Well, the issue of Universal Health Care has been formally submitted in New York's Assembly. Rich Gottfried from Manhattan, is the bill's sponsor and it's quickly become the buzz in Albany world.Gottfried is pushing the idea that the public plan would actually be $30 billion cheaper than the $100 billion Americans now pay for private coverage without sacrificing quality care.
At first glance, the program would resemble the Social Security Payroll tax procedure with the unearned income of our wealthiest New Yorkers tapped through different means. The details havent been debated yet, but it's made it to committee and is expected to get serious attention. I might take a year, but with the extreme burden on small business the way it is, the public program is looking better from a employers point of view.
Below is a map showing the countries that have some version of government funded universal healthcare. Pretty much all the industrialised nations other than the U. S.
The title of the bill is New York Health Plus and as you can see, New Yorkers could get free health coverage from the state, and have their pick of the plans while still having the option to opt out to utilise a private program. Privately, we pay over $65 Billion per year. This plan, would cost taxpayers around $55 Billion.
You would have to ask a mathematician to decide if investing $1,000 in additional taxes would be better than the typical $3,000/year New Yorkers pay today.The increase in taxes for such a plan are a necessity, and is of course, the major roadblock in getting traction in Albany, not to mention the heavily funded lobbyists who represent the insurance companies beating down our representatives year after year.
What do you think about the public plan and do you think the overall cost would benefit New Yorkers as planned?
6 comments:
I am going to have to read this plan before I have an opinion on it. I am no more interested in government deciding what kind of medical care I can receive then I am in having the insurance companies decide, so I need to see how much say about our own care we will have in this plan.
Funny little map. Only China has more in population than the US. All the other countries have less than half the US population, and most of them have less population than NY.
I can't WAIT until a board of government officials decide on whether certain medical procedures and medications are available or not, weighing the costs and popularity, and the amount of special interest influence.
Then the election campaigns. Democrats are for Nulesta Shots ($2600 a pop) for cancer patients with low white blood cells counts. Republicans are for Nupregen (1000), for the same problem. The both sides will have an army of experts saying how one is better than the other.
HEY Mike- Maybe- he wants to debate the issue on the New Kingston Area Public Access TV- ya know the local EG channel 20 doesnt appear to post their meetings. Are they open to the public? we have to be getting close- when we reappear- you can be my first guest-
take care
Shelly Z
PS-good picture of thee and our newest NY Senator-
I would have to think that taking the issue of healthcare away from a "for profit" strategy and broadening the availability to everyone, would not only make the care less expensive, but offer the needed early detection and preventative medicine that is usually neglected because of the high cost of the current private plans. We would all be healthier by default. Would you want your kid sitting in school next to another kid without healthcare?
The issue on the Federal level has offered a dual option. Those who wish to stay with their current private plans are welcome to do so, while those who opt for the public plan will simply see 5% less of their income taxed for 100% coverage. Do your own math and see what option works for you. If 5% is less than the private policy you have today...give it a test run.
I'm still uneasy about the level of service for those of us who join the public program. Any reassurances from anyone we can trust?
Post a Comment