They have you dummy it's called Mass health and it's wildly successful.Fixed*
Implement it at the state level first, see how it goes...
Mercatus Study Finds 'Medicare for All' Saves $2 Trillion over 10 years!
- Thread starter FAH1223
- Start date
-
- Tags
- medicare for all
I don’t believe that’s what is being pushed nor that it’s “wildly” successful... but know for certain that California found it could not afford to enact a single payer, though I don’t know the details of the measure they were considering...
I’d like to see each state figure out how to best handle their healthcare situation/cost in the way that best suits them.
It seems like the best compromise between the statist and the muh freedom crowd.
By your own admission, Mass proved it’s doable... and apparently “wildly” successful.
@the name callingafterlife2009
Superstar
free market providing health care
feelosofer
#ninergang
Yea but what about the poor insurance companies?
88m3
Fast Money & Foreign Objects
the dustbins of history are full of oppressive regimes...
Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
"I like fiscal responsibility."
"Okay, Medicare For All saves trillions."
"YEAH BUT 'ALL' INCLUDES PEOPLE WHO AREN'T WHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
This discussion shows how brainwashed those people are
@ineedsleep212 Thom straight fire
Important discussion:
My response in the Sherrod Brown thread on HOW to pay for Medicare For All
We're already spending a lot of government money on healthcare. Nearly 65% of healthcare spending in the USA is by the federal government ($2.2 trillion)! The other 35% is private sector and that's $1.1 trillion on premiums and $350 billion on out of pocket expenses.
Medicare For All should be about consolidating existing federal healthcare spending into one MEDICARE. Then, using rate setting to lower prices by providers and drug companies. Actually the feds can do that RIGHT NOW with regards to prices but no one has the balls or guts.
Jon Walker in the thread I posted, said you can get the money that employers are paying for premiums right now through an employer mandate which would be like how Japan and Germany fund much of their health care system. Other countries began this way and then went to more straight payroll taxing later on. You'd have to repeal the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 because that's what's making talk of such mandates null and why people keep putting up a bigger payroll tax.
Here he outlines this: Best Option For Funding Medicare For All May Be Employer Mandate
Also:
Medicare-for-all is cheaper
In 2016, Canada's single-payer system cost about $4,500 per person. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services say that same year, just directly tax-supported health-care programs — Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs health programs, and the Children's Health Care Program — cost together $1.929 trillion, or $5,972 per person. Add in the cost of the employer-based insurance tax exclusion ($268 billion) and ObamaCare tax subsidies ($48 billion), both figures courtesy of the Congressional Budget Office, and total government spending on health care rises to $2.245 trillion, or $6,950 per person.
So not only does our government health spending easily exceed that of Canada, it's not even close. And that's still leaving some stuff out!
We're already spending a lot of government money on healthcare. Nearly 65% of healthcare spending in the USA is by the federal government ($2.2 trillion)! The other 35% is private sector and that's $1.1 trillion on premiums and $350 billion on out of pocket expenses.
Medicare For All should be about consolidating existing federal healthcare spending into one MEDICARE. Then, using rate setting to lower prices by providers and drug companies. Actually the feds can do that RIGHT NOW with regards to prices but no one has the balls or guts.
Jon Walker in the thread I posted, said you can get the money that employers are paying for premiums right now through an employer mandate which would be like how Japan and Germany fund much of their health care system. Other countries began this way and then went to more straight payroll taxing later on. You'd have to repeal the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 because that's what's making talk of such mandates null and why people keep putting up a bigger payroll tax.
Here he outlines this: Best Option For Funding Medicare For All May Be Employer Mandate
Also:
Medicare-for-all is cheaper
In 2016, Canada's single-payer system cost about $4,500 per person. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services say that same year, just directly tax-supported health-care programs — Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs health programs, and the Children's Health Care Program — cost together $1.929 trillion, or $5,972 per person. Add in the cost of the employer-based insurance tax exclusion ($268 billion) and ObamaCare tax subsidies ($48 billion), both figures courtesy of the Congressional Budget Office, and total government spending on health care rises to $2.245 trillion, or $6,950 per person.
So not only does our government health spending easily exceed that of Canada, it's not even close. And that's still leaving some stuff out!
Is the cost to adopt M4A still ridiculous?
ADevilYouKhow
Rhyme Reason
Medicare for all now!