Bernie Sanders Proposes MEDICARE-FOR-ALL. Democrats Want This To Be Their Primary Message.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: DanDanDat

What he meant, I think, is that people won't be paying insurance companies for their medical coverage. Sort of nit picky to concentrate on "writing a check."


The "offset" would depend on how much the medicare tax is raised. But, if the plan is the same as the one he offered previously, it's highly likely to result in a large increase in the budget deficit (without other revenue enhancements).

Maybe it's nitpicking ... but I don't think so. I think Sanders may be conflating to sepreat issues.

The issue facing a small group of Americans who actually do pay checks out to insurance companies through the ACA; which is on the verge of collapse.

And the greater issue we are all facing with the ever increasing costs of healthcare.

I'm worried after hearing his speech that he doesn't fully understand the second issue and thinks the first one is the only one that really matters. That's why he spoke about writing checks.

But you could be right; he may have just misspoken. But I have to believe he and his team went over that speech with a fine tooth come. It wasn't off the cuff and it was very important to him personally and his party.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals

originally posted by: Phage
Seems to work for the rest of the civilized world.

But we're 'Mericans, so it can't.

The rest of the civilized world works very hard for it.
'Mericans won't take well to paying European-level taxes.

We literally pay a larger percentage of our GDP for private health insurance than countries do with universal coverage single payer.

a reply to: WhateverYouSay

And the costs of the care are higher too, I believe.

Health care is a many headed beast. It's complicated. Not many people know that.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Asktheanimals

'Mericans don't seem to care much about anyone but themselves.

Raise my medicare deduction a bit. I'm all for it. Want better coverage, you're free to buy insurance at whatever price you wish. As you, as a medicare recipient, can do now.

Once they raise my deduction to pay for the Medicare I may not want or be able to use to pay for what *you* want and a bunch of other people think they want, I may not have the money left over to pay for what I actually need.

That's the evil of socialism.

A bunch of other people decide they can make do with the one size fits all shirt, and they split the cost out so that everyone pays for it so they don't have to pay all that much for it.

But if you happen to be one of those people who can't wear the one size fits all for whatever reason, you still have to pay for your share of a shirt you neither want or can use and then you have to fork over full price for the shirts you can wear on top of it making your own shirts that much more expensive.

Collectivize enough and the empty platitudes of "It's not that much more and you can always buy what you want" start to ring false because what's left over after you pay your mandated share of all the collectivized things you don't want and can't use doesn't leave enough to even begin to cover the things you actually do want and need.

So go find your like-minded collective compatriots, but leave me out.

a reply to: ketsuko

Sure. Live isolated from society. After all, what did it ever do for you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ketsuko

Sure. Live isolated from society. After all, what did it ever do for you?

Exactly.

People complain about living in a civilized society and it's cost, yet they don't seem to be very eager to walk away from it.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: WhateverYouSay

And the costs of the care are higher too, I believe.

Health care is a many headed beast. It's complicated. Not many people know that.

Yeah. A lot of hospitals pay their doctors a percentage of the tests that they perform. So there is a lot of unnecessary work being performed that inflates the salary of doctors. Some hospitals operate on a standard salary irrespective of the income generated by each individual doctor, presumably we would have to move to this method in order to bring down costs.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ketsuko

Sure. Live isolated from society. After all, what did it ever do for you?

Then explain to me what you will do for the ones who won't be able to use the new system you force them to pay for but won't have enough left over to pay for something that will meet their needs, and don't pretend they don't exist because they will.

Or are they an acceptable sacrifice to you, and if so, than what makes your plan any better than any other system we;ve had except that you are getting what *you* want and damn anyone else? Which, of course, would make you a hypocrite.

a reply to: ketsuko

Then explain to me what you will do for the ones who won't be able to use the new system you force them to pay for but won't have enough left over to pay for something that will meet their needs, and don't pretend they don't exist because they will.

Sure. As soon as I can figure out what the hell that amazingly runon sentence means.

