Should Congressmen Decline Health Coverage?

[Coito ergo sum]

To say that an insurance industry can make a profit , have staff ,managers a highly paid board ,pay dividends etc out of the money people pay for their health care before any of that money gets to a doctor or a hospital but that somehow makes health care better is ridicules .

Well, when you buy insurance you aren't "paying for health care," you're paying for "insurance." This an important distinction to note, and suggests a gross level of ignorance about what things are.

Insurance is a contract between one person or company to pay for losses arises in specified contingencies or risks. It means - "if X happens, I will pay for loss $Y." That's all it is. That's why it's hard to compare "insurance" with "National Health Care" - because what national health care is is not insurance. National health care is where people go to the doctor, the State pays for it, and then the State determines which citizens get the bills and in what amounts. To suggest that national health care makes health care "better" is just as ridiculous.

[mistermack]

You've heard wrong, actually. Hospital stays and childbirth are covered by insurance, and those that don't have insurance are covered under Medicaid and SCHIP government provided services. Nobody has to pay out of pocket for it.

The US population must be pretty dumb then. What's the point of paying for insurance, when you're covered anyway?.
The fifty million without cover seem to be the only ones with any sense.
All those people going bankrupt over health bills must feel pretty stupid.

[Coito ergo sum]

You've heard wrong, actually. Hospital stays and childbirth are covered by insurance, and those that don't have insurance are covered under Medicaid and SCHIP government provided services. Nobody has to pay out of pocket for it.

The US population must be pretty dumb then. What's the point of paying for insurance, when you're covered anyway?.

People mainly get insurance from where they work. If they lose their jobs, they get government assistance to pay for continuation coverage if they need it, and if they are poor they get free Medicaid.

People who can afford to buy health insurance buy it, and ought to buy it. It's not like the 25 million folks (among that 50,000,000 you love to bandy about that makeover $50,000 a year don't have the money to pay for it - and it's not like they'd be asked to pay less under national health care.

[maiforpeace]

Yes, I think all those members of congress who rejected Obama care should pay for their own health insurance. I do think those who supported it should still have their insurance paid for.

Despite the worst horror stories (that I fear too many people on this board believe) We do have some care here in the US...if you are poor, you will be covered. Even if you aren't that poor, you can still get covered. My sister, who is permanently disabled has a combined income from annuities and social security of over $2600 monthly - her state medicaid pays for the balance of her nursing care costs which are over double her monthly income.

I've been hearing grumblings from my relatives in France about changes to their health care...my uncle, who has suffered with health concerns all of his life apparently is having to pay for certain prescriptions now. I don't know exactly what the politics and policies are that is making that happen, but I predict some more riots soon.

[mistermack]

People mainly get insurance from where they work.

That just means they pay it out of their wages, before they get paid.
I don't see why you're opposed to Congressmen doing that, if everybody else does it.

[Feck]

Yes, I think all those members of congress who rejected Obama care should pay for their own health insurance. I do think those who supported it should still have their insurance paid for.

Despite the worst horror stories (that I fear too many people on this board believe) We do have some care here in the US...if you are poor, you will be covered. Even if you aren't that poor, you can still get covered. My sister, who is permanently disabled has a combined income from annuities and social security of over $2600 monthly - her state medicaid pays for the balance of her nursing care costs which are over double her monthly income.

I've been hearing grumblings from my relatives in France about changes to their health care...my uncle, who has suffered with health concerns all of his life apparently is having to pay for certain prescriptions now. I don't know exactly what the politics and policies are that is making that happen, but I predict some more riots soon.

France had an amazing health care system ,but the country simply can't afford it .

[Coito ergo sum]

People mainly get insurance from where they work.

That just means they pay it out of their wages, before they get paid.
I don't see why you're opposed to Congressmen doing that, if everybody else does it.

It's about recognizing that stuff isn't free, and that things just don't magically appear.

It doesn't "just mean they pay it out of their wages." When an employer provides health insurance it can be provided wholly as a benefit, with no deduction from wages. Sometimes, employers require employees to pay some portion of the insurance premium out of their wages.

In the case of Congressmen - we pay them $174,000 a year to do what most of them treat as a public relations job, and they spend much of their time on personal business and reelection campaigns. Many of them miss large numbers of votes, and the job they do is self-serving and piss-poor. That's why they have an approval rating barely above the single digits.

