Chuck Todd just said what ever Dem defends their

[wasupaloopa]

health care plan will lose.

So folks drop the Medicare for all talk. The Repubs will tromp us if we don’t

[CurtEastPoint]

1. Screw that clown.

[TruckFump]

2. He's not my type.

[Honeycombe8]

3. "whatever Dem defends their health care plan." ???

Not sure I understand that sentence, wasu.

Any Democrat defending the ACA will lose? Is that what you mean he said? What does Medicare-for-all have to do w/that?

[wasupaloopa]

7. They were discussing how happy the Repubs are

that Dems are supporting Medicare for all.

Forcing people off insurance

Socialism

[Honeycombe8]

11. Oh, I see. It was about Med-for-all. He might be right...

if the candidates are talking about doing away w/private ins. (not all of the plans want to do away w/private ins.).

I think that in most countries that have universal health care, there is also a private ins. path to getting health care.

If they don't include private ins., it sounds too much like the ACA, in which a person is trapped in the ACA with no choices.

[Hoyt]

13. I think Todd is right too, if we go for M4A now. Too many people like their current insurance, or

just don't believe M4A is going to be better, cheaper, etc.

I think a Public Option -- essentially letting those who want Medicare to buyin -- will make the transition much smoother and quicker. If it is anywhere near as good as we think, people will gravitate to it quickly.

[Honeycombe8]

14. Maybe. I'm not clear on how that would work.

I'm not in favor of mixing up Medicare as it exists now (for seniors) with any other form or expansion of Medicare.

That's because Medicare now is tailored to the needs of seniors AND relies on those seniors having paid taxes for it, for decades. AND the insureds have to pay for main Medicare AND buy supplemental coverage, if they can afford it.

It works pretty well, as it is. I think the rest of the population won't care about or treat the seniors well under any expansion, so that the ones who have paid the most for it, get the least benefit. That was my experience with the individual ACA policies.

Medicare doesn't have maternity coverage, birth control pill coverage, or anything like hat. Because it's for seniors only. If it's expanded, it's not Medicare.

Also, I don't know if many people know, but Medicare is not full coverage. And you have to pay for that partial coverage, although the amount is reasonable.

If a senior can't afford a supplemental policy from a private ins. co., then he/she can't get full coverage. I can imagine all the complaints about THAT, if it's expanded to the broader population. But Seniors accept that as a reality, and are thankful to get the basic partial coverage at a reasonable rate.

[Hoyt]

15. I think it would be a Medicare like plan that would include OB, etc.

A premium would be determined actuarially. That’s what someone buying in would pay, likely with subsidies last ke ACA.

Medicare does cover OB for disabled. But, you are correct, they’d have to add in services like newborn care. But that’s easy to figure out.

Sanders says he is going to do away with coinsurance and deductibles, but I’m betting it will continue and people will need to buy a supplement if they want full coverage.

It’s not necessary, but I bet Medicare would continue as it is now. Workers would continue to pay Medicare taxes for their Medicare “Retirement” plan.

Who knows for sure exactly what it will look like, but the financial part is pretty easy to work out. It’s getting people to give up what they are comfortable with, even when they gripe about rising cost, prior approval, etc.

At some point, someone is going to have to come up with details and costs per person, or people who have coverage are going to be afraid of what M4A, an Option, or whatever will look like.

[Honeycombe8]

22. SSI, SSDI use of Medicare is not part of the main Medicare plan

That is a combo Social Security-Medicare thing for disabled, etc. They can use SS for some things, Medicare for others. It's separate from the main Medicare.

You have compared the Medicare expansion to the ACA, which was my point. That did NOT work well for older people AT ALL. The older insureds were used as funders, to fund the policies that others would get. The irony is that because of hte high premiums charged by age, w/no regard to health, it decreased the quality of policy the older person could get, in order to pay for a much better policy for someone else, who WASN'T paying.

