What's wrong with making it mandatory to buy Health Insurance ?

Now ask tomfoo13ry how much he pays yearly on private heath insurance, whether he sees a health professional or not. I bet it's more than 300 bucks per annum.

I actually have private health insurance (first time in my life) since moving overseas because Medicare doesn't cover me there, although I'm covered by Medicare when back on Australia. I pay 900 USD per year for private health insurance, which includes medical, hospital and dental. I'm covered in every country on this planet, even when I go back to Australia for a visit. Read the fine print, I'm not covered in America. Wonder why?

 

I pay a little over $40 per month for my health insurance.

Have you come to the realization yet that your 1.5% levy doesn't even begin to cover what the average Aussie pays for their "free" health care?

 

You're directly contradicting yourself. You ARE imposing YOUR beliefs through the law! Just because they are YOUR beliefs does not make them special.

 

And does that $40 give you total coverage for every eventuality, with no exclusions or pre-conditions? Do your premiums increase if you make a claim?

 

Are you covered for any pre-existing illnesses (if any)? Do you have to make a 'gap' payment when claiming any medical treatment? Do you get a discount for pharmaceuticals like on the Pharmaceuticals Benefits Scheme which is available on Australian Medicare? Are you covered under Reciprocal Health Care Agreements in the UK, many other European nations, Australia and New Zealand?

 

Our laws wouldn't allow that. It is highly regulated, and it drives up cost. We have the most backwards insurance regulation schemes ever devised by man.

 

...designed to benefit nobody but the insurers, while they do everything humanly possible to avoid paying-out and recoup their costs by denying coverage.

 

Look,, I'm not saying the universal healthcare system in Australia is perfect,, far from it. But I know if I'm sick I'll get treated. If an emergency I'll get the best healthcare possible and not be out of pocket for it.

We are fortunate to have two systems running side by side, universal healthcare and private health insurance we can tailor to suit our needs. Most people tailor their private insurance for the 'extras' that Medicare don't supply,, things like dental, ambulance cover, chiropractic etc. most people even if privately insured will see their family doctor, and in the case of an emergency go in under Medicare.

Our daughter had a horrific car accident some years ago, almost died at the scene. Nine hour operation, two week stay in hospital, physio, follow up trauma counselling, meds etc, all covered under Medicare. No money changed hands. Our family ambulance covered her for transportation to hospital by paramedics, she had to be stabilised at the scene.

 

That's terrible; you must have been devastated-I can't imagine how I would have felt if my daughter had been similarly injured. I hope she made a full recovery.

 

Thanks mate,, she did. She's our youngest and a beautiful young woman.

She still has a titanium rod inserted into her femur. Funnily,, a couple of months ago she gets an email from the head of Orthopaedics from the hospital she was treated at. He's advised her to have it removed, 10 years after the event. She's now 28. He'll fit her in mid July, all on Medicare. She is thinking real hard about it, but terrified of any medical procedure.

 

Just like in America., we have healthcare, and used to have reasonable priced insurance.

We have far better trauma care in the States.

That is fine, but they also price fix don't they, or am I mistaken? Price fixing is what causes lack in service issues. You have more educated people per capita then us, more wealth, you should have "more medicine" then us, but you do not. We lead in every major treatment category. We have a longer regulatory review process too, so you should be a few years ahead of us in available treatments too...

Glad to hear she recovered. I was also in a car accident like that, our mandatory car coverage has uninsured motorist insurance pools that cover hospital costs of uninsured motorists that have hospital bills they can't pay for, or if the hospital costs go in excess of policy limits. At least in FL, not sure how it is elsewhere. In either event, you get care and stabilization to go home here before you have to figure out payment. Uninsured people do not die, and frequently they do not have to pay bills.

- - - Updated - - -

We can agree. What we need is more competition, not regulation that ensures a few players get to make all the cash no matter their service.

 

Thanks

The other driver was at fault, he hadn't been drinking but admitted to police he wasn't paying attention. There was a bit of a bun fight as his insurance company didn't want to cover him (or our daughter). He'd modified his car and didn't list the modifications with the insurance company. Luckily, he was using the same insurance company as us (we insured her car in my name). She received a nice cheque in the mail for her written off car.

But,, this has nothing to do with the healthcare our daughter received.

 

Well I am glad it worked out.

Cheque huh?

 

I'm covered for any eventuality. I have a $30 co-pay if I go to the doctor. I pay $15 per prescription filled. I have no idea if I'm covered under "Reciprocal Health Care Agreements in the UK, many other European nations, Australia and New Zealand."

Now, I've been kind enough to answer all of your questions. Perhaps you can stop dodging mine? I ask again,

Have you come to the realization yet that your 1.5% levy doesn't even begin to cover what the average Aussie pays for their "free" health care?

 

Honestly instead of states' forcing people to buy car insurance, I'd rather that they didn't. If a person with no liability insurance causes an accident, then the state could simply fine them the full cost of the damages they caused.

 

I've never said Australian Medicare is free. I stated wage earners are levied 1.5% of gross earnings. Only one member in a family needs to pay the levy, other members of the family are deemed as dependents. What I did state was at point of service no money changes hands.

Medicare is like other health insurance. You pay a premium (1.5% levy in case of Medicare), when sick you see a doctor and the insurance covers the costs. If you are fit, you could go years without seeing a doctor and yes, your insurance premiums outstrip the medical costs. This is also the case with private health insurance. You could be privately insured, healthy and never see a doctor. Where have your premiums gone? To pay for the guy down the road who is obese, smokes and doesn't get any exercise, and sees a doctor a couple of times a week. This is how insurance works.

