BC MSP rip off

[GordonH]

From a few pages earlier.

A family of 4 at an adjusted net income of $300,000/year pays the same for MSP premiums as a family of 4 making an adjusted net income of $30,000. I don't see why the high earners would be complaining.

So, not only do certain effluent ones want to pay less, they'd like to make sure that those they feel are less qualified/talented/ambitious will most certainly die as early a death as possible.

It's the new version of survival of the fittest, just at monetary level.

Anyone making under "X" amount are far beneath us and should be totally ignored.

[Keith Duhaime]

The idea that a good diet and lots of exercise will guarantee protection from ill health is totally bogus.

I'm old enough to have watched several friends die of diseases that could not possibly be attributed to either poor nutrition OR lack of exercise.

I remember one guy who was an organic health food nut and exercised several times a day for years, who was diagnosed with cancer throughout his body and died a few months later. We were all absolutely stunned that someone who took such good care of himself would die that way; yet he did. And he was only 47.

And last year a good friend of mine, who also exercised several times a day and ate well (she was a dietician) died of colon cancer at the age of 59.

Both of these people would have probably passed Keith's proposed "fitness" test with flying colours, had they taken the test 12 months prior to getting sick. But they got cancer and died anyway.

Blaming victims for their illness is a mugs game. And very insensitive.

You're not making sense. What you are saying is equivalent to saying that a driver who is extremely careful will never have an accident. It's not deterministic. Stochastics are involved - that's why it's 'insurance' and it's as necessary as 'assurance' (eg. driver's ed., make sure your car is in good repair, etc. etc.). Exercise, eating healthy, etc. is assurance. Assurance only mitigates insurance needs, it does not eliminate them. Right now as the article I previously posted pointed out, we could liberate $30+ billion in our national economy if we focussed more on the assurance. Assuming BC is 10% of the population, that is about $3 billion. Last time I looked, in BC we spend about $19 billion/year on healthcare, so we would still be spending about $16 billion after mitigation (ceterus paribus).

As for the guy eating 'organic' food - obviously an idiot who likes to waste money. There's nothing in the literature to suggest it has any value. If anything, as an agrologist and someone whose family is still quite involved in farming, I can attest to the potential negative effects of 'organic' farming on the environment. And don't whine, the idiot had a chance not to sleep through the very basic chemistry provided in high schools (courtesy of our tax dollars).

[Keith Duhaime]

A family of 4 at an adjusted net income of $300,000/year pays the same for MSP premiums as a family of 4 making an adjusted net income of $30,000. I don't see why the high earners would be complaining.

1. Actuarial subsidization, but

2. Why is income even part of this conversation? Have you renewed the policy on your car lately? Was there a line somewhere in a form that asked you how much money you made last year because they were going to adjust your premium based on what you put on that line?

[Keith Duhaime]

*removed*

[kgcayenne]

A family of 4 at an adjusted net income of $300,000/year pays the same for MSP premiums as a family of 4 making an adjusted net income of $30,000. I don't see why the high earners would be complaining.

1. Actuarial subsidization, but

2. Why is income even part of this conversation? Have you renewed the policy on your car lately? Was there a line somewhere in a form that asked you how much money you made last year because they were going to adjust your premium based on what you put on that line?

From way back on the first page:

Meh.

Either through the fees or through income taxes, we're paying for it.

In response:

BUT, if it were through income tax, those that made $300,000 per year (like Christy) would pay more than someone making $30,000. As it is, both pay the same; thus MSP premiums are regressive whereas income tax is progressive. Face it, for someone making $300,000 per year, a monthly payment of $70 and some odd sticks affects them MUCH less than it does someone making $30,000 per year, no?

*removed*

This topic has gone in a couple of directions. As far as being a right vs left issue, anything, and I mean ANY THING, that is even remotely private/corporate versus public/social has been, and always will be, right vs left at some point in the game. There is an interesting history of the Canadian healthcare system that does indeed revolve around right vs left parties arguments.

I can envision what you propose, but I feel it would be a tragic invasion of privacy and completely unenforceable. I would definitely endorse extra taxes for healthcare on things like junk food, anything with fructose additives, refined grains, fast food, alcohol, tobacco products etc.

and get this...

...even entry fees for marathons. Did you read the recent article about healthcare costs surrounding group events? Marathons were in the top most expensive. Imagine THAT. *gasp*

On another note: Ghandi once said that “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members”.

I love, love, LOVE that I measure differently from you. I am so GLAD we oppose views on many levels.

[maryjane48]

*removed*

[kgcayenne]

*removed*

[Jo]

Keep it on topic, people.

On topic

No personal attacks

Yada yada yada

And save the report feature for posts that are actually a problem, don't use it as retaliation for a removed post that you think shouldn't have been removed.

[butcher99]

[

2. Why is income even part of this conversation? Have you renewed the policy on your car lately? Was there a line somewhere in a form that asked you how much money you made last year because they were going to adjust your premium based on what you put on that line?

Why would it be there? You are comparing to two totally disparate things. One is automobile insurance and the other is health care funding.