Be patient. It might take a while.

originally posted by: WhateverYouSay

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: WhateverYouSay

And the costs of the care are higher too, I believe.

Health care is a many headed beast. It's complicated. Not many people know that.

Yeah. A lot of hospitals pay their doctors a percentage of the tests that they perform. So there is a lot of unnecessary work being performed that inflates the salary of doctors. Some hospitals operate on a standard salary irrespective of the income generated by each individual doctor, presumably we would have to move to this method in order to bring down costs.

A HUGE roadblock to Bernie's Medicare-For-All would be the large reduction in pay to doctors and hospitals. From the looks of this chart, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... it's 30%-40% less pay.

In a 2016 poll, 90% of doctors are against Medicare-for-All. It's no wonder.

a reply to: carewemust

So, all they have to do is reduce the cost of medical school.

It's so easy. Really easy.

No, wait. It's complicated. Who knew?

a reply to: Phage


With anything related to medicine, It's a never ending greed train. Give us more. We want more. No cuts or sacrifices, damit. GIVE US MORE!

DEMAND activates supplier greed, which drives up prices so precipitously.

Funeral and burial (or cremation) expenses are following suit.

a reply to: carewemust

I don't know about the greed part. On the part of the techs, and doctors and stuff.
My oncologist and the team that saved my life worked really hard to do so, and they care about what they do. I got to know them, and they me.

Saving lives isn't cheap and I don't begrudge them a penny.

Waste, abuse, and fraud at the rate of 140-billion a year.

Make it medicare for all and it likely would reach 1 trillion a year. I for one do not believe the Democrats can stop the Waste, abuse, and fraud.
That is 12% of medicare being paid out for Waste, abuse, and fraud and during the Obama administration nothing was done to stop the bleeding of taxpayer money.

the more money medicare has out there the more criminals will try to get it.

a reply to: carewemust

I would be surprised if it would be that much of a reduction, also having public care does not necessarily outlaw private care.
Regardless, if there were some sort of dry land country they could run to that would continue to pay them what they want perhaps we'd have a legitimate fear, as it stands we're that last bit of dry land in the developed world as the waters of universal payer creep in on them. They've got nowhere to go.

a reply to: Phage

But you know full well, because you are a smart man, that most of what you may have paid for your treatment, if you paid yourself that is, will have gone to people who had nothing to do with saving your life, and moreover, some people whose job it is to ask the question "If saving this life does not make us any money, should we even be doing it?".

Are you comfortable with that?

Are you comfortable with the notion that because of your illness, the payments made to the people who treated it, and millions of people who have had treatment and paid for it, or had insurance to cover it, that people who not only have nothing to do with medicine, but also have nothing remotely decent to add to the discussion on medicine (lawyers, insurance salespersons, the owners of the firms of both), made more money from you than either the doctors, the lab techs, the nurses or any two or three of them combined?

No worries, cheeto king has already vowed to veto it. Carry on, this is what we get.

Also, #hint

It's not Obama's fault.

This week, Congress is trying to REPEAL, FIX, and TRANSFORM ObamaCare at The Same Time!

Excerpts from: dailycaller.com...

Republicans in the House and Senate are torn over what to do about Obamacare, simultaneously putting forth plans to repeal/replace.. and another to patch up the hallmark health care legislation.

The two main Republican proposals floating around Capitol Hill that are catching attention include: a bill to repeal large portions of Obamacare (known as the Graham-Cassidy bill) and a bipartisan piece of legislation to shore up insurance markets and patch up Obamacare (chaired by Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Patty Murray of Washington).

While Republicans mull over these proposals, nearly a dozen Senate Democrats are rallying behind legislation that aims to expand Medicare and create a single-payer health care system in America. The bill is known as “Medicare-For-All,” and is championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

Since ObamaCare is in "crash and burn" mode, which of the above 3 proposals is most likely to become law? Something has to be done before 2018, or another million or so Americans will be left without health insurance.

-cwm

a reply to: TrueBrit

You mean there is an economic chain? Middlemen? Like for food and stuff? I'm gobsmacked. I never considered that.