{OT} Way off topic. - Health Insurance

FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.

I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
697.43 as part of my retirement.

Kind of expensive.

I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
co-pays to help contain costs?

In article <z_5uh.37305$Gr2.32076@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>,
"Ron" <nobodyhere@nowhere.org> wrote:
[color=blue]
> FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.
>
> I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> 93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
> 697.43 as part of my retirement.
>
> Kind of expensive.
>
> I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> co-pays to help contain costs?[/color]

Does anybody know what national health care would look like? Would it
mean free health care for everybody or would it mean lower income, like
me would get it free and moderatly higher income would pay even more
than they pay now. Would it include dental and eyecare? Would we be
able to go to any doctor we want? Would we have to go through a
screening to determine where in line we would be for an operation for
example, in other words, if a person is 85 years old would he/she be put
in the back of the line? Lot's of questions surround this national
health care that the dimmies are talking about. I think we should have
some answers before we let them take care of us.
--

"Ron" <nobodyhere@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:z_5uh.37305$Gr2.32076@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...[color=blue]
> FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.[color=green]
>>[/color][/color]

Nasty Nancy? The only person I can think of rating this sobriquet is the
widow of Ronald Reagan.

mack, 1/25/2007, 2:07:36 PM, <12rhvvu20qnjf4@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> Nasty Nancy?[/color]

Pelosi

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:42:55 GMT, "Ron" <nobodyhere@nowhere.org>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
>plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.
>
>I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
>from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
>AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
>93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
>697.43 as part of my retirement.
>
>Kind of expensive.
>
>I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
>co-pays to help contain costs?
>[/color]

The President's plan is excellent.

Hillary has already been shot down on hers....


--

Scott in Florida

'Let every nation know, whether it
wishes us well or ill, that we shall
pay any price, bear any burden,
meet any hardship, support any friend,
oppose any foe to assure the survival
and the success of liberty.'

John F. Kennedy

dbu wrote:
[color=blue]
> Does anybody know what national health care would look like?[/color]

Ask people who've lived in Canada, UK, France, Germany, Ireland,
Sweden, Norway, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Singapore, Italy,
Switzerland, Japan, Denmark, Taiwan, or Belgium.
[color=blue]
> Would it mean free health care for everybody or would it mean
> lower income, like me would get it free and moderatly higher
> income would pay even more than they pay now.[/color]

It would be "free" for everybody, regardless of income, but higher
income people would pay more in taxes compared to lower income people.
[color=blue]
> Would we be able to go to any doctor we want?[/color]

Canadians can.
[color=blue]
> Would we have to go through a screening to determine where
> in line we would be for an operation for example, in other
> words, if a person is 85 years old would he/she be put
> in the back of the line?[/color]

In some European systems, like Germany's, screening is done by general
practitioners, who determine whether the patient should consult with a
specialist.

dbu wrote:
[color=blue]
> Does anybody know what national health care would look like?[/color]

Ask people who've lived in Canada, UK, France, Germany, Ireland,
Sweden, Norway, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Singapore, Italy,
Switzerland, Japan, Denmark, Taiwan, or Belgium.
[color=blue]
> Would it mean free health care for everybody or would it mean
> lower income, like me would get it free and moderatly higher
> income would pay even more than they pay now.[/color]

It would be "free" for everybody, regardless of income, but higher
income people would pay more in taxes compared to lower income people.
[color=blue]
> Would we be able to go to any doctor we want?[/color]

Canadians can.
[color=blue]
> Would we have to go through a screening to determine where
> in line we would be for an operation for example, in other
> words, if a person is 85 years old would he/she be put
> in the back of the line?[/color]

In some European systems, like Germany's, screening is done by general
practitioners, who determine whether the patient should consult with a
specialist.

I _wish_ that I could cover me, my wife, and two kids for $300! My coverage
is $500, and I have a family deductable of $4800. So, I pay $6000 per year
for coverage that starts after I pay $4800 in deductable.

Can I get some of what you have?




