British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)

- The Trailer Park (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/)

- - 2020 Election (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/2020-election-919243/)

Re: 2020 Election

I think "Medicare for All" is just a deliberately simplistic political slogan. Most Americans under the age of 65 have very little conception of the reality, complexities, and multifarious choices of Medicare. Every year, Medicare recipients have to make a choice between literally dozens, or maybe hundreds, of plans and supplemental plans. (Depending on their county of residence.)

In my case - having worked for a university, with a gold plated healthcare plan for $40 or $50 per month, versus Medicare for $130 a month and max out of pocket (in my plan) of $6,700 per year - I'm not too enamoured with Medicare!

Re: 2020 Election

Here's a word on medicare:

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by caretaker (Post 12609807)

Here's a word on medicare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhaX_gwZy4A

He was a great man who cared about all Canadians.

Re: 2020 Election

Will the next president come from California? Don't count on it

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...217-story.html

Makes some interesting pointsas to why a Californian will not be chosen.

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boiler (Post 12610018)

Will the next president come from California? Don't count on it

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-...217-story.html

Makes some interesting pointsas to why a Californian will not be chosen.

Good article.

I'll take a candidate from Texas if he/she can win.

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by robin1234 (Post 12609801)

Agreed, and I've been thinking that we'd all be better served to think of it as "Healthcare for All".

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by robin1234 (Post 12609801)

Yes. And it even has pre-existing conditions, which no-one wants to go back to. (switching from advantage to supplement, plan to plan)

Re: 2020 Election

The following page was originally posted by Zargoff in the 'Trump' thread, where the failure of Colorado's version of Healthcare For All (single payer) was under discussion.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...iative-failure

I'd like to bring it over here to the '2020' thread where itâ€™s more appropriate, and see if we can continue the meaningful discussion here.

What we all seem to agree on is that extending healthcare coverage to more people is a great idea. Where we disagree is how to achieve that. Bernie Sanders has proposed a form of 'Healthcare For All' that would include the elimination of existing employer-provided ('group') health insurance benefits currently used by almost 50% of the population. The question at hand is, will that be a vote-winning proposal in the 2020 election.

Buried in that excellent Vox article is the following survey:

https://www.kff.org/health-reform/po...r-health-care/

that summarizes "Modestly Strong but Malleable Support for Single-Payer Health Care". The article explains how support falls significantly and opposition rises to the majority when people are told they will pay higher taxes to support the plan.

The Vox article also has this interesting comment and survey:

While the current system clearly doesn't work for people without coverage, most people with employer-based insurance like it. They like it a lot, in fact. And they tend to be very skeptical of big disruptive efforts to change it ...

https://khn.org/news/despite-kvetchi...th-plans-poll/

And this, to me, is going to be the Achilles heel of the current proposals that want to REPLACE current group healthcare plans with M4A.

Quote:

Bashing insurance companies may be a popular pastime, but a poll released Thursday found most people were satisfied with their choices of doctors and even thought the cost of their health coverage was reasonable.

The Kaiser Family Foundation poll revealed that 71 percent of insured adults younger than 65 considered the health care services they receive to be either â€œexcellentâ€ or â€œgoodâ€ values. (KHN is an editorially independent program of the foundation.) A majority â€” 61 percent â€” said their insurance plan was either excellent or good, given its cost.

The breakdown of current â€˜sourcesâ€™ for health insurance is given on this page: https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/total-population/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel=%7B%22colId%22:%22Lo cation%22,%22sort%22:%22asc%22%7D .

Essentially, it shows the following:
Employer Provided: 49% (aka 'group')
Non-Group: 7% (this is â€˜private insuranceâ€™, including ACA/Obamacare)
Medicaid: 21%
Medicare: 14%
Other Public: 1%
Uninsured: 9%

So â€˜employer providedâ€™ is by far the single-biggest source of coverage today. And what Bernie and others are proposing is to force those 49% of people to give up what they currently have, and use a government-provided solution instead. If those 49% were largely unhappy with their plans, that would be one thing but the information above suggests they are quite happy with it, so thatâ€™s where I see the big risk at election time. Others have posted here that people are NOT happy with their employer provided insurance, but the surveys above donâ€™t support that.

Re: 2020 Election

I have had that conversation and seen it come up a few times.

I came to the conclusion that most people are mathematically illiterate, what I hear is how much it costs being how much they are charged, deducted from their pay.

Most seem to have no clue what it is costing in total and that as far as the Employer is concerned it relates to the cost of employing them and effectively they are paying the toal.

I remember somebody complaining that they had no real pay rise since the last recession, I was thinking maybe but the cost of employment had gone up. Yes they said they had good insurance.

Kloubuchar is on TV, Town Hall, and she was asked about that and fudged the response. Maybe make it a taxable benefit?

Re: 2020 Election

I haven't really made my mind up on the subject, even as someone who works in healthcare from the financial standpoint.