The debate basically is, should healthcare be totally funded by taxes or be paid for with healthcare premiums. So, that would be why people keep bringing it up.

As has been pointed out before, BC is the only province to not pay for healthcare from taxes or have a graduated scale calculated from income.

As to why it should be based on income, if you make $1,000,000 a year you can afford to pay more. Why should the premiums of someone making $1,000,000 a year (who by the way has never exercised in his/her life) pay the same as a poor single mother making just over the minimum required to have to pay for medical premiums?

[Glacier]

As has been pointed out before, BC is the only province to not pay for healthcare from taxes or have a graduated scale calculated from income.

Well technically BC does pay for healthcare from a graduated (progressive) scale because much of the funding comes from general revenue. the rest comes from MSP, and that's the part that is unfair.

[butcher99]

[
Well technically BC does pay for healthcare from a graduated (progressive) scale because much of the funding comes from general revenue. the rest comes from MSP, and that's the part that is unfair.

Yes, the msp premiums are a minor part of the cost. So there is that.

[Keith Duhaime]

As to why it should be based on income, if you make $1,000,000 a year you can afford to pay more. Why should the premiums of someone making $1,000,000 a year (who by the way has never exercised in his/her life) pay the same as a poor single mother making just over the minimum required to have to pay for medical premiums?

Again you are not making sense. If you have fat pig millionaire that likes to smoke two packs a day, then why wouldn't we want a fair system that charges them an appropriate premium. It's not like they couldn't have known after the 35+ years of Participaction and the US Surgeon General's pronouncement on smoking FIFTY (50)+ years ago now. Someone barely getting by on the otherhand can save dollars simply by making healthy lifestyle choices. And remember, it's not about telling someone how they live their life. Each is free to make choices and choose the stochastically dominant options that achieve their objectives. It's simply about containing the externalities to the respective decision maker. Though Greeks might not be able to, even a simply farm boy like me can figure that out. I'm wondering, if you go to a restaurant and order a steak and lobster with all the trimmings and a bi chunk of cheesecake, do you then also ask the guy next table over who had the salad to cover your bill for you? That's essentially what you are implying. What's next? You going to tell me you're also against smart meters and time-of-use billing?

[Keith Duhaime]

I can envision what you propose, but I feel it would be a tragic invasion of privacy and completely unenforceable. I would definitely endorse extra taxes for healthcare on things like junk food, anything with fructose additives, refined grains, fast food, alcohol, tobacco products etc.

and get this...

...even entry fees for marathons. Did you read the recent article about healthcare costs surrounding group events? Marathons were in the top most expensive. Imagine THAT. *gasp*

On another note: Ghandi once said that “The true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members”.

I love, love, LOVE that I measure differently from you. I am so GLAD we oppose views on many levels.

Privacy issues..simple, making it voluntary. As I stated before, non-participants will hardly notice anything the first few years. MInd you, just like the water pigs that held out on revenue neutral voluntary water metering programs..that second order derivative eventually bites as bifurcation takes place in the population's distribution. But that is fair. People can make choices, decide what they want, and pay their fair share as a result. As for marathons and health care costs, I think I previously addressed this. Intense cardio exercise needs to be balancesd with strength and endurance training. IOW, they need to pump iron too.

Ghandi? Are you for real? Visit the type of developing world slum he was all too familiar with and then come back to Canada and try to explain to us that Canadians are not born with a silver spoon in their mouth. And let's not forget, fair pricing here means a lot more money available to help in the developing world slums that Gandhi was all too familiar with.

[butcher99]

[
Again you are not making sense. If you have fat pig millionaire that likes to smoke two packs a day, then why wouldn't we want a fair system that charges them an appropriate premium. It's not like they couldn't have known after the 35+ years of Participaction and the US Surgeon General's pronouncement on smoking FIFTY (50)+ years ago now. Someone barely getting by on the otherhand can save dollars simply by making healthy lifestyle choices. And remember, it's not about telling someone how they live their life. Each is free to make choices and choose the stochastically dominant options that achieve their objectives. It's simply about containing the externalities to the respective decision maker. Though Greeks might not be able to, even a simply farm boy like me can figure that out. I'm wondering, if you go to a restaurant and order a steak and lobster with all the trimmings and a bi chunk of cheesecake, do you then also ask the guy next table over who had the salad to cover your bill for you? That's essentially what you are implying. What's next? You going to tell me you're also against smart meters and time-of-use billing?

choose the stochastically dominant options that achieve their objectives. containing the externalities to the respective decision maker.

Give it a rest.

You did not however answer the question. You went off on some long winded bloviating tangent.

Here you go. the question you seem to disregard.

As to why it should be based on income, if you make $1,000,000 a year you can afford to pay more. Why should the premiums of someone making $1,000,000 a year (who by the way has never exercised in his/her life) pay the same as a poor single mother making just over the minimum required to have to pay for medical premiums?

[Donald G]

People who consider MSP payments a ripoff should do a survey regarding the medical situation in other countries.

Complaining about the very few dollars more that people who make more pay is IMO akin to arguing about the number of apples in a bin of apples.