Just Fred wrote:

This is a pretty good article.  I'm glad the debate in general focused on issues:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/01/18/fact-check-fourth-democratic-debate-clinton-sanders-omalley/78949686/

Maybe it's just too easy to complain about our political process and the media and things like the debates, but I was very underwhelmed by the debate last night. While the debate was focused on issues, I thought a majority of the candidate responses were well rehearsed talking points that had no meat behind them. 

For example, Bernie released his Medicare for All plan a couple of hours before the debate yesterday. Great. 

Hillary, when asked about it, took the position that the ACA should be enhanced because the country just wasn't ready to have another major health care debate again.

Well, you would have thought a moderator would have asked what specifically Hillary would tweak on the ACA to make it better, i.e., what' currently wrong with it, and asked Bernie how he could possibly get Medicare for All passed in this day and age.

Instead, you just got a lot of bickering between Hillary and Bernie that grew disinteresting after about half an hour.

Goose wrote:

Didn't watch it. I did however read an article in the NYT detailing how Bernie would pay for Medicare for all.

I'd end up paying thousands more.
Awesome!

Do you believe in Medicare for ALL ?  IF so, is there a better way to pay for it ? 

 

I want medicare-for-all.  I believe it would be less expensive in the end, and I also support the ability of the program to negotiate drug pricing with the pharmaceutical industry.

A possible compromise might be to allow people to 'buy into' the medicare system before they reach retirement age.  People would then have a choice to go with a private-for-profit health insurance plan of their choice or buy into the already established medicare system.

Of course, Medicare Part A is a bare-bones program and many people (like me) pay a little more and add part B.

The reason I say medicare-for-all would be cost effective is paying a bit more in taxes is offset by the higher premium rate one would pay for a privately owned for-profit plan.  However, giving those under the age of 65 the option to buy into the medicare system seems reasonable to me.

Last edited by Just Fred (1/18/2016 4:13 pm)

tennyson wrote:

Goose wrote:

I don't want Medicare for all

What do you see as the alternative ?  Do you believe the current ACA is the solution and then do you believe it is the best that can be had or if not then what ?  Or do you believe that everyone should just vie for themselves ? 

I have had employer provided health insurance as part of my compensation package my entire career, and I'm quite satisfied with it. 
I like the ACA with it's expansion of medicaid for the poor, provision of subsidies for some working people, the elimination of pre-existing condition clauses, etc.
I would be interested in allowing older 55 + year olds the option of buying into medicare as well.