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.
I'd have no problem with everyone paying something into the system if everyone is benefiting.
Not enough. The U.S. would have to switch to a European-style regressive tax system to pay for UHC.
Quote:
"UC Davis's Peter Lindert has argued in his book "Growing Public" that European social democracies were only able to develop the programs they did because they used efficient consumption taxes that didn't lower growth as much as progressive income taxes, particularly those on capital income. European countries needed tax systems that could raise a lot of money without hurting growth, and only regressive consumption taxes fit the bill.
...Prasad and Deng found that when the progressivity of countries' tax codes is negatively correlated with the amount of redistribution they do. In English: The less progressive the code, the more progressive the system.
That would necessarily shift the bulk of the federal tax revenue burden onto lower and middle income earners and away from the higher income earners who pay it now. Would Americans accept that tax shift if that gave them UHC? Let's hold a national referendum vote and find out.
"Many states and the federal government experienced technical problems with the enrollment websites, but implementation of the federalAffordable Care Act has been a relative disaster in Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, Oregon and Vermont."
That would necessarily shift the bulk of the federal tax revenue burden onto lower and middle income earners and away from the higher income earners who pay it now. Would Americans accept that tax shift if that gave them UHC? Let's hold a national referendum vote and find out. :think:
I know. People think single payer, universal health care, whatever you call it is so simple.
The facts are that these health systems are highly regressive. It's a very difficult sell to the general public especially Democratic politicans to their base (lower income earners).
Most people pay what is equivalent to 8% of their income to fund the German single payer system up to around 60-80K (in US dollars). If you earn more than that, you can "opt out" and go to private insurance.
How can Obama or any other Democrat go to their constituents and tell those making 40K a year to pay up. Pay that 8%. (employers pay around 7.5% under the German system).
The reason I use the German system is because Germany, unlike most of Europe is a very hard working country. If they left the EU, the EU would collapse. However, Germany is facing so many raising health care themselves and their health care system consumes close to 12% of their so called magical "GDP" that so many left wing USA proponents of single payer like to quote (USA GDP of health care is around 17%).
The other issue is the size of the USA population. German is 1/4 the size of the USA population at around 80 million. How's China's health system doing? How's Russia's health system? How's India's health system?
USA has around 320 million legal residents and citizens. It's a huge country. If Germany at 80 million plus citizens already has GDP around 12% and trying to cut so many corners what does that tell you about China and India and even Indonesia (which has around 200 plus million residents?).
I know. People think single payer, universal health care, whatever you call it is so simple.
The facts are that these health systems are highly regressive. It's a very difficult sell to the general public especially Democratic politicans to their base (lower income earners).
Most people pay what is equivalent to 8% of their income to fund the German single payer system up to around 60-80K (in US dollars). If you earn more than that, you can "opt out" and go to private insurance.
How can Obama or any other Democrat go to their constituents and tell those making 40K a year to pay up. Pay that 8%. (employers pay around 7.5% under the German system).
The reason I use the German system is because Germany, unlike most of Europe is a very hard working country. If they left the EU, the EU would collapse. However, Germany is facing so many raising health care themselves and their health care system consumes close to 12% of their so called magical "GDP" that so many left wing USA proponents of single payer like to quote (USA GDP of health care is around 17%).
The other issue is the size of the USA population. German is 1/4 the size of the USA population at around 80 million. How's China's health system doing? How's Russia's health system? How's India's health system?
USA has around 320 million legal residents and citizens. It's a huge country. If Germany at 80 million plus citizens already has GDP around 12% and trying to cut so many corners what does that tell you about China and India and even Indonesia (which has around 200 plus million residents?).
Just off the top, how much health care would $100 billion dollars cover?
Medicare yearly cost run around 700 billion (as of 2013). The chart clearly say 36 billion in medicare fraud. So that makes it what? 5%.
I've read the studies on medicare fraud since I am in medicine. It was 10% fraud. Now it's down to 3%.
The point is even if you cut down the fraud to 0 which is impossible, you aren't going to come up with enough money.
Right now the ACA is budgeted for 1.3 trillion over 9 years. That's over 100 billion a year just to "help" 10 million people with subsidies or medicaid expansion.
You still leave 30 million plus uninsured.
You are going to have to come up with a lot more than 100 billion per year to run the health system to cover all the expenses for those who can't afford it.
We've had debates about preventing welfare fraud, all types of fraud. The way the government works, it will cost even more money to hire more people to go after the fraud.
Remember the ACA is budgeting over 10 billion dollars each year just for IRS agents to audit people who don't have health insurance.
How many agents do you have to hire to cut down on earn income tax fraud/unemployement fraud etc.
So go ahead cut fraud down to zero. But you end up spending another 40-50 billion on administrative cost each year fighting fraud.
Medicare yearly cost run around 700 billion (as of 2013). The chart clearly say 36 billion in medicare fraud. So that makes it what? 5%.
I've read the studies on medicare fraud since I am in medicine. It was 10% fraud. Now it's down to 3%.
The point is even if you cut down the fraud to 0 which is impossible, you aren't going to come up with enough money.
The point is when numbers are thrown around as to what it will cost us it always starts where we are at today. It doesn't take into account what we could do to bring those costs down.
Paying off $6,000 in deductible debt is much easier than paying several hundred every month for premiums, and a much better option than going $1,000,000 in the hole for major procedures.
Right, because everyone is sitting on $6,000 in cash.
Oh, I forgot.....VISA...it's everywhere you want to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon
Take your pick, we either make everyone pay into the system somehow, or we raise taxes and go single payer. Or we go back to letting the working poor go bankrupt from medical bills.
A reasoner who unfairly presents too few choices and then implies that a choice must be made among this short menu of choices is using the false dilemma fallacy, as does the person who accepts this faulty reasoning.
There are other options....such as the Free Market.
The fact that you refuse to acknowledge the existence or are incapable of comprehending other options does not mean they do not exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Mon
And what's the deal with the "ramming down our throats" idiom from the far right. Just because something you don't like happens doesn't mean it's being rammed down your throat against your will.
You are ramming it.
I believe it's called "Tyranny of the Stupid."
In order to prove that you are not ramming it, then you must provide a Free Market option.
You do believe in Freedom of Choice, do you not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper in Dallas
They better have an alternative before killing it off, and going back to the old failure of a system is not gonna fly.
They do...it's called the Free Market, look into it.
That alternative also works best with the US Constitution.
You do know what the US Constitution is, don't you?
Do you understand the difference between intra-State Commerce and Interstate Commerce?
If you don't, you know, understand, you can read the Supreme Court's ruling in Sebelius.
Let me explain how logic works.........
1] Healthcare is intra-State Commerce;
2] Healthcare is not Interstate Commerce;
3] US Supreme Court says Healthcare is intra-State Commerce;
4] US Supreme Court says Healthcare is not Interstate Commerce;
5] Therefore: Congress has no power and no authority.
Do you need dictionary links to understand the meaning of "no power" and "no authority"?
I'll be happy to provide such links, you just have to be smart enough to ask for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow
I found it highly amusing, to be honest. The poster calls all Republicans liars, proceeds to post an absolute lie, and then supplies evidence that shows the Republicans were not lying.
I like it. They remind me of Gomer Pyle, only dumber.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale
How much credibility does obama's law professor have?
ZERO.
Grading...
Mircea
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.