On top of that, they get free health care without having to be a dime for it. My position is that someone who earns $174,000 a year, in these trying economic times, can afford to pay for their own insurance. And, since they're not really earning their keep or impressing their bosses (us, the people), then they shouldn't be receiving gold plated benefits. It's also in quite poor taste to keep improving their compensation - which they vote on and approve themselves - while the rest of the country is suffering.

[Feck]

You are right about congressmen (or for that matter anyone ) who is in a position of wealth and power who expects the less well off to suck up all the economic troubles without any thought that a 10% cut in their income means a few less luxuries but a 10% cut in income to people and families who are struggling maybe the final straw .

Especially ones like congressmen who have a job to look after people . Shit they could just take another bribe from the gun lobby , the health insurance industry, the tobacco industry, or the oil companies .

[mistermack]

This notion that the employer pays some, and the worker pays some, is complete bollocks. (yes, my favourite word again).
The employer pays everything. In exchange for the work the employee does.
So the employer pays every penny, and every penny is taken from the worker's wages. To imagine that insurance is some kind of "different money" that the employee somehow doesn't pay is ludicrous. Calling something different words doesn't change reality.
I can see why someone might moan about what Congressmen get paid, but I can't see the logic in moaning about HOW it's paid, if it's exactly the same as most other people.
.

[Coito ergo sum]

This notion that the employer pays some, and the worker pays some, is complete bollocks. (yes, my favourite word again).
The employer pays everything. In exchange for the work the employee does.
So the employer pays every penny, and every penny is taken from the worker's wages. To imagine that insurance is some kind of "different money" that the employee somehow doesn't pay is ludicrous. Calling something different words doesn't change reality.
I can see why someone might moan about what Congressmen get paid, but I can't see the logic in moaning about HOW it's paid, if it's exactly the same as most other people.
.

I'm not moaning about how it gets paid. They get paid $174,000 a year in salary, and on top of that they get free health care. I'm suggesting that they should take a at least a 20% cut in pay, and pay for their own health insurance. Where do you see me criticizing "how" they are paid? They receive a salary and fringe benefits. I'd rather they get paid by the hour and account for their time with time-keeping records, so we could audit what they actually do (or, more like "don't do") on a daily basis, but that's probably wishful thinking.

[mistermack]

Where do you see me criticizing "how" they are paid? They receive a salary and fringe benefits. I'd rather they get paid by the hour and account for their time with time-keeping records,

I can't believe you wrote that. You ARE taking the piss. You must be.

[Coito ergo sum]

Where do you see me criticizing "how" they are paid? They receive a salary and fringe benefits. I'd rather they get paid by the hour and account for their time with time-keeping records,

I can't believe you wrote that. You ARE taking the piss. You must be.

In that respect, I am. However, it's not far from my opinion of their abysmal performance. We ought to, like Caligula, just appoint a horse to the Senate. It would do as good a job.

[Clinton Huxley]

Where do you see me criticizing "how" they are paid? They receive a salary and fringe benefits. I'd rather they get paid by the hour and account for their time with time-keeping records,

I can't believe you wrote that. You ARE taking the piss. You must be.

In that respect, I am. However, it's not far from my opinion of their abysmal performance. We ought to, like Caligula, just appoint a horse to the Senate. It would do as good a job.

Horses are high maintenance. Replace them with a computer dispensing policies entirely at random and it wouldn't be worse.

[Coito ergo sum]

Wow...some of them are suggesting a 5% pay cut... http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010 ... s-support/ - not a big rush to co-sponsor that bill though....lol

[Coito ergo sum]

They get frickin' ridiculous pensions too...

When Schroeder, who was elected in 1972, retires as announced at the end of this year, she will have accumulated lifetime pension benefits of $4.18 million, according to an estimate by the National Taxpayers Union Foundation. Walker, also outgoing, has served since 1976. His accumulated pension benefits will be $4.2 million, says the (slightly higher than Schroeder's due to actuarial assumptions).

http://www.fa-ir.org/alabama/corrupt/Co ... nefits.htm

What with 35 senators and representatives having announced their retirement this term, Congress will soon be creating "pension millionaires" at a terrific clip. The 23 departing representatives stand to pick up more than $1.1 million in lifetime pension benefits, and all but four who have not yet reached the minimum retirement age of 50 can start collecting next year. Only two of 12 senators who plan to step down will collect less than $1 million (see table, page page 28).