English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Health = free, $20 copay
Dental = 12 monthly
Vision = 7 monthly

It's a state job. Wouldn't I end up paying more than this in taxes?

2007-08-10 06:49:58 · 32 answers · asked by Abu#2 4 in Politics & Government Politics

It's my lunch break. Whiner

2007-08-10 06:53:36 · update #1

I work for a university in Texas.

2007-08-10 06:59:39 · update #2

32 answers

Carewise you would probably not notice any difference. The cost of your insurance may go down. If your employer pays all of it you are very rare and fortunate indeed. Your copay shouldn't go down. I believe in AFFORDABLE health care and not the stereotypical ideas of universal healthcare.

2007-08-10 07:01:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7 5

Congratulations for you! You have socialized health care! Yay!

I'm sure you wouldn't mind sharing with us. I work in the for (small) profit sector, and I'm lucky, too. My boss is wonderful, and makes sure we get good health care.

I'm 38, and I may have another job someday. And that employer may not provide good health care coverage. Also, like any other person, I may experience an unplanned and unwanted change in employment status or personal health. Then I'll be up the creek without a paddle, because my insurance is tied to my employment.

Also, I have kids, and they do the darndest things! Why, just last year, one of them developed a rare medical condition. Lucky us! Actually, we were just plain lucky - my boss changed our company's plan to provide more coverage. She's close to unique, that way. And the condition resolved itself before any major expenses anyway.

I'd love for everyone to work for a boss like mine. But that's impossible. They don't even do that in Canada!

But what they do in Canada is possible. It's what you call "socialized medicine." We could all pay in, cover each other with our great national wealth, and spread the risk over our population of 300 million people.

Combined risk is a successful strategy for reducing individual cost.

You work at a public institution, which gives society hard to measure benefits (well-trained engineers, etc.). For years, many conservatives complained about paying for public schools when they didn't have children in them. But if you have only a small portion of the population educated, they can't support the sort of economy we'd probably like to live in.

And the same goes for healthcare. If you're well, that's good. But if everyone else around you is contagious, you'll need a space suit, no matter how much private or employer-based healthcare you have.

2007-08-10 08:04:03 · answer #2 · answered by umlando 4 · 4 2

It would be better for everyone and certainly for those without any at all. I am legally disabled (due to rupturing 3 discs in my back) but I work 20 hours per week. I cannot get insurance unless I pay a huge amount because of my "pre-existing condition".
My husband works for our national government -but alas, no healthcare. They make him get layed off for a few months every year in order to not have to give him the benefits. It is a bunch of bs and I hope someone in politics has the ba**s to put it into place!

2007-08-10 11:53:17 · answer #3 · answered by Cindy P 4 · 0 1

Your taxes for socialized medicine would be very, very, high and the quality of you care would decrease significantly.

Depending on your illness you may get better, but it will be slower due to generic medicine, than it would be now.
If you needed a specialist, it will be a long wait, and surgery longer after that visit, compare that to now.

If you wish to know about the failed health care system of Canada, that Hillary thinks is so great. Do some research, and answer, why are Canadians coming to the US and paying for surgery here in this country.

Oh yes, and if you want a sex change, it will be paid for.
It is in Canada.

Example: In Australia, taxes 50% after $40,000.00 of income,
they were seeking and got permission to get private pay insurance so they could go to a doctor of their choice.

2007-08-10 07:44:33 · answer #4 · answered by bluebird 5 · 2 1

well, since you have government health care then yes, you will probably be in the group that ends up definitely paying more.. how much .. who knows..... the government may even go as far as to cover the cost of socialized health care for it's employees.. I wouldn't doubt that....

many people though, if the system was set up right, may see a drop in their premiums from a socialized program.

2007-08-10 07:37:15 · answer #5 · answered by pip 7 · 2 1

Heck yes! Socialized medicine benefits only those who are too lazy to get a job. If you're employed, "universal" healthcare is a loser in terms of increased cost for less service.

2007-08-11 07:43:11 · answer #6 · answered by trentrockport 5 · 1 0

For yourself that is a good price. My company pays for my personal monthly fee as well.

However my assistant who has a wife and 3 kids pays over $625 per month just for the insurance, which doesn't cover the $25 copay (each visit) or the $4,000 deductable (which doesn't include co-pays). He probably spends another $150/month (because of a sickly child) on doctor visits, prescriptions, etc. If his other 2 kids get sick, it goes up at least another $200 or so a month.

So he can easily spend 50% or more of his monthly take home salary on heath care costs alone for his family.

Would socialized medicine help him? Absolutely.

Are a lot of Americans in the same situation he is in? Yes.

2007-08-10 07:02:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 8 2

It probably wouldn't effect you. It would only cover those who do not have insurance or who choose to go with government subsidized health care as it would probably be cheaper than private insurance (not for profit as opposed to 30% profit). Since you are a state employee, the government subsidized insurance would probably be very similar to what you already have.

2007-08-10 07:30:32 · answer #8 · answered by Mitchell . 5 · 3 1

The tax payers in Texas are paying a high price for your health insurance. Why don't you cancel it at work and buy your own insurance?

2007-08-10 07:25:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

I think only Kucinich is advocating a “socialized” health care plan, similar to Medicare. For most people, the only difference in health care would be a sense of security that their health care would not change depending on a change of employment, self-employment or unemployment. Of course, for people who currently have no insurance, the difference would be dramatic.

2007-08-10 07:27:51 · answer #10 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 2 2

Kripes, a state employee, figures. It explains your attitude. Whose butt did you kiss to get that job? You people are practically the only ones left who have an employer who pays your insurance. It wouldnt impact you, except you might actually have to do some work for a change.

2007-08-10 07:37:38 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers