What do you think about Bush's health care plan?

As far as I can see, it only helps wealthy and upper middle class families, it does nothing to help the people who need it most, the working poor and families making less than $60,000 a year who do not have insurance through their employers.

I forgot to add, people with pre-existing conditions who cannot get insurance because of it.

Again the Average person left in the dust to support the wealthy. Please go to NUMBERSUSA.com and alipac.com, Check out the Discussion Groups!

Well, I make less than 60k a year, and I don't have a problem affording insurance for me and my son. I'm a single parent unit.

It's a matter of managing your money so that you CAN have healthcare. Bush is making people work for their money and healthcare. God forbid.

Though an adamant Bush supporter, I cannot agree with him on this one! Perhaps when I hear even more details on the plan I'll reconsider my stance but currently, based on what I've heard, I don't support it. (And I do work for my money & healthcare!)

I think this is a fabulous idea... it gives a tax break to the middle-class and they really need a break for once. It isn't just for wealthy and upper middle class families, it is for any family that is already insured. I know we could really do with that $15000 deduction.

It also allows for people without insurance to GET insurance. Isn't that a good thing for the poor?

I would also like to see HSAs be allowed to roll over so you can actually KEEP your money that you put in and have a great vehicle for saving for a serious health emergency.

I think it could help some people... that almost had enough for health care, but not quite...

but there are still people out there that basically don't pay taxes because they are so poor... and a tax cut doesn't really help them, if they couldn't afford it in the first place...

so... I think it's better than nothing... but overall, doesn't help that much...

EDIT: am I the only one that sees a difference between health care and pizza? people die in the dealings of one every day... the other has 3 for 5 deals?
if you only want to look at it as a business... then at some point, business realizes that it's not "cost effective" to save everyone... and people die because it's not cost effective... profit over life...it's a very dangerous idea if you ask me...

It is a step in the right direction as total universal healthcare will cost anywhere from 1.5 - 20 Trillion a year if we do nothing, although it shouldn't be a political issue.

Health care is a business like pizza is a business. If you don't think we need tax funded pizza, then I don't think you can HONESTLY rationalize tax funded healthcare. Not in a capitalist society.

Note: If you get all worked up over my answer then get a hold of yourself. I said rationalize.

Maybe you didn't listen to the same speech I did. The plan would be great for all, bur I don't know how we would pay for it.

It just lowers the quality of health care even more for Americans, and raises the bar for the drug companies to rape Americans for medications. The average income in my State is 24,000, and that leaves the whole State out of the picture doesn't it.

How do you figure ??With this proposal individuals would deduct $7,500 and families $15,000 from their taxable income if they purchased health care insurance directly or received it through their employers; and it will help states make affordable private health insurance available to their citizens.Tax breaks would be used to make it easier for people who do not have employer-provided health insurance to buy coverage on their own.a family buying insurance on its own could take a $15,000 deduction 鈥?even if the insurance cost less. Which would force Insurance companies to compete for the lowest prices and best coverage..Don't forget tax-free health-savings accounts .
One thing people need to remember is those who are poverty level or below receive free health care through their Departments of Public Health and any proposal besides Government controlled Health Care would be too much.. And do we really want the Government deciding our health needs? I think that is between me and my physician not my government...Because that is what the Democrats are proposing...
At least be honest, 80% of Americans will fall under the $15,000. so will Not pay taxes on this money The other 20% are the Happy few who can afford those "gold ticket" policies people are talking about.. So NO it will not only benefit higher middle class and rich in fact those are the ones that will be taxed.....

Unfortunately, no, I think this plan is an extremely bad idea, at least if you have any expectation of it actually helping people. The main idea behind this plan is similar to the Medicare Part D fiasco: it is made to bankrupt the government. Why? So that they can finally achieve their primary objective of getting rid of the New Deal -- if the country simply can't afford to keep Medicare, Social Security, etc going, then it will have to drop those programs or default on its debts.

Think about it: if nearly everyone is deducting $10K of medical insurance premiums per year, tax receipts are going to drop off drastically, pushing our government further into the red.

Keep in mind that an artificial price control (which really isn't one) of $15K/year will do nothing to stem the costs of health care: the excess will simply be passed onto all of us in the form of higher co-pays, deductibles -- and worse -- denied claims. Once again, we will see rationed health care: those who can pay for it, will receive it. Those who can't -- die.

Currently 53% of all bankruptcies are due to medical bills. More than half of those are people WITH health insurance. Simply mandating health insurance or rebating portions of the premiums will not solve the problem of rising costs and coverage gaps.

If we want to solve the problem, we need to look at the systems that EVERY OTHER developed nation in the world have implemented EXCEPT for the United States. The best system of all is to leave the doctors, hospitals, clinics, etc alone. Instead, we create a single insurance company that We The People own. If you don't like that idea, I submit to you that we are paying twice the price per person for health care as the next expensive system, yet we are behind South American countries for quality of service, and near dead last of developed nations for actual life expectancies and health birth rates -- something we should be SECOND TO NONE at. If our health care system is so great as it is, why are we so far behind socialized medicine countries?

We need to examine what we really want out of medicine in this country. 25-50 cents of every dollar we spend on insurance is going to paperwork, jet planes, big buildings, huge golden parachutes for CEOs (in the BILLIONS -- money that should be saving lives instead)... can we morally justify this waste and expense when 47-50 million people won't be able to afford to get medical care this year?

On the other hand, if we implemented a Single Payer system in America, all we would have to spend to fund it is a 5% tax on our paychecks. Keep in mind, the Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance premium deductions would go away forever -- so more than likely you would actually come home with MORE money after the switch. Plus your employer isn't spending $1,000 a month on private insurance for you, so they can afford to pay you more money. It's a win/win situation all around, except for the health insurance companies. But then again, with 1.7 BILLION dollar salaries, do their CEOs really need more money?

--

Edit: I would challenge the conservative argument: "Do you really want the government deciding what should be between you and your doctor?" with this question: "Which is better: an entity controlled by We The People with our money and votes deciding to approve or deny claims, or an entity which is motivated purely by squeezing out maximum profits and minimizing services making the decision as to paying claims?"