This Medicare disruption will not be popular. If the govt wants to provide health care to the population, it needs to do a separate program from Medicare. Seniors have specialized needs and limited income resources.

Leave granny's Medicare alone. What I found with the ACA was that no one cared about the older middle class people who couldn't get health care. Unless you belong to one of the popular demographic groups, you don't matter. That was my experience. (Those older people were checked off the list as having health care, but the reality was that they had policies, but many like myself did not have health care.)

Remember this: Most older voters vote Republican. For those that vote Democratic, the main reason is that the Democrats started and protect Social Security and Medicare. If the Democrats mess with either one of those, the party will lose entirely the older demographic.

[dsc]

16. that is actually untrue

people on SSI and SSDI also have Medicare as a primary insurer. And yes, it covers things those younger people need that older people don't.

[Honeycombe8]

20. I'm not talking about SSI, SSDI. I'm talking about the Medicare itself. Not add-on programs.

Which, BTW, is where the financial issue w/Medicare comes from, I read. That Medicare and Social Security were never intended to cover people who had not contributed to those programs over years (and their employers).

So that "expansion" hasn't worked out well long term, and puts the entire program in jeopardy. I hope the politicians figure some way to save Medicare, though. It is headed toward a financial problem, although safe for now.

[dsc]

21. this has nothing at all to do with Medicaid expansion

people who get disability have always gotten Medicare, not Medicaid, as their insurance. From day one of Medicare it was designed to cover people on SSDI. I was wrong about SSI, that is Medicaid and it was Medicaid from jump. https://www.disabilitysecrets.com/will-i-get-medicare-medicaid-with-disability.html

[Honeycombe8]

23. I'm not going to argue about add-on programs.

Don't try to distract from the issue.

[emmaverybo]

27. The supplemental part is paid for as a part of one's retirement benefits for some seniors. I am not

the only senior whose Medicare fee is covered by reimbursement to my pension and who pays no premium for supplemental.

Further, many seniors pay a group rate for great coverage through an HMO like Kaiser with the group rate being low and the coverage terrific.

We can help seniors needing supplemental coverage on Medicare. We can help many groups who are uninsured or pay too much without taking away plans folks like and can afford and reinventing the wheel with a federal program we better all hope works a lot better than the VA system.

[Honeycombe8]

30. Medicare as it is needs to be left alone.

People keep talking about it as if it were like a Medicare program for the whole population. It's not. That's why it's cost effective, up to a point.

There are no birth control payments, no maternity benefits, so more limited things are paid for. But overall it works for seniors. It's not intended to work for a 30 year old.

Most people don't have pensions, as we all know. Most people don't get supp. Medicare plans through a group. Most are like I am. I pay for basic Medicare (which is subsidized through the payments I and my employers made over the decades), and I pay for a supplemental plan that is geared toward what I think I need, and what I want, and can afford. The rates are very reasonable.

For those who can't afford full Medicare coverage, they may qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid.

It works pretty well. Most seniors look forward to qualifying for Medicare.

Yes..."helping groups who are uninsured or pay too much" WILL take away from seniors if you try to do that by using Medicare. Because that's WHY you would use Medicare, in the first place.

As I said...I went through this with the ACA. The older middle class people got the shaft and were used to "help other people who are uninsured or pay too much." The result was that older middle class people had to pay TRIPLE RATES for THE BOTTOM LEVEL COVERAGE, so that someone else could get SILVER LEVEL COVERAGE at a much reduced rate.

Not only are the deductibles for the lower level plans extremely high ($4,500 to $6,000 is what I had), but MOST providers would not even take those plans. I couldn't find a dr. to take my plan for two years or more. Blue Cross got over $35,000 for providing a "plan" for me for several years. I turned in two claims: $175 urgent care for a dog bite (I had to pay $75); $166 for a preventive exam (I had to pay $66).

History has shown that seniors will get the shaft. Medicare works because it's for a limited group, based on decades of taxes paid for it by those beneficiaries.