"Ron" <nobodyhere@nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:z_5uh.37305$Gr2.32076@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...[color=blue]
> FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.
>
> I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> 93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt
> pays 697.43 as part of my retirement.
>
> Kind of expensive.
>
> I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> co-pays to help contain costs?
>[/color]

On Jan 25, 11:43 am, Scott in Florida <askifyouw...@mindspring.net>
wrote:[color=blue]
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:42:55 GMT, "Ron" <nobodyh...@nowhere.org>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> >plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.[/color]
>[color=green]
> >I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> >from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> >AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> >93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
> >697.43 as part of my retirement.[/color]
>[color=green]
> >Kind of expensive.[/color]
>[color=green]
> >I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> >co-pays to help contain costs?The President's plan is excellent.[/color]
>[/color]
Sure it is Scotty. If the Democrats proposed this you'd be crappin your
depends..

It's good that people who have to pay for their own health insurance
get to deduct it, but if you're middle class and have an employer paid
health plan, you'll soon be screwed by the still sky -rocketing cost of
healthcare (which this plans does nothing to control) . Your taxes will
go up substantially when they surpass the deductable, which they will.
Not right away but 5 years down the road, the middle class, as usual,
will be paying through the nose. Hopefully Congress will never pass
this bad piece of legislation. This is just another tax hike on the
middle class.

In article <1169758895.159893.141560@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"MaceFace" <maceface@nycmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> dbu wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Does anybody know what national health care would look like?[/color]
>
> Ask people who've lived in Canada, UK, France, Germany, Ireland,
> Sweden, Norway, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Singapore, Italy,
> Switzerland, Japan, Denmark, Taiwan, or Belgium.
>[color=green]
> > Would it mean free health care for everybody or would it mean
> > lower income, like me would get it free and moderatly higher
> > income would pay even more than they pay now.[/color]
>
> It would be "free" for everybody, regardless of income, but higher
> income people would pay more in taxes compared to lower income people.
>[color=green]
> > Would we be able to go to any doctor we want?[/color]
>
> Canadians can.[/color]

I've heard differently from Canadians.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
> > Would we have to go through a screening to determine where
> > in line we would be for an operation for example, in other
> > words, if a person is 85 years old would he/she be put
> > in the back of the line?[/color]
>
> In some European systems, like Germany's, screening is done by general
> practitioners, who determine whether the patient should consult with a
> specialist.[/color]

I don't like that idea. Right now I can go to a specialist, bypassing a
screening doctor.
--

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:Nn9uh.7230$U81.1119@trnddc06...[color=blue]
>I _wish_ that I could cover me, my wife, and two kids for $300! My coverage
>is $500, and I have a family deductable of $4800. So, I pay $6000 per year
>for coverage that starts after I pay $4800 in deductable.
>
> Can I get some of what you have?
>[/color]
Good observation, Jeff. Sadly we pay thru the nose for those who don't pay
anything. One congressman I spoke to said, after looking at my new vehicle
and asking me where I work, "You look like you're doing well for yourself.
Would you rather have what you have and pay or be poor with nothing and get
your healthcare free?"
I said that's not the freakin' point!!!!

In article <1169761021.089747.145960@13g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
"ToMh" <tlhumm@hotmail.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Jan 25, 11:43 am, Scott in Florida <askifyouw...@mindspring.net>
> wrote:[color=green]
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:42:55 GMT, "Ron" <nobodyh...@nowhere.org>
> > wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > >FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> > >plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > >I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> > >from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> > >AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> > >93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
> > >697.43 as part of my retirement.[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > >Kind of expensive.[/color]
> >[color=darkred]
> > >I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> > >co-pays to help contain costs?The President's plan is excellent.[/color]
> >[/color]
> Sure it is Scotty. If the Democrats proposed this you'd be crappin your
> depends..
>
> It's good that people who have to pay for their own health insurance
> get to deduct it, but if you're middle class and have an employer paid
> health plan, you'll soon be screwed by the still sky -rocketing cost of
> healthcare (which this plans does nothing to control) . Your taxes will
> go up substantially when they surpass the deductable, which they will.
> Not right away but 5 years down the road, the middle class, as usual,
> will be paying through the nose. Hopefully Congress will never pass
> this bad piece of legislation. This is just another tax hike on the
> middle class.[/color]

