Time for a national lottery that supports U.S. Healthcare

[mojo]

Don't know why the politicians haven't come up with this idea. There are lottery games throughout the U.S. that people purchase tickets for such as Powerball, Megabucks, Megamillions, etc. etc. Why not have a lottery that makes part of the revenue support healthcare for middle class, the poor and uninsured?

[Desire]

That's a great idea mojo .Let's start a campaign by calling our representatives or start a petition. I don't know how to do that but I'd sign it.

[TargeT]

That's a great idea mojo .Let's start a campaign by calling our representatives or start a petition. I don't know how to do that but I'd sign it.

I'd suggest a different path:

Do it with out them (representatives etc, any form of governMENT actually), get the support rolling so it can't be ignored; THEN approach them. Government should be last in considerations of "the people" when trying to accomplish something; to put them first is to rob your self of power and give it to them.

don't let someone else fight your battles, the "victory" will rarely be what you desired.

[mojo]

Let's see what other members share and if the majority agrees perhaps we can start a petition? I recall Bill's recent thread about how our forum gets widely viewed and personally can't see anyone disagreeing with supporting healthcare for the people and just maybe the forum will be the birth of a great move?
6aoTjlvo0js

[Nasu]

It's a good idea. I like Target's idea of doing it ourselves. But as I see it the two big issues are buy in and administration. If I don't buy a ticket am I now not covered? If I only buy a few tickets a year am I now covered? The second aspect is administration, everyone within the program would have to be in the database so as to pay the dr's bills etc, etc. However just being in a database does not ad value to the system. Do we insist that each member buys one ticket a week to build funds? If a member misses their ticket buying by a week or a month, do we exclude their care bills? Just a few thoughts.

Back in the sixties when the US government brought in the SS#'s the Amish community refused to take part. Their argument went something like this - our people will not be ruled over by anyone other than god, we will not accept numbers of the beast in return for medical help. They were granted an exemption on the grounds that they did not use health care without paying for it. So, all these years later, the Amish as a general rule don't need as much healthcare as the rest of the country, very little obesity, very little cancer, no autism, etc, etc. Because of their lifestyle they need less. So how it works is that the girls and women weave blankets, throws, comforters etc and then bring them together to sell. They have large sales of their stuff to the surrounding towns and villages of "English" their word for non Amish. The monies collected goes into an account that is administered by the Amish. When one of them needs to see a Dr the bills are paid strait from that account, often at a discount because they are paying cash.. Simple and elegant.

If a lottery system is going to work, everyone would have to pay in, much like the Amish or the UK's NHS or even current US insurance system. All of these systems start to fail when non paying members of the community claim the care or funds for their health-care, that otherwise would have gone to full paying in members.

It is a good idea...x.... N

[regnak]

Once I win the lotto :o

[Zanshin]

There is a school of thought postulating that the national lottery in Britain was one of the original justifications for monetising the 'faith, energy and spirit of the people' in the commercialised corporate bankruptcy reorganisation.

This along the lines of anyone trying to gain 'something for nothing' (by purchasing a lottery ticket) was consenting under trust law to that 'something' being provided by whatever means necessary.

On the topic of government:

If the people created the government, surely an enlightened bunch of creators could direct their creation to operate strictly as directed as opposed to status quo which appears to be the complete opposite.

[Desire]

OK So lets try for a petition. I think this could be a good test
for what we may be able to accomplish here for this and next, who knows.

[robinr1]

the problem with the op is that the usa economy is a Ponzi scheme that is between 100 and 200 trillion in debt. we have had lotteries that have paid for things of that nature before. that still doesn't change the underlying fact that the

people getting the funds are running what at best can be considered a Ponzi scheme.

[amor]

If a lottery system can work, and that is a big if, then those winnings should be in much smaller amounts than millions in order to encourage greater participation. Also, would someone with knowledge of how the accounting of lotteries works enlighten us? I have had some very disturbing thoughts about how it actually works; I hope that I am wrong.

[TargeT]

Need to pump the breaks a bit here

We need a fully fleshed out thought, Not an idea... this needs to be way more solid to move forward or your idea will easily be comprimised and drift off course.

Start with basics, details

What is being funded, what distribution channels, federal or state, pricing, monetary backing; government buy in or not (matching funds?) lots of details need to be fleshed out.

[Praxis]

How about this: stop selling weapons to every country. Reduce the number of military bases we have in the world. Cease any and all military aid to foreign nations. With this money create a single payer healthcare.

If you have the right to life, you have the right to healthcare(and food, water, and shelter).

Could you imagine: you have the right to breathe, but you must pay me for the air!

[robinr1]

so who will be the person or persons forced to work to provide all these things for free to 7 billion people? maybe reconsider the basic idea of rights?

that said I agree with your first line.




How about this: stop selling weapons to every country. Reduce the number of military bases we have in the world. Cease any and all military aid to foreign nations. With this money create a single payer healthcare.

If you have the right to life, you have the right to healthcare(and food, water, and shelter).

Could you imagine: you have the right to breathe, but you must pay me for the air!

[ceetee9]

Don't know why the politicians haven't come up with this idea. There are lottery games throughout the U.S. that people purchase tickets for such as Powerball, Megabucks, Megamillions, etc. etc. Why not have a lottery that makes part of the revenue support healthcare for middle class, the poor and uninsured?