I gave you the example of my daughter. At the time see was covered under my Medicare card as an independent. She was 18 and just started university, so she was still covered under the 'family' Medicare card. How much would've her treatment cost in total. I wouldn't have a clue, but paying into Medicare in this case paid for itself. One, we didn't have to worry about where we'd have to find the money to pay for medical costs, and two, she received the best medical attention possible.

I can also give you an example of my father who was diagnosed with prostate cancer about 15 years ago. He was treated under Medicare, made a full recovery and therefore his 1.5% levy easily paid for itself.

 

OMG! Are you purposefully ignoring my point or do you just not understand? The 1.5% levy that you pay does not even begin to cover the entire cost of the Australian health care system. The majority of the funding comes straight out of the general fund. The money in the general fund comes from ALL the other taxes that you pay besides the levy.

Do.you.understand.that???

 

'Pays for their healthcare' meaning Australian's personal healthcare not what the government spends on healthcare.

But the Medicare levy contributes. How much do the private health insurance companies contribute to the cost of American healthcare?

Australia also pays less per capita on healthcare than America does by about a half. That has been proven.

 

*Sigh*. Your politicians sold you a bill of goods and you swallowed it hook, line and sinker. The money that the government spends (both from the levy and the general fund) comes from your pocket and goes towards providing you with health care. Explain how the 1.5% levy that you pay is any different from the portion of the other taxes that you pay that go toward your "personal" health care. It is a distinction without a difference, my friend.

 

I still believe if you need or want something, you have to pay for it somehow, whether it be up front or in the form of taxes or levy or an insurance premium. The more people in the pool, the cheaper it becomes, that's the theory. How much of the 40 bucks a month you pay goes toward America's healthcare expenditure?

Doubt it. Ask any Australian (or anyone who has access to universal healthcare) if they'd be prepared to drop Medicare. The answer will be a resounding NO.

 

Yeah, ok, no doubt. However, the point I'm trying to get across to you is that your Australian health care doesn't just cost you the 1.5% levy as you asserted earlier. It costs much more than that. You keep dodging that very basic assertion to the point of absurdity.

About 1 part in ~300 million.

How many of them are operating under the false notion, as you were, that they are only paying a 1.5% levy for that health care? That's the bill of goods I was referring to. As far as I can tell the levy is just window dressing designed to distract the plebes into thinking that this is the extent of the cost to them. It certainly seems to have worked on you, no offence. You even seem to have constructed a mental block when confronted with the truth of the situation. You don't seem to want to come to terms with it.

 

Except one buys auto insurance just in case they cause an accident and will pay someone else for damages.

 

The simple reason would be its not tied to a choice you can choose to drive with that you must carry proper insurance its linked. You mortgage a house you must insure the house to have the mortgage its linked.

Life which your doing involuntarily is not a choice so should not be forcibly insured but I suspect if the ACA Law was all a choice you can opt in or not, it would still be popular so I don't get the mandate either I would push to take the money for Medicaid and adopt the law exchanges just because its a good deal for those of low income.

 

I would like to provide you with some interesting facts regarding the health of the population and who is insuring them. There are approx over 7 million people that accounts for over half of healthcare spending are enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid as their secondary payer. These people are usually in long term care facilities and have multiple health issues. The population that were previously denied due to pre-existing conditions are now enrolled under Obamacare. It is not broke as opponents to it indicate through the media.

People under 65 and are disabled are the next costly group in healthcare spending. There are over 26 million children under 18 on Medicaid and they are the least costly on government insurance. There are over 20 million adults on Medicaid that are under 65 years of age. All states have reduced spending for Medicaid because now they have capitated their medicaid population by contracting with a HMO plan. What this means is the government will only pay a specific amount per member per month whether they receive care or not and it includes all care negotiated in the contract. Since adults currently cannot get Medicaid unless they get a medical condition that requires continuous care, their diagnosis is carefully figured in that capitation per member per month.

Even though states do contract with the commercial health plans that provide coverage for the working population doesn't give them the right to increase premiums for the general population. We as tax payers already pay a great deal of our taxes to support the government's population of insured. In summary it is the federal government that insures the most expensive individuals that require healthcare.

There is no reason for commercial health plans to raise premiums in the exchange and in fact should lower all premiums across the board for the working population since they are adding more healthy individuals to their already mostly healthy pool. Any increases is pure greed and their excuses for increases is simply not true.

The government could have easily pushed a national single payer plan since they now have a higher population under government insurance then the working population. The reason they didn't is because the health insurance companies paid them in contributions and donated to fund raising events to politicians to prevent it.

A mandate for insurance right now is going to hurt the all of the working families and they are going to get less healthcare then what they do right now. There are too many parasites from government, insurance companies, investors, administration levels that are skimming a great deal of our money for healthcare before it even gets to the providers of care that should be criminal.

We all agree that healthcare is essential and it would be much less expensive if we had a system in place that put a cap on profits and eliminated the many useless levels that administer to it. The government and the health insurance companies has proven that they cannot be trusted in handling our healthcare revenue so why would anyone in their right mind want to give them more of our money to a corrupt healthcare system?

 

Many people just don't want it. Why should they be forced to pay for it? If someone wants it, then they should be able to get it, but not everyone does.