• On The Economy

ON HEALTHCARE

A PLAN FOR HEALTHCARE COVERAGE FOR ALL

This Plan would be Comprehensive Universal Healthcare Plan for ALL and would be a hybrid of Private Coverage (continuing as it is) and an extension of our present Social Security system to include a newly created Governmental Publicly funded Healthcare Coverage Program for all (those) not opting for or continuing to keep their private insurance. The two major systems, public and private, competing against one another to give the taxpayer/consumer/insured the best price and the healthcare possible. Here’s how it would work>>

(1) Everyone (ALL Adults) would be required to be covered either by Private Insurance or through a newly created Governmental Publicly funded system (say by December 31, 2021 giving notice to everyone via a massive public service announcement campaign similar to an “amber alert”.

(2) Everyone having private insurance will get to keep their coverage, if so desired, continuing to see their own doctor. Their premiums won’t go up. Nothing will change!!

(3) Companies and corporations offering group plans will continue to do so. This, as well, will NOT change!!

(4) Now, if you’re not covered by an employer and currently don’t have insurance, you will have two (2) options. Option One (1) You can purchase private insurance OR you can go for Option Two (2) Government Coverage.

(5) If you choose Government Coverage, a deduction would be taken out of your paycheck in the same manner as with social security retirement. Now, here’s the good part–Government Coverage would ACTUALLY COST LESS per month than with private insurance, But, if you have a family or want a more traditional health plan with the kind of highly experienced, qualified physicians such plans generally provide better access to or if you are concerned in any way about your health and/or your plan or simply a high wage or income earner, then Option One (1)—the private carrier would probably be the “way to go.”

But, if you’re young or even if you’re not but, nonetheless, in good health and supporting no family or it’s just you and your significant other, you may want to go with Option Two (2), the cheaper government-provided plan. And if or when you do require medical care, the federally funded plan would provide it for you.

(6) OBSERVATION–By the government offering healthcare coverage at slightly LESS but at enough of a discount to make a difference, many (especially those young or older but still in good health or one without having to think about family (wife or husband and kids)) would opt for the cheaper, lesser-priced publicly funded healthcare coverage and the Government will, statistically speaking, have less claims per insured and as a result, more than likely, be able to build up more (or even a surplus of) funds. Which brings us to the next point>

(7) BUT WHAT ABOUT those with pre-existing medical conditions or with spouses or children with pre-existing medical conditions? They would be allowed to purchase government insurance at the same rate they would otherwise pay if they qualified for private coverage. The medically unfortunate including orphans or others without family OR ANYONE who CAN’T ADEQUATELY FEND for themselves (for example–those on Social Security Disability Insurance or people receiving Supplemental Security Income) would be easily covered under this Plan because of all the premiums being collected every month from the many, many healthy taxpayers receiving a paycheck and because of this>

(8) With so many healthy insureds paying into the federal plan creating this projected surplus of funds as discussed and conjectured in (6) and (7), the federal government would be able to build, without any additional tax burden on the taxpayer, Hospitals and Clinics and provide vital medical equipment, scanners, repairs, renovations, education, preventative and nutritional programs even advertising against electronic cigarettes and vaping! This would also include those hospitals and clinics that are now being shut down for lack of critical funding. And

(9) Having this potential, projected surplus and with interest rates currently being so low, the government could “float” bonds for the startup costs of constructing these new hospitals and clinics or for those funds needed to prevent FURTHER SHUTDOWNS OF CRITICAL HEALTHCARE FACILITIES, also the purchasing of vital medical equipment and so on and use this projected Surplus to pay the low annual yields on these newly issued bonds and inevitably would have the money as this Plan develops over the years with its positive cashflow aspect-characteristic to pay back (retire) these same issued bonds as they eventually reach maturity.

(10) Basically, IN REALITY, the Plan would be funded by single, unattached adults or couples without children. Those in good health with incomes ranging from moderate to substantial—incomes at such a level that the monthly premiums charged would hardly be felt. Those with minimum income levels as with the indigent would be excused from paying.

(11) Now, here’s how the Plan would work—Everyone would be given say up to a year say by December 31, 2020/21 to purchase private health insurance or publicly funded healthcare coverage once it became available. If by January 1, 2021/22, one did not have a medical plan, they would be assigned the lower-priced government coverage and just like with social security, as noted, it would be automatically deducted from one’s paycheck. Also, under this Plan, you would receive an actual written Policy from the Government that you could hold in your hand and keep at home with your other valuables. Furthermore, The Government would keep an accounting of what you paid into your Medical Coverage Healthcare Plan Policy just like it does with what you pay into Your Social Security Retirement.

