That is what the medicare levy is for, it's fair

It is important but realistically some people have to visit a lot more frequently than that, my husband must go weekly for example.

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

My opinion is that EVERYTHING should be means tested.  There are too many wealthy people taking freebies, which means poorer people are hugely disadvantaged.

---

The problem with that is that it would require huge bureaucracy to administer.  Much cheaper to make it universal.  Even the small co-payment will mean extra work at number of stages.  And as said above, some people with many problems will be just going to outpatients instead; so the cost will be shifted. 

It may also mean that people will put off visit to doctor until their condition gets worse, and then may require much more expensive treatment than if they went early.

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

My opinion is that EVERYTHING should be means tested.  There are too many wealthy people taking freebies, which means poorer people are hugely disadvantaged.

---

what do you consider wealthy?

if they are paying medicare should they too not be covered?

it is meant to be free health care for all

Those who can't afford it ie concession card holders, will not be required to pay.

---

@**meep** wrote:

Under the proposal, pensioners and concession card holders would be exempt from the fee, while families would be granted up to 12 bulk-billed visits annually.

 

 

I think that is an important factor to consider when asking what people think.

 

 

 

---

The only problem with that Meep is it still omits struggling singles, couples and parents with children above the child age cut off and leaves them with a heavy biurden too bear. Im sure the "time wasters" are minimal in comparisson to those who will have to pay for legitimate reasons to visit. The most frightening factor is what percentage of people will put off doctors visits

You might have something there polksaladallie, there is a huge amount of welfare given to the middle class, nobody seems to mind that, yet it is being made harder and harder for those in need to access any welfare. Whenever anyone suggests cutting some of the welfare to the middle class, howls of hysteria can be heard.

It was started by Howard and continued since, although I did see that Shorten admitted it wasn't the right thing to throw single parents of the pension when their child/ren reached a certain age (it was young - can't remember exact age), so maybe there is hope yet.

I think 12 free visits per year is reasonable.

---

@*mrgrizz* wrote:

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

My opinion is that EVERYTHING should be means tested.  There are too many wealthy people taking freebies, which means poorer people are hugely disadvantaged.

---

what do you consider wealthy?

if they are paying medicare should they too not be covered?

it is meant to be free health care for all

---

Paying medicare doesn't stop well off people clogging up hospital outpatient and emergency departments when they can afford to go to local clinics and private specialists.  While the emergency department is called thus, it is used for anything from sniffles to the dying.  If a small fee was charged, this might help, but no government will touch it.