Bernie Sanders Releases His Healthcare Plan: Medicare For All--Leaving No One Behind (Iraq, generation)
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.
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.
It's not just insurance companies. It's also hospital corporations that are now a fixture in our healthcare market. In my area, one company controls more than 3/4 of the healthcare market with only one competitor. Most doctors are also affiliated with this company, and all the insurance companies here provide services for this one company. It's tit for tat. Hospital corporations and insurance companies feed off of each other to control access to as many patients as possible. It is difficult for one to exist without the other
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.
And this has what to do with my posting, given this amount is paid ON TOP of Medicare payments etc..
Because Medicare covers the oldest, those age 65 and older. The younger age groups cost proportionately less. In fact, a lot less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beach Sportsfan
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.
This is an extremely important point. Extending Medicare to all will not only get everyone under its umbrella, it will also diversify the risk pool and help solidify its solvency.
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.
That's a marginal tax rate and only the $ over 231k are taxed at that rate.
The current marginal rate is 33%, so a family with a $400k after-tax income would see a tax increase of $6760* under Sanders' plan.
If that family is currently receiving employer-based health care coverage that is taxable, their taxes will possibly decrease.
If they are currently paying for their own health care coverage, the tax increase will be at least partially offset by their savings in premiums, I believe. I haven't yet checked that out.
This is an extremely important point. Extending Medicare to all will not only get everyone under its umbrella, it will also diversify the risk pool and help solidify its solvency.
How so? Medicare recipients paid decades of Medicare tax into the system before they even accessed any benefits. Workers are still paying into Medicare, but how does letting them access benefits sooner solidify its solvency? It's actually just more drain on Medicare's assets.
That's a marginal tax rate and only the $ over 231k are taxed at that rate.
The current marginal rate is 33%, so a family with a $400k after-tax income would see a tax increase of $6760 under Sanders' plan.
If that family is currently receiving employer-based health care coverage that is taxable, their taxes will decrease.
If they are currently paying for their own health care coverage, the tax increase will be at least partially offset by their savings in premiums, I believe. I haven't yet checked that out.
Here's the disconnect in those numbers once again: the payroll tax. It *will* come out of an employee's pocket. Employer-provided healthcare is already considered a part of total employee compensation. That won't change with national healthcare. It will continue to be rolled over into an employee's total compensation package. The experts have weighed in on this. It's no exaggeration. This results in lower wages for new employees, and loss of wage increases for established employees.
Under Bernie's plan, a family making a combined income of 100k a year would pay about $8400.00 in yearly premiums using the 2.2% personal tax and 6.2% payroll tax rolled into their compensation. That's $8400.00 for a plan that they choose zero components of.
A couple making 200k would pay a staggering $16,800.00 per year.
A couple making 400K well ... you get the idea. Then add the additional federal tax on top of THAT.
It's a recipe for financial ruin for the middle class.
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.