Many hard working Americans, both self-employed and employed do not have health insurance because they either can not afford it, or their employers can’t afford it. If you are making the average American wage of $40,000, there is no way you can afford the outlay of $400 to $1200 a month that the average insurance policy requires. Not only is it expensive, but in many cases, individuals are turned down by insurance companies.
I know this because this has happened to me personally.
Seven years ago, I had gastric bypass surgery. I have since lost more than 100 pounds, and am now more healthy than I’ve been in years. I decided several years after my surgery to become self-employed. When I went to apply for medical insurance, I was turned down by EVERY insurer I applied for because I had this surgery… Even though it made me healthier. Does that make sense?
Currently, millions of people who are unemployed that do not qualify for Medicaid. They can not afford their COBRA payments on $300 a week unemployment insurance. Do you believe that these people, some of whom worked all their lives but are in circumstances beyond their control, should not have access to health care? Should they only depend on emergency room care?
Universal health care means universal access to health care. Everyone should be able to purchase affordable insurance, and everyone should have access to good health care. Many people tend to view health care as a limited resource that they do not want to share. But believe it or not, you are sharing – sharing the cost of the uninsured. We all pay for the uninsured when they have to go to emergency rooms and can’t pay for their services. Those costs are passed on to others. Did you know that 40% of all bankruptcies in this country are medical cost related? Who has to pay for this? Why do you think you pay $7 for an aspirin when you are admitted in a hospital?
No one is speaking of socializing medicine. As a matter of fact, the ONLY group that consistently speaks of socialized medicine are those who want to keep the status quo. Primarily these are Republicans politicians who have for years received millions of dollars in financial contributions from health insurance carriers. This is simply an argument that conservatives are using as an excuse to keep the status quo. The most “radical” proposal is to have a public insurance OPTION. No one is talking about MAKING people have to take “government-sponsored” insurance. Since when is giving someone an option for medical insurance considered “socialism?”
Just to make a point that “socialized insurance” is not as bad as you try to make it seem, ask the average senior citizen do they like or dislike their current insurance? Ask the average federal employee do they believe their health insurance is inadequate? Ask members of Congress, all of whom are under Federal health insurance plans, if they feel their “socialized insurance” is horrible? There is a distinct difference in “socialized medical care” and “socialized insurance”, yet many people are trying to tie the two together.
One other point – what exactly is insurance? In its basic form, insurance is a pool of money that a group of insured have contributed to in order to cover each other in the event of a loss. That certainly sounds very socialistic to me!
If everyone has medical insurance, and we change the focus of medical care from expensive, after the fact treatments to prevention and on-going treatment, we can cut costs, and I believe we can improve health care for everyone.
To begin with Mr. Taylor, as I have addressed your numerous e-mails, the average wage is $40K as you now correctly state. Keep in mind that is PERSONAL average salary, not household. In an effort to be more realistic and less “simplistic” you should figure the numbers based upon median HOUSEHOLD, not individual income. This figure is slightly over $50,000. So does an extra $10K a year make it more feasible? According to your own numbers it should mathematically pay for the difference. In another effort to make a valid and fair comparison, we aren’t really talking about “average” are we? The “average” American is covered, seeing as how 5/6ths of the population have some form of health insurance. Its the Americans that fall somehwere in between that we’re talking about. Its the people who do not qualify for medicare or medicaid, yet also cannot afford the costs of health care insurance. So in essence, we aren’t talking about the “averages” here for the average is able to pay for their own. Now lets look at below average household incomes. Lets suppose this hypothetical family only makes $25K a year with two kids. We also have to assume they haven’t been working for ten years to qualify for Medicare part A to get theri 40 credits necessary. That’s about $2,000 a month. Lets assume you’re renting. Your rent SHOULD be about 1/4th of what you make, but lets call it $600 a month. The average car payment is $378. The average electric bill in the US is just under $100 a month and the average water bill is $40 per month. Now add in $400 a month for food. Don’t forget a family at this level would qualify for food stamps by the way, over $500 a month to be exact. Anyway that leaves around $400 a month for health insurance which you admit is reasonable. So IT CAN BE DONE, even figuring AVERAGE costs versus below average incomes. Please note that I puposely excluded expenses such as cable TV, internet and entertainment as there is NO debate that health care is more important. This brings us back to my article in the arguments against socialized health care which states these people COULD afford it if they would prioritize their spending. I will concede people with pre-existing conditions need some kind of alternative, but the system needs some tweaking, not this massive overhaul.
As for your medical “related” reason for bankruptcy, guess you failed to read my response to your e-mail where I asked if you even knew what that entailed. For starters, the Harvard study to which you are refrencing was conducted in 2001, so its outdated, but they included such “Major Medical” categories such as “medical debt over $1,000 which had been accumulated over a period of years” OR “lost at least two weeks of work-related income because of illness/injury” OR ” cited illness or injury as a specific reason for bankruptcy”(basically, because they said so) and the most outrageous of them was this, “Our more inclusive category, “Any Medical Bankruptcy,” included debtors who cited any of the above, or addiction, or uncontrolled gambling”. To be honest and fair, that last reason pushed the numers up to 62%.
[Excessive quote removed. Please review what constitutes fair use. I recommend no more than 300 characters or not more than 1/3 of the article.]
Thanks, Tyrone. I concur with your point of view.