Support NeoGAF

[pigeon]

No, it's the worst among those who are insured and actually receive coverage. And also in efficiency. The problem with slowly boiling the pot is that people are hard to convince to reform something. You've explained why that is. So when they like a public option it will be even harder to convince them there can be something better and to change it yet again. People are dissatisfied with cost so you have a chance to change it, but the Republicans last week proved just how hard that is. The more times you want to change it to get to where you want to be, the less likely you will ever get there.

When your argument can be repurposed nearly word for word as an argument for vanguard socialism it's time to rethink your position.

If doing a public option will make people even more satisfied and make sure people are covered then...that strikes me as a win even if we don't get to the hypothetical perfect system? Especially because we don't know about the unexpected externalities that will result?

 

[Khoryos]

It's​ still a tax increase, even if people are paying less at the end of the day. Voters don't like tax increases. You can tell them that their premiums would be lower all you want, but I'm not sure the vast majority would buy that. All most will recognize is that they are having more money taken out of their paycheck for taxes.

And that they won't be able to keep their current healthcare plan. There's a lot of obstacles, even if most of them shouldn't be.

(A report from 91 isn't especially relevant today, either. I'd like to see updated numbers.)

So it's a branding issue? Do what we do in the UK, call it National Insurance and make it a separate item on your payslip.

 

[enemy2k]

I applaud Bernie for pushing this. More and more people are coming around to the idea of Medicare for all. And pushing this idea constantly even when it can't be passed will help move the Overton Window back towards the left as it's been pushed right for too many damn years.

 

[JesseEwiak]

So it's a branding issue? Do what we do in the UK, call it National Insurance and make it a separate item on your payslip.

Part of the issue is that concievably, there are some middle class people would pay more in taxes than they currently do in premiums because they have a sweetheart deal with their employers who pay almost all of their health insurance costs.

So, even though in reality, their premiums are $8,000, they may only pay a small sliver of that and as a result, they have a lower wage, so when their taxes go up by $2,000, yes, they're "paying" less, but they'll perceive it as "paying" more.

That's why I'm for the plan I explained on the previous page. It'll be up to the employers to dump people into the public option, not a forced thing.

 

[Sub_Level]

http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/

One way to find and contact your rep.

 

[Staccat0]

Zero chance of success with the current state of healthcare/insurance in the US.

Not the point.