance plans have a deductible, which is the amount you have to pay before the insurance company pays anything at all. After the deductible is met, the insurance plan pays most of the cost, perhaps 80% or 90%, unitll you have paid the "Out of pocket maximum", which may be 10,000 dollars. After that the insurance company pays everything. If you have "great insurance", your out of pocket maximum is probably around 5,000 dollars. I think that's what mine is right now, and I have pretty great insurance.

If you run up more than that, then there's something odd going on.

It's kind of nuts.

Thanks for your answer.

What I had been hearing about before was that people with 80% coverage of say a $400,000 bill for chemotherapy still having to pay $80,000 upfront. I would be happy to hear things are not as dire as that.

Still sounds expensive to me, and of course there is the whole "it's cheap for people with money" logic - if you can afford great insurance your medical bills are lower, but if you are too poor for that to be in your budget then you will pay more if you get sick.

 

[abaddon]

Hey, being the foil in a comedy routine is hard work. So is being a stage magician's assistant.

Are you saying Bernie Sanders is basically the straight man to the mainstream Democrats' clown show?

A clown would be an improvement over Trump.

 

[Darat]

Thanks for your answer.

What I had been hearing about before was that people with 80% coverage of say a $400,000 bill for chemotherapy still having to pay $80,000 upfront. I would be happy to hear things are not as dire as that.

Still sounds expensive to me, and of course there is the whole "it's cheap for people with money" logic - if you can afford great insurance your medical bills are lower, but if you are too poor for that to be in your budget then you will pay more if you get sick.

If you want a quick overview with good links rather than personal anecdotes - https://www.cheatsheet.com/health-f...-to-pay-for-treatment-if-you-get-cancer.html/

As noted in that article:

...snip...

You might think your excellent insurance will save you from astronomical out-of-pocket costs, but that might not be the case. The report found high co-insurance, deductibles, occasional out-of-network care, and uncovered treatments really add up, even for those with a good plan.

Those costs seem high, but possibly manageable. However, U.S. News & World Report found different statistics that are way more severe. Newly approved drugs can cost up to $10,000 per month, and patients are expected to pay 20-30% of these costs. That means a year’s worth of these new drugs could take $24,000 to $36,000 out of your pocket — and that’s before health insurance premiums.



...snip...

 

[timhau]

What's silly is that so many foolish people equate Socialist with Authoritarianism and Dictatorships. It would be like equating Capitalism with Authoritarianism and Dictatorships because of Putin.

Not exactly. Countries that self-identify as "socialist" have, without fail, had repressive authoritarian regimes. Countries that self-identify as having some form of capitalist economy range from Pinochet's Chile to really rather pleasant, prosperous places like Canada or Australia. What messes up the comparison is the American parlance of referring to e.g. the Nordic countries as "socialist". We never self-identified as such, and despite high taxation, private enterprise and free market economy are doing OK up here.

 

[BobTheCoward]

And here is the obvious reminder that medicare for all looks nothing like Medicare.

Unless they expect 400 million people to navigate Part A vs Part B and respective co-pays and coverage limits.

 

[varwoche]

And then there's Trump's healthcare plan: "I prefer people who don't get sick."

Biden's plan may not be quite what Bernie wants, but it's far better than what we have. It's like we have a cheap hamburger right now, Biden offers a Porterhouse Steak and Bernie wants Filet Mignon. I'm fine with the Porterhouse steak.

And while we'd be pleased with either, the dining establishment at which we're seated only offers ground round. Porterhouse and Filet Mignon will be added to the menu the day georgia flips both seats, or when hell freezes over. Just ask Mitch.

 

[erwinl]

It would be very strange to pay 10s of thousands or hundreds of thousands.

Cancer could add up to tens of thousands because of the multi-year nature of the disease. You could pay 10,000 dollars per year, multiple times.

Most US insurance has an "out of pocket maximum" per year. I think I had an out of pocket maximum of 12,000 dollars last year when I had an Obamacare plan. I could be wrong about that. I know i have had out of pocket maximums that were around 6,000 dollars.

Typical US insurance plans have a deductible, which is the amount you have to pay before the insurance company pays anything at all. After the deductible is met, the insurance plan pays most of the cost, perhaps 80% or 90%, unitll you have paid the "Out of pocket maximum", which may be 10,000 dollars. After that the insurance company pays everything. If you have "great insurance", your out of pocket maximum is probably around 5,000 dollars. I think that's what mine is right now, and I have pretty great insurance.

