Would You Support an Increase in The Medicare Levy (for New Services or to Maintain Full Bulk Billing GPs)?

Unorthodox on 04/08/2022 - 12:53
Last edited 04/08/2022 - 13:17 by 1 other user

I think everyone is aware of the discussions on Medicare and free health-care being eroded in Australia.
Examples of some key talking points:

  • GPs that were bulk billing are now moving to full fee or mixed billing.
  • Increased calls for standard dental to be added to Medicare
  • Mental health consults requiring more time and specialists vs GPs
  • Patients going directly to Emergency
  • Health checks declining due to cost of visits being a deterrent
    Etc

Given these and any others you may comment, would you support an increase in the Medicare Levy?
There has been some modelling with specific increase but let's just say it's an increase anywhere from 0.5% to 3%.

Poll options are limited but would also be interested in comments for who would prefer a progressive increase as well etc.

Note: there are debate points on Private Health Insurance subsidies, junk policies and applying the Medicare Levy Surcharge but I'd like to leave that out of the poll.
Please do add comments if you have any thoughts (e.g. paying the surcharge instead of getting a junk policy and preferring an overall increase to the Levy instead of the requirements for PHI).

Poll Options

  • 534
    Yes - to add new services (e.g Dental, dedicated mental health) & maintain full bulk billing at GPs
  • 38
    Yes - to maintain full bulk billing at GPs
  • 6
    Yes - overall increase with no specific focus areas
  • 29
    No - Mixed billing is the way forward
  • 163
    No - Would not want to pay more
Financial Medicare

Comments

    • Fobsessive on 07/08/2022 - 12:47

      Are you on a junk policy now?

      • DeeTrance on 07/08/2022 - 17:59
        +2

        Yep. Purely to avoid the Medicare levy.

        • Fobsessive on 07/08/2022 - 22:01

          Would you mind mentioning which one? I might need to do the same…

          Such a dumb system bc we'd rather pay the $700 to Medicare instead of to a PHI CEO

  • sheebies on 07/08/2022 - 08:50
    -1

    I actually went to a local doctor the other day, the bulk billed practitioner I used to see was booked up for over a month. I was in the office for no more than 10 minutes to get a prescription and I was charged for an “extended consultation fee” which meant I paid $126. After Medicare I was still $70 out of pocket. After looking at their fees even if someone has a concession card they still would be $67 out of pocket

    I have no issue paying this because I have the money to do so, but I worry about vulnerable people who might avoid doctors visits putting a higher strain on emergency facilities or hospitals because they let their illnesses become worse as they can’t afford those kind of fees. I think back to when I was on Centrelink for a short period and there is no way I could have paid $70 for a doctors visit. I just wouldn’t have gone to a doctor at all and waited until I needed a hospital.

    I’d be happy to pay more into Medicare for people to have bulk billed services freely available.

  • Dack Smith on 07/08/2022 - 12:27

    Definitely.

    Everyone uses Medicare, so it’s fair for a big increase.

    Only selfish people with no morals would oppose the move.

    I see the poll, hundreds of selfish swines want to only use not give lol

    • zephyrfox on 08/08/2022 - 11:01

      Might be a different outcome if it was a qualified poll, eg if this wont cost you any more personally then you don't get a vote…

      Love voting with other people's money.

  • georgegeorge31 on 07/08/2022 - 14:25
    -1

    100% yes.
    A small increase per person equals a massive boost to a health system that is severely under-funded and failing.
    I agree that budget allocations are out of whack but that isn't going to change any time soon, and this is a real world solution that would have a real world effect once given the chance to ramp up.

    • xdigger on 09/08/2022 - 10:21

      I didn't downvote you, but curious why you think it can't be changed? As a democracy, if enough of us wants the government to prioritise healthcare over spending hundreds of billions on nuclear submarines the government would listen to us.

  • wallet72 on 07/08/2022 - 14:55

    I don't mind paying something to see a GP. What I have a problem with is paying just because I have to get a referral to see specialist, or a script renewal for something I've been taking all my life and will keep taking. There are things that shouldn't incur a co pay, but there are things that should be paid.
    I have chronic conditions, I already pay enough to keep some form a quality of life, I just get annoyed when things I have to pay for are just arbitrary government rules that have to be followed - you make it mandatory, then make it free.

  • ashspecops on 07/08/2022 - 20:29

    If employers didn't demand Doctor's certificates when employees have entitled sick leave. I'm sure a lot fewer people would go. which should in turn free up some of the pointless spending and pay staff more. not just in doctor's clinics but in all settings. Case in point my wife Is an EN on the highest pay level and it pays $34 an hour.
    I'm an electronic security technician, people coming out of their apprenticeship are being paid $38 an hour plus all penalties and a work vehicle. Healthcare staff are severely underpaid.

    • Guerilla89 on 08/08/2022 - 22:23
      +1

      Couldn't agree more. Sick and annual leave should just be rolled together and paid out whether taken or not, I think then more people would actually use it without the boss making them feel like parasites.

  • FlyingMiffy on 07/08/2022 - 23:03
    +2

    Nope get taxed enough as it is.

  • El-Rhi on 08/08/2022 - 07:07

    I would support cutting the Stage 3 tax cuts in half (so there is still some tax relief, just not as much) and funnelling the savings into Medicare to support preventative dental and more bulk billing

  • kalithreaver on 08/08/2022 - 09:14

    yes, i would rather it increase and they stop trying to force people onto private health.

  • Guerilla89 on 08/08/2022 - 12:08

    If I had to choose between paying an extra 1-5% on tax or a future with a large homeless population simply because they got a large medical bill they couldn't pay, it's not a difficult choice, especially if you are thinking about the future you want your kids to inherit.

    • sardines on 08/08/2022 - 12:49
      +1

      Previously people with tuberculosis were tracked, medicated and isolated in Australia. From what i heard that this tracking is becoming less effective due to budget cuts and stresses in the system..last thing you want as you state homeless or poor population in the community getting sick or spreading deadly airborne disease because they cannot afford hospital care or end up costing more as they end up in hospital. anyone homeless or income under "x" amount should be bulk billed. even "elective" surgury wait lists is (profanity). … we need a radical fix to our two tiered system

  • USER DC on 08/08/2022 - 15:42
    +1

    I would certainly be looking to ditch Part time employment if I have to pay doctor $$ as much as my sick leave worth.

    At that point part time and full time employment will no longer make sense to me. Rather be unemployed on Centrelink or casual instead of paying doctor just for sake of getting my own deserved sick leaves.

    I guess they should really be making a separate system for people to be getting sickness certificates than to be going to GP's.

    • xdigger on 09/08/2022 - 10:19
      -1

      We truly are a lucky country in Australia that Centrelink provides a viable alternative as a good source of income to working a day's job.

      Not many other first-world countries provides the same amount of Centrelink NDIS benefits as we do!

  • Eeples on 11/08/2022 - 15:56

    Include dental (extractions, fillings, and preventative).

    Rotten teeth are bad for individuals and health systems.

  • xdigger on 18/08/2022 - 11:53

    Essentially we need a better allocation of our federal budget for healthcare. Why doesn't ATO with their billion dollars annual budget target mining companies and billionaires like Gina Rinehart to pay their fair share of taxes, instead of coming after the surgeon making $500k a year after ten years of training? What gives Gina Rinehart more right to accumulate billions by digging dirt from our soil, over the surgeon who over the course of their lifetime may accumulate a couple of millions with their surgical expertise?

    Its astonishing how the billionaires through their control of politicians and mass media have twisted the tax debate for us honest taxpayers to fight amongst ourselves. The Australian people should demand accountability to check if ATO execs subsequently cross-over into lucrative mining roles, if RBA execs retire into multi-millions banking advisory roles, and if politicians have a cushy $800k NY/London trade job waiting at the end of their political career? All these calls for a federal Corruption commission, which the liberal party has fought so hard against in their decades long control.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join