What do we do about HC for the poor?

[lifeexplorer]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

Young my fanny. By the time my dad was my age, he earned the same non adjusted dollar amount I do, and he was married, had a house and I was 3 years old; and my dad had his college degree in music, so wasn't applicable to the field he was working in at the time

I took classes and switched my profession around 35 and now making triple the money.

My old boss went to school at 60 and he’s now an assistant professor.

[tinytrump]

Originally Posted by skycaller23

Let's see..the poor have medicaid, the old have medicare, the foreigners don't count so that leaves just the Blacks that Trump wants to eliminate via no health insurance.

so short sighted-- get out more my dear- and see the new laws he wants to put in place-- your version would no longer hold true --- at all

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by FirebirdCamaro1220

I don't pay for my health insurance, I get it from my employer

Then what's your excuse for living beyond your means?

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by lvmensch

No...

Yes:

"The increase in federal expenditures would be considerably larger than the increase in national health expenditures because substantial spending borne by states, employers, and households under current law would shift to the federal government under the Sanders [Medicare for All] plan. Federal expenditures in 2017 would increase by $1.9 trillion for acute care for the nonelderly, by $465.9 billion for those otherwise enrolled in Medicare, and by $212.1 billion for long-term services and supports.

In total, federal spending would increase by about $2.5 trillion (257.6 percent) in 2017. Federal expenditures would increase by about $32.0 trillion (232.7 percent) between 2017 and 2026. The increase in federal spending is so large because the federal government would absorb a substantial amount of current spending by state and local governments, employers, and households."

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/...-Care-Plan.pdf

$32 trillion / 10 years = $3.2 trillion/year.

Do you know what INCREASE means?

[lvmensch]

Originally Posted by InformedConsent

Yes:

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/...-Care-Plan.pdf

$32 trillion / 10 years = $3.2 trillion/year.

Do you know what INCREASE means?

Your post continues the nonsense. What you said was...

Originally Posted by InformedConsent
The US citizenry doesn't pay that now. Employers and local and state governments pay most of it. No, the $3.2 trillion/year is IN ADDITION TO what the Fed Gov already spends on Medicare and Medicaid, which is about $1.2 trillion/year. Why so much extra? About 30 million people are currently still uninsured

You are under the impression that the state, local, federal governments and the corporations have a source of income not from the citizenry? You really going to sink to the level of claiming government payments are free money?

You also appear to believe the uninsured have no health care costs. How do you think that works? The do of course have health care costs which they pay or are loaded into the system overhead. One might argue they do not spend enough but that is a different problem.

We are discussing changes in the cost to the USA of all health care. That remains the same or decreases. The Feds obviously go from paying part to paying all the costs. But the costs may actually go down and all are covered.

Your 3.2 trillion number as an additional cost is absolutely absurd. Changing the source of funding is not going to double health care cost. Even a true believer like you should be able to figure out that doubling the cost of health care in a short period is an impossibility.