Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And about that 6.2% payroll tax. Is anyone naive enough to *really* believe that employers will absorb that? Of course they won't. Employees will. They'll simply roll that tax into total employee compensation. We'll see lower wages as a result. So take your personal 2.2% and add another 6.2% and now you're at an 8.4% tax for lower quality single payer care shared with 300 million people. This is a terrible idea.
Politifact has run the numbers. Note: They used a payroll tax of 6.7% in this report which is higher than Sanders' proposal released last night of 6.2%. The premise however remains the same.
"Employers "pay nothing for insurance in reality," as health care is a fringe benefit of a total compensation package, said Gerard Anderson, a professor of health policy at Johns Hopkins University. So when employers stop providing insurance and are required to pay into single-payer, less money will be available for paychecks".
Unfortunately most Americans don't get it that your employer is not paying your insurance. You are. Be that as it may, that is not an argument against a national health insurance. The issue you bring up could be addressed legislatively, but in reality 6.2% would go over very well with most corporate bean counters. The ones who would get stung would be the small businesses and the Walmarts who don't offer plans to their employees and now would face payroll taxes for them. Too bad. If they can do it in the rest of the world, we can do it here.
Sanders is the future. Of course for the right, they will vote for Medicare for all if you couple it with some Islamophobic or xenophobic legislation. That's Trump's base in a nutshell.
Of course there needs to be a two-proned strategy. First we need a single payer system that will also require one standard form for healthcare processing. Two, use anti-trust legislation to break up healthcare monopolies that exist in EVERY SINGLE healthcare market in the US today. You don't side with one cartel and just get rid of the other while leaving the other intact. You cut both the insurance and hospital corporation cartels down to size
You are correct. Health insurance companies do not have to abide by anti-trust legislation and they absolutely should! One reason they don't have to abide is because of non-profit insurance companies were out performing for-profits and were sued in court and won their case. In order for the for-profits to compete against BLUE CROSS was to allow insurance companies to collude and fix prices.
Medicare was established 50 years ago because private health insurance companies refused to cover those age 65 and over.
It is run quite efficiently at far less cost than private health insurance companies.
No average person that has a serious medical problem could ever hope to save enough to pay the medical bills.
Number people on Medicare is about 56 million
Total federal spending on Medicare is $618 billion
Thats about $11,000 per covered individual, which doesnt even count the patients contribution of up to $411 per month.
Why everyone thinks thats "efficiency" or far less than private health insurance I'll never comprehend.
If the same ratio was used to spend across the 320 million citizens, total expenditures would be about $3.5 TRILLION per year.. PLUS the citizens contribution.
Thats not even CLOSE to "far less"..
Last edited by CaseyB; 01-18-2016 at 10:37 AM..
Reason: language
Unfortunately most Americans don't get it that your employer is not paying your insurance. You are. Be that as it may, that is not an argument against a national health insurance. The issue you bring up could be addressed legislatively, but in reality 6.2% would go over very well with most corporate bean counters. The ones who would get stung would be the small businesses and the Walmarts who don't offer plans to their employees and now would face payroll taxes for them. Too bad. If they can do it in the rest of the world, we can do it here.
But of course it's a valid argument against national care. Why would anyone earning a decent middle class living vote for a plan to further increase their healthcare costs via personal and absorbed payroll taxes in exchange for lower-quality single payer care? Only dreamers and liars believe that the middle class won't suffer from this proposed plan.
I personally support this plan. I'm on Medicare, pay the highest monthly premium and I think it should be made available to all US citizens - at as close as possible to the current income-based premium levels. DH & I have been solidly middle-class all our adult lives. We've not found we get lower quality care on Meidcare than we did with private insurance (BC/BS). We use the same medical providers we always did.
Sanders of course wouldn't be able to pass his plan even if elected.
The real issue is how his proposal will influence taxpaying voters. I'm inclined to believe he'll lose more votes than he'll gain, most people just do not respond positively to promises to raise taxes.
However, I agree with Gringo ^^^^ - it is our future.
Last edited by biscuitmom; 01-18-2016 at 09:08 AM..
Number people on Medicare is about 56 million
Total federal spending on Medicare is $618 billion
Thats about $11,000 per covered individual, which doesnt even count the patients contribution of up to $411 per month.
Why the fk everyone thinks thats "efficiency" or far less than private health insurance I'll never comprehend.
If the same ratio was used to spend across the 320 million citizens, total expenditures would be about $3.5 TRILLION per year.. PLUS the citizens contribution.
Thats not even CLOSE to "far less"..
My wife is on medicare and does not pay anything near 400 bucks, less than half of that amount. As I stated earlier Americans payed nearly $400 billion in meds alone in one year let alone in premium payments, copays, deductibles, and lets not mention denials after paying out the nose for decades.
Number people on Medicare is about 56 million
Total federal spending on Medicare is $618 billion
Thats about $11,000 per covered individual, which doesnt even count the patients contribution of up to $411 per month.
Why the fk everyone thinks thats "efficiency" or far less than private health insurance I'll never comprehend.
If the same ratio was used to spend across the 320 million citizens, total expenditures would be about $3.5 TRILLION per year.. PLUS the citizens contribution.
Thats not even CLOSE to "far less"..
Because Medicare covers the oldest, those age 65 and older. The younger age groups cost proportionately less. In fact, a lot less.
Number people on Medicare is about 56 million
Total federal spending on Medicare is $618 billion
Thats about $11,000 per covered individual, which doesnt even count the patients contribution of up to $411 per month.
Why the fk everyone thinks thats "efficiency" or far less than private health insurance I'll never comprehend.
If the same ratio was used to spend across the 320 million citizens, total expenditures would be about $3.5 TRILLION per year.. PLUS the citizens contribution.
Thats not even CLOSE to "far less"..
And you do realize that those on Medicare would be 65 and older which would be the ones with more costly treatments and chronic diseases which is why private insurers don't want to cover them.
So to say that their cost would be multiplied by the whole population is a wrong assumption.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bernie Sanders Releases His Healthcare Plan: Medicare For All--Leaving No One Behind
