Minimum annual salary to receive free health care under a public plan.

[ZombieHorde]

If we get a sliding health insurance payments based off of income, what should be the minimum annual salary to receive free* health care?

So if you vote, "Over $30,000 but under under or equal to $40,000 per year.", then you believe everyone who earns $40,000 or less per year should not have to pay for health insurance, with the possible exception of a small $5 co-pay.

I understand many of you strongly desire a single payer health plan, but let rule out this possibility for my poll. (If you would be so kind.)

*Maybe you have a five dollar co-pay.

I don't know how I will vote yet, I would like to read input from my fellow DUers.

Small family, say 1-2 kids.

[rpannier]

1. I picked the 50-60 k

But my vote has a caveat

How many people in the family

80K a year and 3 kids has less disposable income than 50K and no kids

[ZombieHorde]

3. Small family. 1-2 kids.

[noamnety]

2. How many people are in the family?

Without knowing that, the poll is meaningless. A single person with no dependents earning 40k is very different than a two income family each earning 40k, and that's very different than a single parent with three kids earning 40k.

I'd rather see all of it free, paid for by a progressive tax structure. I don't understand why basic health care should be tied to income level. Fire and police services are provided regardless of income level.

[ZombieHorde]

4. You are right, I fixed the poll's body text to include family information. nt

[noamnety]

7. That makes a little more sense to me

But I'd still have to vote other.

[Xipe Totec]

5. Did you mean maximum? n/t

[ZombieHorde]

9. No. I assume that most of us would be fine if everyone who made two million dollars or less recieved

free health care.

[Xipe Totec]

10. So anybody earning less than the minimum would have to pay for coverage?

Do you see my confusion?

[ZombieHorde]

13. I see what you mean now.

I should have stated, "The minimum highest annual salary to receive free..." Wait, that still sounds a little confusing. Oh well, hopefully readers understand my intent.

[Xipe Totec]

14. dupe

stuttering fingers...

[Xipe Totec]

15. NP - I did understant your intent

:hi:

[mwooldri]

6. I want universal healthcare free at the point of delivery for everyone,

regardless of income. No deductibles, no co-pays. Even if you make $0 or $100,000,000. Free to everyone. Period.

That's how it is done in the UK.

Now, as for paying for it, the healthcare itself is not free. Everyone pays National Insurance contributions in the UK to fund the NHS, so we should simply increase Medicare Tax payments appropriately, oh and poke the cap up on that too. If you're not making any money, you pay nothing. If you make something, you pay something. Make lots, pay lots.

We could be even nastier and state since corporations like to be treated like people, then we charge the corporations extra Medicare Tax on top of their employer contributions.

[Hutzpa]

17. Exactly

this is special interest taking the discussion and confusing everyone with public options or
giving families choices which IMO changes nothing.

[R. P. McMurphy]

19. I agree completely. n/t

[mudplanet]

23. Right F***ing On

Why make the system so convoluted?

Look at what others are doing, copy what works, maybe improve on it. Learn from their mistakes.

[ZombieHorde]

24. I agree, but I do not think this will happen. nt

[mwooldri]

26. Sadly, you're probably right... but still something like this would be nice. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

8. 40% of US families are below $35,000.

It shouldn't be a strict cutoff though. Between $30,000 and $40,000 a childless couple should get some subsidy of their premiums. Raise that $7,000 for each kid

[dflprincess]

11. In the poll is it adjusted gross or net income listed?

n/t

[ZombieHorde]

16. Gross income. nt

[dflprincess]

18. In that case I'll go with 80,000 or more

but, given the government's inablity to set income limits for other programs that bear any connection to reality, we'll be lucky if it's $20K.

[Hutzpa]

12. It should be $50,000

considering minimum wage is set at $7, besides commodities and groceries have all increased
in prices.

[grantcart]

20. geography will be a big factor. $ 50 k in Idaho is a lot different than CA

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

30. Absolutely.

My salary here in DC would make me rich in other parts of the country. Here? Not even close.

[Oregone]

21. How about free for all?

Fund it with tax dollars. Done deal.

[ZombieHorde]

25. I support that, but those office do not seem to share our views on this subject. nt

[harun]

22. $0, if Cuba, one of the poorest coutries on Earth can do it, why the hell couldn't we?

Good grief are there any Liberals even left on DU anymore?

You all know equating someones allowable access to gov't services to their wage is Republicanism don't you?

[endarkenment]

27. everyone in no exceptions

Paid for through a payroll tax split between employers and employees, as we do with social security and medicare. Everyone in, no means testing, no exclusions, no more bullshit.

[Bluenorthwest]

28. Define 'family'. Define 'household'.

If my partner and I are as we live, a family, then 'we' have a household income. If we are as the Government bigots treat us, we are strangers who happen to live together for years and decades and such. Seems to me that is going to make a big difference.
So I can not answer this poll. It is meaningless to me. All I want is for my family to be left alone, and not forced into poverty to please Joshua DuBois and Ricky Warren. Frankly, I do not trust these folks to be fair.

[ZombieHorde]

29. I am not concerned about gender, and I hope our new health plan will not

be concerned with gender either.

[BlooInBloo]

31. Would need the info on economic/demograpic data to choose intelligently.

[ZombieHorde]

32. Is Obama's plan going to take economic/demographic data into consideration,

or will it be treated in the same manner as taxes?