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 always hear people say they don't want single-payer healthcare because their taxes would go up. Does anyone have any stats on how much they would go up?
I always try to analyze any "deal" in the context of the alternatives. Right now, most of us are paying well in excess of $10k/year for our premiums. Even those of us who get it from work, the premium is subsidized by your employer, and that is money that would be available for salary, so you have to look at contributions of the employee and employer. Some are closer to $20k in premiums for a decent plan.
Then, if someone gets sick at all, you are looking at thousands per year more in copays, deductables, and other out of pocket expenses. My GF had one trip to the Emergency Room because her doctor told her she was having Pancreitis. It turned out to be a mild ulcer, and with good insurance, it is costing her $2800 (and rising), not to include the follow-up visit to the specialist.
So, I guess my question is: How much would taxes have to increase to afford single-payer (SP)? I read one study that was very ANTI-SP, and they said California was considering doing it at the state level, and it would cause a 4% increase in taxes. They felt that was pretty awful! As I look at today's reality, 4% of my total take-home salary would be a huge savings, even if I never used it.
Also, with insurance companies being so bad about denying coverage on everything ("death-squads"), and mandating which doctor you can, or cannot see. With them being so non-transparent with billing, and with them creating a bureaucracy where you get multiple bills from one visit (GF got 4 or five so far from the above example, may not be done yet), I would have to invoke President Trump's famous question he posed to "the blacks". What have we got to loose?
I obviously have a bias to what I think is the best solution. I'm not trying to veil or hide that. I would appreciate some intelligent responses either for or against single-payer systems AND other options. It would be nice if people stuck to ideas or facts, and left the name-calling and the alarmism on the sideline.
I would love to see numbers for the cost of coverage with say 3000 indiv/ 6000 family deductibles with some preventative front end money. IE bankruptcy protection insurance. Not see the doctor for the sniffles coverage.
To save time, I'm cutting and pasting from another thread.
Studies have shown that a basic 10 percent national sales tax is more than enough to pay for national healthcare. Everyone who buys anything from a 10 year old buying a toy, to a wealthy person buying a yacht is contributing. The money virtually pours in every day. Even the poor contribute when they buy a t-shirt or an inexpensive pair of shoes. Those who are in this country illegally are also forced to contribute using this method. The wealthy buy more goods and higher priced goods so they ultimately pay more.
Then take into account the middle class would no longer be paying insurance premiums with high deductibles. Money is not taken out of anyones paycheck or property taxes. They actually end up paying less with a sales tax. It's a win, win.
Exactly, OP. I would rather have the money I shell out every month for premiums go to support a single payer healthcare system than enriching some fat, greedy insurance company. What value does a health insurance company add? They add nothing. They only stand between us and our doctors and take, take, take.
We don't need a middleman siphoning off money and providing nothing of value in return. This money grab at the expense of the American people's health has gone on long enough.
I always hear people say they don't want single-payer healthcare because their taxes would go up. Does anyone have any stats on how much they would go up?
I always try to analyze any "deal" in the context of the alternatives. Right now, most of us are paying well in excess of $10k/year for our premiums. Even those of us who get it from work, the premium is subsidized by your employer, and that is money that would be available for salary, so you have to look at contributions of the employee and employer. Some are closer to $20k in premiums for a decent plan.
Then, if someone gets sick at all, you are looking at thousands per year more in copays, deductables, and other out of pocket expenses. My GF had one trip to the Emergency Room because her doctor told her she was having Pancreitis. It turned out to be a mild ulcer, and with good insurance, it is costing her $2800 (and rising), not to include the follow-up visit to the specialist.
So, I guess my question is: How much would taxes have to increase to afford single-payer (SP)? I read one study that was very ANTI-SP, and they said California was considering doing it at the state level, and it would cause a 4% increase in taxes. They felt that was pretty awful! As I look at today's reality, 4% of my total take-home salary would be a huge savings, even if I never used it.
Also, with insurance companies being so bad about denying coverage on everything ("death-squads"), and mandating which doctor you can, or cannot see. With them being so non-transparent with billing, and with them creating a bureaucracy where you get multiple bills from one visit (GF got 4 or five so far from the above example, may not be done yet), I would have to invoke President Trump's famous question he posed to "the blacks". What have we got to loose?
I obviously have a bias to what I think is the best solution. I'm not trying to veil or hide that. I would appreciate some intelligent responses either for or against single-payer systems AND other options. It would be nice if people stuck to ideas or facts, and left the name-calling and the alarmism on the sideline.
That's very difficult to estimate since this is very complex to be honest. One one side, you want to craft a plan that is relatively low up front cost but insurance will cover more expensive medical care. On the other hand, you need to regulate and tax both individuals and employers to fund it.
Since most people get their insurance through their employers right now as it is, a proportion needs to be determined how much should be shared between the employee and employer. Like FICA is 7% split. Healthcare should fall heavier on the employer than the employee (to essentially tax large profitable corporations). A reasonable approach would be a progressive healthcare tax on employees and employers at the ratio of 25%/75% (employee pays 25% of the cost, rest employer pays), and the rate of taxation goes up as the corporation is worth more money. So small businesses won't be killed off and big corporations will be taxed more heavily the more money they make.