(12) If the paycheck healthcare deduction for those who don’t or can’t obtain private health coverage, affects their ability to provide for their family or themselves including having enough leftover spending money after their cost-of-living expenses have been met to simply enjoy the “fruits” of their labor and with it–life every so often (such as buying clothes and other things for you and your family, going to the movies, out to dinner on occasion and other family outings), then raising the “poverty” level at which a person would be excused from any payroll deduction for healthcare would be (further) raised with a graduated tax scale beginning at the “top portion” of this “poverty” point-basic livability with dignity level (“living wage” standard) until there’s a full deduction for healthcare from one’s paycheck.

(13) If the company that these minimum, low-income wage employees work for doesn’t carry a group health plan, under this publicly-funded Government Plan, it would be required to do so, if it’s profitable enough; that is, meeting certain criteria such as overall sales, net company income, asset-debt ratio, number of employees, the specifics and initial application as to whether it would be a totally employer funded coverage plan or coverage matched (equally or partially) by the employer or a group plan funded only by the company’s employees (but, nevertheless, still qualifying for a discounted “group” rate), all this dependent upon company “profitability” (with any later modifications if necessary or appropriate to arrive at the best equitable apportionment of funding for all) to be determined by study.

(14) In short, only those companies with minimum and/or low-income workers–companies that are profitable (more than just barely making it) but do not provide their workers with healthcare insurance would now be required to do so thereby relieving the Government under this newly proposed publicly funded plan the burden of coverage and shifting (rightfully and equitably) this responsibility to those companies making a Real Profit employing minimum, low wage workers.

(15) To implement this Plan, in addition to the Federal Income Tax Standard Deduction and Personal Exemptions for Oneself and Dependents, another one would be carved out for a Low Income Healthcare Deduction Exemption for those workers making under a certain income (the exact amount to be determined by study.) This Exemption exactly would BE the healthcare deduction that otherwise would be taken out of one’s paycheck as described in (11) but, in this case, would NOT be taken out of those low income wage earners’ paycheck WHEN a LOW-INCOME HEALTHCARE DEDUCTION EXEMPTION WAS CLAIMED AND VERIFIED TO BE VALID but rather would be paid by the employer INSTEAD IF that employer made above a certain Net Business Profit (the exact net amount also to be determined by study.) If the employer did not make a certain level of profit (again to be determined by study to be adequate and substantially enough), the Government would cover the employee as explained in (10) and (12).

(16) One further note, in addition to lower monthly healthcare coverage  premium costs that would be made available through the Government Publicly Funded Plan in contrast the higher-on-average monthly premiums charged for private coverage, those opting for publicly funded Government Healthcare Insurance would end up, in most cases, receiving a higher monthly retirement stipend (for the many years that most would be paying into the Government publicly-funded Healthcare Plan.) Specific increased amounts to be determined by study as the plan grows over time.

(POSSIBLE) CONCLUSION AND OUTCOME

It is predicted by this author that eventually people would start leaving their private coverage (statistically the healthiest first) for the cheaper public government sponsored healthcare insurance. And if enough people left, private insurers to maintain their covered customer-insured base would, to more competitively price their insurance policies, begin lowering their premiums—the basic principle of competition! Chances are this could very well happen since private healthcare insurers are, after all, profit driven and as result have a “built-in” “margin” that they can “draw down from” and still stay in business continuing to offer quality medical care.

When this happens, where premiums begin to “narrow” for private versus public coverage, this is when the two systems could, at some point, be combined (merge) to give a single-payer healthcare coverage for All or, in the alternative, become a finely-tuned, efficient, competitive two prong option “platform” giving the taxpayer-consumer the best price, service and medical attention possible to choose from.

PLAN COMPARISONS TO ELIZABETH WARREN AND BERNIE SANDERS

RE: ELIZABETH WARREN’S PLAN

What Elizabeth Warren wants to do with her Wealth Tax, in essence, is a Redistribution of Wealth taxing Corporations and wealthy individuals to pay for the healthcare and medical needs of others not having any DIRECT relationship to such wealthy entity-individuals. A proposal that raises serious, fundamental Constitutional concerns. Specifically, a Redistribution of Wealth Tax would face issues under the Fifth Amendment-The Due Process and more specifically The Eminent Domain Clause which states “nor shall private property [in this case, income/money] be taken for public use [in this case, taxed], without adequate compensation.”

Under my Plan, only those Corporations and wealthy individuals via any business entity that they may own or have an interest in if not already providing healthcare coverage for its (their) employees would now have to do so if meeting those certain “size/profit”-related criteria such as overall gross sales, business “net” income profit and number of employees as discussed in (13) and (14).