[mr_lebowski]

31. Why is anyone 'trapped in the ACA with no choices'?

How would that happen, exactly?

Are you referring to how some areas have only 1 (Private Insurance) provider on the Exchange, and offering only 3 plans?

That's something that needs changing, IMHO every insurer operating in a state should HAVE TO offer a set of plans on the exchange, at least available to people living in the areas they ordinarily service.

But the ACA is far more than just the exchanges, the subsidies, and the insurers that take part in them.

[Chemisse]

4. He's an idiot. People want heath care very badly.

The candidates must have a solid health care plan or they won't go anywhere.

[Hoyt]

5. He can be an idiot, but I don't think you quoted him properly.

[Lint Head]

6. Chuck Toad said whaaaaaat?

No offense to toads meant.

[JI7]

8. Todd is a troll

[lefthandedskyhook]

9. We should really CHUCK todd

nuff said

[sop]

10. The right to Healthcare is the number one issue on voters' minds

Chuck Todd is just pushing his usual Democrats-can't-rock-the-boat-too-much-or-they'll-lose crap.

[vsrazdem]

12. Yes, I'm sure our candidates take their marching orders from Chuch Toad.

[YOHABLO]

17. I've had it with Todd. He's such smarmy s.o.b. What does he know?

[thegoose]

18. Fuck the toad

And his ridiculous little-boy hairdo.

[jalan48]

19. Corporate mouthpiece says corporate healthcare the way to go.

[Kurt V.]

28. so obvious. how are ppl not getting this? Rhetorical btw

[JDC]

29. This

[turbinetree]

24. Hey Chuck, can I call you Chuck

Can you tell the public how MSNBC pays for your health care in your contract.....................you know the 10 to 15 million you make a year spewing your shit sandwich, and that your health care will be paid by Comcast when you retire......................Can you explain to the public Chuck, how, that after $125,900.01 you don't have to pay into Medicare or Social Security because your max out, in the first ten minutes your on the air in the beginning of the year saying your shit.
But everyone making less than $125,900.00 ( did you catch that one cent difference Chuck) gets to subsidize your heath care and their own, because you asshole don't have to pay after $125.900.01..........................

Can you tell a person like me that has had heart attack's that damn near killed me and cost thousand of dollars, that if I did not have Medicare, that I would have had to file for bankruptcy because I have a pre-existing condition in the private health care system if they get there way...........with that Federalist Society asshole AG sitting at the DOJ and his authoritarian leader collecting social security because his kid is under 18 and he's over 70 and he's supposedly worth billions, wanting to use the Chained CPI to index health care for the poor and those on Social Security ..................have you ever explained that fact Chuck....................FUCK NO...................you continue to spew your shit sandwich side show of deceit and deception.................

Have you had, let's say Warren on your show or any other candidate that raised there hand in the first debate about Medicare for All.........................nope, you had Sanders on if memory serves me correctly. You may have had Warren...............

Did you hear what Warren said about how economics, and how it is tied to health care which you keep forgetting to explain to the public, because, Chuck, you have after all, have the Comcast silver spoon paying for your health , at 100% I bet......................and it must be stuck were it doesn't shine...........................

I pay $135.00 a month being taken out of my Social Security check Chuck, and pay another $30.70 cents to pay for my Part D drugs to help me fight my heart condition, which is better than private health care system that cost over $6,000.00 a year after you make the deductible either from your employer or yourself, so Chuck do the math.
I pay over $1500.00 a year and others pay over $4500+ a year................................so Chuck, can you add Chuck, 2+2 = 4 in the Medicare program, the private insurance program 2+2=5, because you never know how much that health care CEO gets in paid in the next year, or what Wall Street wants on their return........................FUCK THAT SHIT.......................

So lets talk about Medicare for All..........................Chuck.........................

[tiredtoo]

25. Chuck Todd is a jerk. EOM

[brush]

26. Fu_k Chuck Toad. We just ran on healthcare in 2018 rode a blue wave...

that took over the House.