Then you need to consider the different conditions for various state tax laws and how will this law supersede it or not. Another point to consider is family situations. How will healthcare be handled for singles, families, head of household, people who've lose their job, etc...
Other issues that needs to be considered is, how will the government contract with hospitals and doctors. A reasonable argument would be, the government will only include medical facilities that are non-profit. Then regulate Pharma so that they stop ripping everyone off.
It's complicated but one thing is for sure, we wouldn't need as much taxation as you'd think, since right now medicare and medicaid already exists to cover the elderly and poor, we just need to close the gap on the middle class.
Another thing is for sure, if Democrats gain power again like 2008. I can guarantee you, this single payer bill will take the full 2-years to draft, legislate, research, and pass. It'll be another several thousand pages of legislation, guaranteed.
Bernie Sanders was pushing for single payer and he had a proposal for how it would work, including taxes. In his plan taxes for middle class Americans would go up 2.2%, so about $1100 for someone with a $50k of income. I believe you would also pay the Medicare premium, which is about $100/month. Total cost to that family = $2300/year. Compare that to the current average cost of $5000/year for insurance. So your taxes go up but your premiums go way down and all in all, you pay less.
Under Bernie's plan, rich people (income over $250k) would pay a larger share.
I always hear people say they don't want single-payer healthcare because their taxes would go up. Does anyone have any stats on how much they would go up?
I always try to analyze any "deal" in the context of the alternatives. Right now, most of us are paying well in excess of $10k/year for our premiums. Even those of us who get it from work, the premium is subsidized by your employer, and that is money that would be available for salary, so you have to look at contributions of the employee and employer. Some are closer to $20k in premiums for a decent plan.
Then, if someone gets sick at all, you are looking at thousands per year more in copays, deductables, and other out of pocket expenses. My GF had one trip to the Emergency Room because her doctor told her she was having Pancreitis. It turned out to be a mild ulcer, and with good insurance, it is costing her $2800 (and rising), not to include the follow-up visit to the specialist.
So, I guess my question is: How much would taxes have to increase to afford single-payer (SP)? I read one study that was very ANTI-SP, and they said California was considering doing it at the state level, and it would cause a 4% increase in taxes. They felt that was pretty awful! As I look at today's reality, 4% of my total take-home salary would be a huge savings, even if I never used it.
Also, with insurance companies being so bad about denying coverage on everything ("death-squads"), and mandating which doctor you can, or cannot see. With them being so non-transparent with billing, and with them creating a bureaucracy where you get multiple bills from one visit (GF got 4 or five so far from the above example, may not be done yet), I would have to invoke President Trump's famous question he posed to "the blacks". What have we got to loose?
I obviously have a bias to what I think is the best solution. I'm not trying to veil or hide that. I would appreciate some intelligent responses either for or against single-payer systems AND other options. It would be nice if people stuck to ideas or facts, and left the name-calling and the alarmism on the sideline.
Your taxes would have to go up by the amount of your yearly premiums. If you pay $20K in premiums, then that is how much your taxes would have to increase at a minimum. Because it is now government, you can multiply that by 1.5.
Your taxes would have to go up by the amount of your yearly premiums. If you pay $20K in premiums, then that is how much your taxes would have to increase at a minimum. Because it is now government, you can multiply that by 1.5.
Because Wall Street isn't adding a premium now? So if in the end I pay exactly what I pay now but everyone is covered, I see that as a positive. No?
To save time, I'm cutting and pasting from another thread.
Studies have shown that a basic 10 percent national sales tax is more than enough to pay for national healthcare. Everyone who buys anything from a 10 year old buying a toy, to a wealthy person buying a yacht is contributing. The money virtually pours in every day. Even the poor contribute when they buy a t-shirt or an inexpensive pair of shoes. Those who are in this country illegally are also forced to contribute using this method. The wealthy buy more goods and higher priced goods so they ultimately pay more.
Then take into account the middle class would no longer be paying insurance premiums with high deductibles. Money is not taken out of anyones paycheck or property taxes. They actually end up paying less with a sales tax. It's a win, win.
The problem with the 10% sales tax is that while the wealthy may buy more toys, they generally have tax avoidance schemes for those larger purchases.
A 10% tax on purchases means 10% inflation of prices across the board. Not sure whether this would be good news.
But it would be good news if everyone had health insurance coverage.
Friends who work in Urgent Cares report that Medicaid patients come in constantly, wanting Z-Packs for viruses, excuses for missing school, and other such pointlessness.
I would say a $10 co-pay for a doctor visit would cut that down. Those who can't afford $10 could be eligible for vouchers that would cover a certain number of co-pays per year.
The billions that insurance companies pull out of the medical care industry is simply no longer affordable.
Because Wall Street isn't adding a premium now? So if in the end I pay exactly what I pay now but everyone is covered, I see that as a positive. No?
I think it's a positive.
Aside from the humanitarian aspect, who wants to be served food by someone with untreated diseases?
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.