To explain, this author believes that for a tax (or a financial burden-requirement) to be valid (as in this case, a company funded health plan for its employees) there must be a (direct) relationship between the tax (burden) being levied, the “thing” being taxed (or required) and the specific benefit to the taxpayer, it/he/she derives from this tax-onus, in question, as opposed to a Redistribution of Wealth where there is no direct causal (but only a tangential or general conversational, cocktail party) connection or nexus between the tax-burden and the person or entity being taxed (imposed upon.) Here, employers derive an undisputed, measurable benefit from a THEIR employees and as elaborated in (14). Again, only those companies with minimum, low-income workers–companies that are more than minimally profitable but do not provide THEIR low-income workers with healthcare insurance would now be required to do so.

RE: BERNIE SANDERS’ PLAN

Now, under Bernie Sanders’ Plan, anyone making over $29,000 yearly would have to pay an additional 4% per annum in federal income tax. This is somewhat similar to what I am proposing but under my Plan, what a person pays or rather what is deducted from their paycheck would NOT go into a general Tax Revenue Fund to be potentially used for any purpose not related to the individual taxpayer’s medical and healthcare plan funding specifications.

Rather, it would be deducted being paid directly into a specific fund AND NOT A PENNY MORE would be taken out than for an individual’s Healthcare Policy statement needs which, as mentioned, they would receive a written copy of. And again, those paying for private medical healthcare insurance or receiving coverage through their employer would NOT have anything deducted from their paycheck.

Furthermore, there would be a national database housing this information as to whether an individual taxpayer, employee or employer maintained or had private coverage. Because of privacy concerns, only whether there was coverage would be maintained in this national database–NOT what kind of coverage nor the person’s vital statistics nor policy amounts or limits would be recorded.

Under Bernie Sanders, even if you had private coverage, you would still pay this additional 4% tax of your income. And for those with incomes such that their 4% tax would exceed the costs of their actual Government Healthcare Coverage, they would still have to pay this additional 4% on ALL their income above what their (government funded) policy healthcare coverage would cost. Under my Plan, you only pay for your individual policy as previously explained in (4) through (7).

GENERAL ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS

As this Plan develops, statistics would be kept for overall economic activity: GNP, GDP, aggregate consumer spending, production and Unemployment. If because of the deduction being now taken out for publicly funded healthcare begins to negatively impact The Economy, then the Healthcare Deduction Exemption level could be adjusted upwards shifting Employee Healthcare Payment Responsibility to the Employer until Economic Indicator Activity stabilizes.

Similar to a general Federal Income Tax Standard Deduction for all taxpayers being adjusted upwards, this would increase take-home pay (by the subsequent decrease in payroll tax deductions being taken out) in turn increasing consumer spending which would increase production of those goods now being additionally consumed which in turn would prevent further layoffs and increase hiring, reducing any Unemployment attributable to the new payroll healthcare deduction.

If this increase in Healthcare Deduction Exemption levels (or Federal Income Tax Standard Deduction) negatively impacted overall Government Tax Revenues to such an extent that existing Government programs and obligations began to suffer, surplus monies collected from these new healthcare payroll deductions could be (temporarily) borrowed against and used to replace any General Tax Revenue Fund shortages needed for the vital Government programs and obligations affected.

But keep in mind, this healthcare deduction tax would, in its own right, create new jobs in the healthcare industry since with everyone now being covered, this would only promote many to visit their doctor for problems they otherwise would have neglected when without coverage having instead to pay for doctor visits, medical treatment and the like—often waiting “too long” until “the problem” became so great one had to go the emergency room requiring additional medical treatment that could have been avoided by regular checkups.

Finally, these new jobs created in the healthcare industry for doctors, nurses and medical support staff not to mention all the additional patient visits to primary-care physicians generated as a result of this New Universal Healthcare Coverage for ALL Plan being proposed and the subsequent referrals to surgeons and other specialists that would without question arise will further stimulate additional consumer demand and spending at all levels thereby increasing Overall Production and GDP (again) reducing Unemployment and ultimately enhancing diversification of Our Basic Across-The-Board Economic Livelihood-Employment Job Structure.

Share:

Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit

More Posts

ON INFRASTRUCTURE

(1) In our last article on the Warren Wealth Tax and how it could be better and more sensibly applied–We made the following proposition and

Read More »

Have any Comments?

Share:

Share on email
Email
Share on print
Print
Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit

Leave a Reply

More Posts

ON INFRASTRUCTURE

(1) In our last article on the Warren Wealth Tax and how it could be better and more sensibly applied–We made the following proposition and

Read More »