So we can keep feeding the voracious appetite of the insurance, medical and pharmaceutical industries?

I wonder why "our politicians" haven't proposed a not-for-profit healthcare system or some other type of system that didn't foist most of the costs of that system onto the backs of the middle class and then reward them with double digit increases in costs with less and less coverage year-after-year? Could it be because they've sold their allegiance and souls to these industries and because their healthcare system is separate and far superior to anything Obamacare or its "replacement" may provide?

Does it really make sense to any compassionate and caring human being that the quality of healthcare one receives is directly proportional to how much they can afford? Not in my book!

The control and manipulation by these industries is unprecedented in history. I read an article recently where it said that the cost of a sliver plan (I believe it was called) will cost $296/month in 2017. I had to laugh, but then I saw that the article was written by an insurance company. Naturally, they didn't go into what age the person had to be or what that plan would cover or what its deductible would be, but, hey, those are minor and unimportant details. Right?

Three or four years ago, when I was out of work, I had an insurance agent come to our house to show my wife and I medical plans. The cheapest plan he could come up with for us at that time cost over $800/month and it had a $5000/year deductible and covered a fraction of what the health insurance plan I had when I was working. To get a comparable plan to what I had before it would have cost us over $1830/month. That's about $22,000 a year! Does that seem like a reasonable cost to anyone? And that was when Obamacare was just getting started. The insurance agent then preceded to tell us that several years prior the insurance industry did a study to find what the average American spent on healthcare per year and they discovered that around 80% (I forget the exact percentage) would spend less than $5000 per year. Interestingly, most "affordable" (and I use that term tongue-in-cheek) insurance plans began including a $5000/year deductible. Hmmm, so basically what he was saying was that we would get to pay $800/month for health insurance and we, more than likely, would not reach our $5000 deductible before it started paying much of anything. Gee, sign me up. That sounds great! Not!

I wish working people and, particularly, people approaching retirement, would check into what it would cost them for even minimal health insurance coverage should they lose their job or should their company decide to stop subsidizing most of their health insurance costs—which, by the way, most companies have been moving toward for many years. They are in for a very, very rude awakening.

I am, however, thankful that I've reached the age to qualify for Medicare—well, ok, not that I've reached that age, but that it at least provides some semblance of healthcare coverage at a cost I can semi afford. Of course, it too goes up every year and will slowly, but surely, erode my Social Security income. But, hey, it's better than letting those health insurance companies suck my retirement money dry. ;)

[robinr1]

this is a very informative and factual post. absolutely nothing regarding health insurance reform can happen until the government gets 100 percent out of the game.





Don't know why the politicians haven't come up with this idea. There are lottery games throughout the U.S. that people purchase tickets for such as Powerball, Megabucks, Megamillions, etc. etc. Why not have a lottery that makes part of the revenue support healthcare for middle class, the poor and uninsured?

So we can keep feeding the voracious appetite of the insurance, medical and pharmaceutical industries?

I wonder why "our politicians" haven't proposed a not-for-profit healthcare system or some other type of system that didn't foist most of the costs of that system onto the backs of the middle class and then reward them with double digit increases in costs with less and less coverage year-after-year? Could it be because they've sold their allegiance and souls to these industries and because their healthcare system is separate and far superior to anything Obamacare or its "replacement" may provide?

Does it really make sense to any compassionate and caring human being that the quality of healthcare one receives is directly proportional to how much they can afford? Not in my book!

The control and manipulation by these industries is unprecedented in history. I read an article recently where it said that the cost of a sliver plan (I believe it was called) will cost $296/month in 2017. I had to laugh, but then I saw that the article was written by an insurance company. Naturally, they didn't go into what age the person had to be or what that plan would cover or what its deductible would be, but, hey, those are minor and unimportant details. Right?

Three or four years ago, when I was out of work, I had an insurance agent come to our house to show my wife and I medical plans. The cheapest plan he could come up with for us at that time cost over $800/month and it had a $5000/year deductible and covered a fraction of what the health insurance plan I had when I was working. To get a comparable plan to what I had before it would have cost us over $1830/month. That's about $22,000 a year! Does that seem like a reasonable cost to anyone? And that was when Obamacare was just getting started. The insurance agent then preceded to tell us that several years prior the insurance industry did a study to find what the average American spent on healthcare per year and they discovered that around 80% (I forget the exact percentage) would spend less than $5000 per year. Interestingly, most "affordable" (and I use that term tongue-in-cheek) insurance plans began including a $5000/year deductible. Hmmm, so basically what he was saying was that we would get to pay $800/month for health insurance and we, more than likely, would not reach our $5000 deductible before it started paying much of anything. Gee, sign me up. That sounds great! Not!

I wish working people and, particularly, people approaching retirement, would check into what it would cost them for even minimal health insurance coverage should they lose their job or should their company decide to stop subsidizing most of their health insurance costs—which, by the way, most companies have been moving toward for many years. They are in for a very, very rude awakening.

I am, however, thankful that I've reached the age to qualify for Medicare—well, ok, not that I've reached that age, but that it at least provides some semblance of healthcare coverage at a cost I can semi afford. Of course, it too goes up every year and will slowly, but surely, erode my Social Security income. But, hey, it's better than letting those health insurance companies suck my retirement money dry. ;)