wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

can we create the universal coverage like in auto?
can private choices address the fundamental question about pooled risk so that everyone can be affordable? This seems to be the principal issue not poss with current private plans. There needs to be more pooling of risk across all people young, old, healthy, sick, etc, and create more collective incentives for preventative and healthful living. Can collectives/cooperatives mutuals be a better solution than private for profit cos?
what is different about congress "making decisions" from private company functionaries deciding when you have to die? At least congress members are elected and can be held accountable for moral consequences!

How does one whose per annum income is, oh say $16,500 pay a $10,000/annum health insurance premium!? Doesn't anybody ever take real-life situations into the picture? I mean maybe that person should just be allowed to get more and more sick and just die? The private market has failed and will continue to fail because it's money only based.

I second that vive la France!!!

doctors and nurses are a limited commodity. so health care costs will not fall

What is meant my prexistng medical condition? I understand that only exists if you have not been insured or had a lapse, not if you are only changing providers.

Is that correct and do the listeners know that?

in the war against the middle class we CANNOT lose the healthcare battle.

move into the 21st century.

vive la France!!

Is it a giveaway to the insurers and employers to provide tax breaks for insurance to encourage individuals to buy plans. With incentives for health insurance to no longer be provided by employers, even with a tax incentive for the individual, this would amount to a cut in take-home pay. Unless an employee could renegotiate for higher pay, this is effectively a loss in wages and would cause a downturn in spending. How would this affect unions and union negotiations? Also, with individuals purchasing insurance from companies with a monopoly in the business (India and China can't export healthcare to the US), there would be no way for consumers to affectively bargain for lower or fairer healthcare cost. The tax incentive would set the base amount for any policy provided by insurers.

Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are FICTION, at least to New York state residents! When HSAs were created, there was a $1,000 deductible, but it increases $50 per year, so in 2007 the deductible was $1,100. NY residents can't buy health insurance from private insurers with a deductible of more than $1,000. THUS WE DON'T QUALIFY TO GET THEM! Also it's hard to find a financial institution to have them!

I'd also like to add this about national health coverage: when I was participating in it in France, this is what comforted me about the huge chunk of "social charges" I paid out of my paycheck: if I didn't get sick or break a leg or need hospital care, my money was not wasted. Why? Because my money went to take care of my neighbor, my friend, some poor kid somewhere.

This is not the case with health insurers here. I feel like my money just goes into a black hole, enriching creeps who don't have my best interests at heart.

It's not just the money. It's a whole psychology.

I might be more inclined to willingly get health coverage here (besides my minimal hospital coverage), if I actually thought the insurance companies would actually COVER me. They just seem to exclude everything that anyone really NEEDS! I hear stories everywhere about how people have to struggle to get their money's worth out of their health insurers and it disgusts me and puts me off getting health care.

I was so grateful for all the low cost health coverage I got in France when I lived and worked there that I never even filed for reimbursements (which I was eligible for -- but it seemed a crime to ask for my 50 dollars back on a dentist appointment knowing how much I'd have paid in NY).

!! clarification - employees don't pay pay taxes on the employer contribution to healthcare. and neither do MARRIED Spouses. However, if you have your domestic partner on your insurance, the entire cost of the company contribution to the partner is taxable income. very subtle, very discriminatory.

A brief anecdote, I think this whole situation is an insurance company issue. The company I currently work for uses Aetna as our health care provider, and we began paying for health care benefits back in 1999. If you look at Aetna's stock, it's gone up more than five-fold since then.

I can't help but linking the two phenomena, and if health care costs are rising so appreciably, why are the insurance companies making so much profit? It seems that this is the REAL inefficiency in health care.

My system is best. Set up a single payer system side by side with HMOs. The single payer system will do only primary care 24/7 and benefits 1. Immediately 47 uninsured will be insured for primary care.
2. Emergency rooms will be decongested

HMOs will continue to take specialty and hi tech . Hmo prices will be lower to help pay for the SPS. Thepublic will be able to compare the two.

See... 5 candidates...he mentions 4 positions...!

My plan: Set up a system parallel to HMOs.
It wil;l be: Single Payer
Restricted to primary care
It will automatically insure the 47 million uninsured for primary care
Relieve congested emergency rooms
Be available 24/7
High Tech and specialty referreals will remain the domain of HMOs

Single payer and HMO systems side by side can be repaired.

Just a guess....I say Brian doesn't mention Ron Paul...or if he does it will be a dismissive comment...