Medicaid for all?

[TexasTiger 12,782]

Trump friend proposes basic health insurance for all-- folks with means would supplement with for profit insurance. I think there may be a basis for a workable model here. Thoughts?

 

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/14/14923784/christopher-ruddy-medicaid

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Humane, practical.  If you throw in allowing the government to negotiate with the pharma companies,,,even better.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

Humane, practical.  If you throw in allowing the government to negotiate with the pharma companies,,,even better.

If Trump pulls this off in a valid way that doesn't undercut Medicaid, I'll give him props. Would still need some cost saving measures, imo, e.g. Low cost preventive clinics.

[SaltyTiger 7,757]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Trump friend proposes basic health insurance for all-- folks with means would supplement with for profit insurance. I think there may be a basis for a workable model here. Thoughts?

 

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/14/14923784/christopher-ruddy-medicaid

Interesting, but the title "medicaid for all". As it works now we have Medicare which does not pay for someone confined to to nursing home with say Alzhimers ( as long as assets for available). Once assets are exhausted Medicaid does kick in. I am talking now. According to the proposed plan Medicaid negotiates (stingier) a better price. Is it for the same care prior to exhausting personal funds.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

48 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Interesting, but the title "medicaid for all". As it works now we have Medicare which does not pay for someone confined to to nursing home with say Alzhimers ( as long as assets for available). Once assets are exhausted Medicaid does kick in. I am talking now. According to the proposed plan Medicaid negotiates (stingier) a better price. Is it for the same care prior to exhausting personal funds.

This is why Golf and Homer should transfer all of their assets to me,,,before it is too late.  Probably too late for Golf already.

[TexasTiger 12,782]

54 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Interesting, but the title "medicaid for all". As it works now we have Medicare which does not pay for someone confined to to nursing home with say Alzhimers ( as long as assets for available). Once assets are exhausted Medicaid does kick in. I am talking now. According to the proposed plan Medicaid negotiates (stingier) a better price. Is it for the same care prior to exhausting personal funds.

I would think that type of residential care would have the same requirement to exhaust assets.

[autigeremt 6,560]

17 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

If Trump pulls this off in a valid way that doesn't undercut Medicaid, I'll give him props. Would still need some cost saving measures, imo, e.g. Low cost preventive clinics.

Which feeds into my suggested plan a few years ago that I sent up to the previous administration.

[SaltyTiger 7,757]

23 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

I would think that type of residential care would have the same requirement to exhaust assets.

Makes one wonder. Medicaid is paid by the individuals assets until exhausted. No free lunch until you have disease and not a pot to pee in. 

[AURex 1,979]

Medicaid for all, or Medicare for all? The reality is, most of us who have lived a bunch of decades have paid a LOT of money into Medicare. We should expect to receive AT LEAST the amount we paid plus compounded interest for the period we've paid into it. The reality is that most of us will not.

As for Medicaid for all, well, the real world statistics from all developed countries is unquestionable. Universal healthcare that covers EVERY person, pre-birth to death, is cheaper than the U.S. system of "competitive insurance," and results in cheaper drugs, cheaper medical services, and ** lower mortality rates ** meaning better outcomes for the entire populace.

The ONLY reason for not moving in that direction is ideological, not based on real world data. The choice is funnel more money into the hands of corporations and the 1%, or do what is best for the people of this country.

 

[SaltyTiger 7,757]

19 minutes ago, AURex said:

Medicaid for all, or Medicare for all? The reality is, most of us who have lived a bunch of decades have paid a LOT of money into Medicare. We should expect to receive AT LEAST the amount we paid plus compounded interest for the period we've paid into it. The reality is that most of us will not.

As for Medicaid for all, well, the real world statistics from all developed countries is unquestionable. Universal healthcare that covers EVERY person, pre-birth to death, is cheaper than the U.S. system of "competitive insurance," and results in cheaper drugs, cheaper medical services, and ** lower mortality rates ** meaning better outcomes for the entire populace.

The ONLY reason for not moving in that direction is ideological, not based on real world data. The choice is funnel more money into the hands of corporations and the 1%, or do what is best for the people of this country.

 

Medicaid is nothing but welfare.Kicks in when all funds exhausted ( other than $2000 in cash) all assets are then  seized by the government. I suppose if you have nothing to begin with its good. 

What countries with universal pre-birth to death have better systems?