If you run up more than that, then there's something odd going on.

It's kind of nuts.

Question.
Is that 'out of pocket' per year or per occasion?
What kind of insurance payments would that mean per month (what you pay to the insurance company, I mean), if I may ask? (this answer could of course be something of a generic answer).

Even if per year, it sounds ridiculously high, to me. Whether 10 or even 5 thousand dollars per year, it would mean that for normal things (dentist work, a simple emergency visit to the hospital and such), you would in essence not be insured, because you have to pay for it anyway.

 

[angrysoba]

If you want a quick overview with good links rather than personal anecdotes - https://www.cheatsheet.com/health-f...-to-pay-for-treatment-if-you-get-cancer.html/

As noted in that article:

Thanks for that. Good link. Horrific reading.

 

[Meadmaker]

Thanks for your answer.

What I had been hearing about before was that people with 80% coverage of say a $400,000 bill for chemotherapy still having to pay $80,000 upfront. I would be happy to hear things are not as dire as that.

Still sounds expensive to me, and of course there is the whole "it's cheap for people with money" logic - if you can afford great insurance your medical bills are lower, but if you are too poor for that to be in your budget then you will pay more if you get sick.

It is, in some ways, even stupider. Changing jobs, or becoming unemployed, while having health issues can wreak havoc on a families finances, even today. Our medical situation is tied to our employment situation, which is just crazy. However, the kind of scenarios you are describing are mostly a thing of the past. Obamacare helped a lot. Medical bankruptcies plummeted after it was put into effect. It may not be the best possible law, but it achieved some of its goals.

 

[angrysoba]

It is, in some ways, even stupider. Changing jobs, or becoming unemployed, while having health issues can wreak havoc on a families finances, even today, but the kind of scenarios you are describing are mostly a thing of the past. Obamacare helped a lot. Medical bankruptcies plummeted after it was put into effect. It may not be the best possible law, but it achieved some of its goals.

Okay, that's good!

 

[Mumbles]

It is, in some ways, even stupider. Changing jobs, or becoming unemployed, while having health issues can wreak havoc on a families finances, even today. Our medical situation is tied to our employment situation, which is just crazy. However, the kind of scenarios you are describing are mostly a thing of the past. Obamacare helped a lot. Medical bankruptcies plummeted after it was put into effect. It may not be the best possible law, but it achieved some of its goals.

Yep: it wasn't just the marketplace and pre-existing conditions, it was also yearly and lifetime caps gone, kids staying on their parents' insurance until they hit 26 years of age, an end to ressission ("You said you had acne as a teen? Well, we say those were pre-cancerous lesions, so we won't cover your breast cancer chemo now that you're 57 years old - and we'll keep your money and cancel your insurance, shoulda told us sooner.") Dolt 45 couldn't even pretend that he'd cover pre-existing conditions affordably, just that he'd make insurance companies cover them at some unknown price, never mind the other issues.

 

[Meadmaker]

Question.
Is that 'out of pocket' per year or per occasion?
What kind of insurance payments would that mean per month (what you pay to the insurance company, I mean), if I may ask? (this answer could of course be something of a generic answer).

Even if per year, it sounds ridiculously high, to me. Whether 10 or even 5 thousand dollars per year, it would mean that for normal things (dentist work, a simple emergency visit to the hospital and such), you would in essence not be insured, because you have to pay for it anyway.

It's per year, at least for every plan I've ever dealt with.

And, you're right. As a 57 year old man on an Obamacare plan, I was paying something like 600 dollars per month for a plan that had a 5,000 dollar deductible. That's right. I would pay 7,000 dollars if I didn't get sick, plus an additional 5,000 dollars if I did, before the insurance companies paid a cent. And why was I on Obamacare? Because I was unemployed.

And yet it was still better than what there was before Obamacare. Trump was, and still is, trying to get rid of Obamacare, but we were told we shouldn't worry, because he has a secret plan to replace it. Assuming his efforts fail in the Supreme Court, as they are expected to, at least we won't have to worry about that for the next four years, but the health care system is still horribly messed up in America, and we certainly are not going to see huge changes for at least two years.

ETA: And the figures I throw around are greatly simplified. In reality, most plans come with tables that take one or two pages to explain exactly how much you will pay for several different categories of health care expenses.

 

[Mader Levap]

Healthcare in USA is designed to kill off poor people.