I don't itemize my taxes, how does Bush's plan affect me in that regard?
--

"dbu" <nspam@nojoke.com> wrote in message
news:nspam-73B6CD.15444425012007@comcast.dca.giganews.com...[color=blue]
> In article <1169758443.125984.276420@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>,
> "MaceFace" <maceface@nycmail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> dbu wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Does anybody know what national health care would look like?[/color]
>>
>> Ask people who've lived in Canada, UK, France, Germany, Ireland,
>> Sweden, Norway, Finland, Spain, Portugal, Singapore, Italy,
>> Switzerland, Japan, Denmark, Taiwan, or Belgium.
>>[color=darkred]
>> > Would it mean free health care for everybody or would it mean
>> > lower income, like me would get it free and moderatly higher
>> > income would pay even more than they pay now.[/color]
>>
>> It would be "free" for everybody, regardless of income, but higher
>> income people would pay more in taxes compared to lower income people.[/color]
>
> Why should higher income people have to pay more tax for the same
> service? Don't seem fair.[/color]

It isn't fair. But the concept is used regularly to unite/ignite one level
against another.

mark_

In article <Nn9uh.7230$U81.1119@trnddc06>,
"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@verizon.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I _wish_ that I could cover me, my wife, and two kids for $300! My coverage
> is $500, and I have a family deductable of $4800. So, I pay $6000 per year
> for coverage that starts after I pay $4800 in deductable.
>
> Can I get some of what you have?
>[/color]

So under national health care, I suspect that Ron's out of pocket will
go up and Jeff's will go down.

[color=blue]
>
>
>
> "Ron" <nobodyhere@nowhere.org> wrote in message
> news:z_5uh.37305$Gr2.32076@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...[color=green]
> > FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> > plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.
> >
> > I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> > from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> > AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> > 93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt
> > pays 697.43 as part of my retirement.
> >
> > Kind of expensive.
> >
> > I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> > co-pays to help contain costs?
> >[/color][/color]
--

On Jan 25, 1:49 pm, dbu <n...@nojoke.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> In article <1169761021.089747.145...@13g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
> "ToMh" <tlh...@hotmail.com> wrote:[color=green]
> > On Jan 25, 11:43 am, Scott in Florida <askifyouw...@mindspring.net>
> > wrote:[color=darkred]
> > > On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:42:55 GMT, "Ron" <nobodyh...@nowhere.org>
> > > wrote:[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > >FWIW, I thought in the light of the Prez's IRS proposal and Nasty Nancy's
> > > >plan to cover "everyone" in universal health insurance I'd share this.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > >I am retired government employee who is also eligible for Social Security
> > > >from previous work. I have the family (wife & I) Standard Blue Cross plan
> > > >AND part B Medicareto cover insurance deductible and co-pays. Medicare is
> > > >93.50 month and blue cross total is 988.41 of which I pay 290.98, govt pays
> > > >697.43 as part of my retirement.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > >Kind of expensive.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> > > >I wonder what these costs would be if it was free, no deductibles nor
> > > >co-pays to help contain costs?The President's plan is excellent.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > Sure it is Scotty. If the Democrats proposed this you'd be crappin your
> > depends..[/color]
>[color=green]
> > It's good that people who have to pay for their own health insurance
> > get to deduct it, but if you're middle class and have an employer paid
> > health plan, you'll soon be screwed by the still sky -rocketing cost of
> > healthcare (which this plans does nothing to control) . Your taxes will
> > go up substantially when they surpass the deductable, which they will.
> > Not right away but 5 years down the road, the middle class, as usual,
> > will be paying through the nose. Hopefully Congress will never pass
> > this bad piece of legislation. This is just another tax hike on the
> > middle class.I don't itemize my taxes, how does Bush's plan affect me in that regard?[/color]
> --[/color]

Actual IRS details aren't there, but you shouldn't have to itemize.
It depends on if you have an employer paid or partially paid health
plan, you would get a $7000 single or $15000 double
standard deduction. If you are paying less than that out of pocket, you
get a tax break, if more, you pay more taxes.
If you buy your own healthcare, then it is now deductable.
If you have no healthcare there is no difference other than you may be
able afford some now, providing you make enough to take the tax break.
The problem is, that with no plan to control health care costs, this
will only provide some relief for a short time.