The only way I can see people getting on board with M4A is by guaranteeing that you will pay no more out of your paycheck then you pay now - although I don't really see how this is achievable considering how to factor in co-pays and deductibles. The fact is most people are going to pay more, if not much more, for their healthcare out of their own pocket under M4A then they do with their group insurance, mostly because of the 20% co-insurance under current Medicare regulations.

That isn't ever going to popular.

Re: 2020 Election

So Sanders is running again. I couldn't be less enthused by him if I tried.

Oh, and he can't win. If he couldn't beat Hillary, he can't beat Trump.

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by civilservant (Post 12639279)

So Sanders is running again. I couldn't be less enthused by him if I tried.

Oh, and he can't win. If he couldn't beat Hillary, he can't beat Trump.

He had a better chance of beating Trump than Clinton but not anymore. Besides, he was blocked once by the DNC, whatâ€™s changed to stop that happening again?

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by civilservant (Post 12639264)

The only way I can see people getting on board with M4A is by guaranteeing that you will pay no more out of your paycheck then you pay now - although I don't really see how this is achievable considering how to factor in co-pays and deductibles. The fact is most people are going to pay more, if not much more, for their healthcare out of their own pocket under M4A then they do with their group insurance, mostly because of the 20% co-insurance under current Medicare regulations.

That isn't ever going to popular.

I can see the difficulty - someone, young, healthy, no dependents and on a good employer's scheme is potentially going to be more out of pocket than those with families with ongoing health needs on less favourable insurance plans.

Of course, overall, when you take into account the employers contributions and the duplication/waste in the current system that could be eliminated by M4A, the country as a whole pays less for (hopefully) better access to care. But then that strays dangerously into socialist concepts of paying in what you can and taking out what you need.

As a side conversation, given the prevalence of Christianity in the USA, I've never really seen a biblical-based support of socialist type concepts. It's right there in the bible - not just the acts of charity that Jesus commanded (feed the poor, heal the sick), but in the description of the early Christian community of the Apostles right after Jesus' death. In Acts 2;44-45 it describes how:

"44 All who believed were together and had all things in common; 45 they would sell their property and possessions and divide them among all according to each oneâ€™s need".

I expect it would be waved away by another bit of biblical "pick'n'choose" quoting by the evangelical-terror wing of Christianity, ie those who believe in the nonsense of the prosperity gospel. But I'd like to see them try at least.

Spoiler:

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by BritInParis (Post 12639322)

He had a better chance of beating Trump than Clinton but not anymore. Besides, he was blocked once by the DNC, whatâ€™s changed to stop that happening again?

Is he still pretending to be a D?

Re: 2020 Election

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steerpike (Post 12592420)

Now the 2018 mid-terms are over, it's time to get ready for the big-one ... the 2020 Election, when Trump will be up for re-election.

I've been in shock / denial over Trump's victory ever since 2016, avoiding most political discussion but I'm desperately hoping that the Democrats can get their act together for 2020 and put up a candidate who can beat Trump (and strengthen their position in Congress). You'd think it wouldn't be that hard but the Democrats do seem to have the ability to shoot themselves in the foot, and Trump does seem to have a teflon coating of sorts.

If there's one thing I learned from 2016 it is not to underestimate Trump. If the economy is still strong, he can still win. Remember all the celebrities, 'experts', commentators, pollsters, and even BE folk, who refused to take Trump seriously?

In My Humble Opinion, in order to win in 2020 the Democrats must find a presidential candidate who is charismatic above all else. That is what Obama had going for him (and Bill Clinton) more than anything else. And by 'charisma' I include the ability to speak eloquently at length.

So without further ado, I will state my personal current hope that the Democratic candidate is Kamala Harris, the current Senator from CA. This article https://qz.com/1129587/democrats-can...aign-strategy/ suggests she has the right credentials. Maybe Joe Biden could pull it off ... though he's really too old at this point. I think Bernie would be a disaster; he has a certain 'authenticity', but he is never going to get the independents in my view. Beto O'Rourke? Maybe just a touch TOO inexperienced.

This article talks about Cory Booker, and also lists 10 possible candidates; Harris is #3 on their list, Booker #5. https://www.nj.com/politics/index.ss...and_other.html

Elizabeth Warren is #1 on the list above; she doesn't inspire me but hey, if she's the nominee then she'll get my vote.

On the republican side, Jeff Flake would actually be a welcomed participant ... https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...0-trump-980914 ... but his chances in the primaries would be slim, given his vocal opposition to Trump.

Booker is dead because of his votes fro BIG Pharma. I support Bernie's issues and thank him for making them almost mainstream. O ' Rourke is dead because he suggested knocking down border walls that are currently built. Kamala Harris is dead because she is on record to end private medical insurance. Gillibrand is dead as she forced and ousted Al Franken. Warren is dead because of her stupid "I think I'll have a beer" video and her Native American heritage.
My bet is Biden or Amy Klobuchar. Klobuchar is a moderate, great speaker, easy to understand, straight talker, personable, smart, no negatives, authentic. She will be President one day, not sure if it will be 2020.