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.
The Urban Institute (lefty think tank) pegs the cost of Bernie Sanders' proposed 'Medicare for All' plan cost at $32 trillion for 10 years. That's $3.2 trillion/year. Since people would no longer be funding their own private insurance premiums, co-pays, and deductibles out of their own pockets, and that money would no longer be going to fund US's current annual $3.2 trillion in health care costs, where would the $3.2 trillion/year to fund 'Medicare for All' come from?
Private insurance and individuals' out of pocket spending on health care totals a little over $1.4 trillion/year. When that funding source is ended by single-payer 'Medicare for All,' where does the funding to pay that $1.4 trillion worth of health care come from?
Everyone opposed Medicare when LBJ was president. He rammed it through anyway, and now the GOP base are totally in love with Medicare that they'll fight you tooth and nail to keep it.
Why would they after paying tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even $1+ million of dollars in Medicare tax over a span of 35-40 years? And that doesn't even include what the compounded interest/return on that would be had that money been invested, instead.
How does the cost of that tax get so high?
Example: a self-employed individual (business owner, 1099 contractor, etc.) pays the full 2.9% Medicare tax, which has no cap.
Such an individual with a career average annual income of $1,000,000 (not unusual for a business owner) pays Medicare tax for 35 years.
$1,000,000 ☓ 2.9% ☓ 35 = $1,015,000
Now let's look at what a middle class employee (who pays 1.45% Medicare tax, not the full 2.9%) with a 35 year annual average income of $55,000 would have paid:
$55,000 ☓ 1.45% ☓ 35 = $27,912.50
HUGE difference in what they've paid, to receive the exact same Medicare benefits.
So the first person paid 1 mil more in medicare taxes but made only 33 million more, lol? And because this person is so special he/she should get a better healthcare?
The Urban Institute (lefty think tank) pegs the cost of Bernie Sanders' proposed 'Medicare for All' plan cost at $32 trillion for 10 years. That's $3.2 trillion/year. Since people would no longer be funding their own private insurance premiums, co-pays, and deductibles out of their own pockets, and that money would no longer be going to fund US's current annual $3.2 trillion in health care costs, where would the $3.2 trillion/year to fund 'Medicare for All' come from?
Private insurance and individuals' out of pocket spending on health care totals a little over $1.4 trillion/year. When that funding source is ended by single-payer 'Medicare for All,' where does the funding to pay that $1.4 trillion worth of health care come from?
A calculation over 10 years would have to include nominal GDP growth (inflation+real GDP growth). Nominal GDP growth raises the revenue from a fixed percentage share of GDP as well like a 5% sales tax or payroll taxes.
A typical Medicare-for-all single payer system would fund 80% of all health care costs of a total 15.5% oof GDP total health care cost, not 100% of the current wasteful system like you assume.
So the first person paid 1 mil more in medicare taxes but made only 33 million more, lol? And because this person is so special he/she should get a better healthcare?
Here's what you need to know: the first person earned 18 times more but paid 36 times more for the eligibility to buy (again, Medicare is not free health care, it's government-administered insurance) the exact same single-payer Medicare insurance.
Why? Should one person pay $4 for a gallon of milk while someone else must pay $72 for the exact same thing? How is that fair?
Here's what you need to know: the first person earned 18 times more but paid 36 times more for the eligibility to buy (again, Medicare is not free health care, it's government-administered insurance) the exact same single-payer Medicare insurance.
Why? Should one person pay $4 for a gallon of milk while someone else must pay $72 for the exact same thing? How is that fair?
Thats how taxes work, you pay according to your ability to pay and the self-employed millionaire doesnt see a reduction in their pay as a result of employer payroll tax like the employee. Your concern for the millionaires and billionaires is very poignant, but shouldnt tug too many heartstrings.
A calculation over 10 years would have to include nominal GDP growth (inflation+real GDP growth). Nominal GDP growth raises the revenue from a fixed percentage share of GDP as well like a 5% sales tax or payroll taxes.
A typical Medicare-for-all single payer system would fund 80% of all health care costs of a total 15.5% oof GDP total health care cost, not 100% of the current wasteful system like you assume.
You still haven't answered how you'd cut the current $1.4 trillion in private spending (private insurance and individual) on health care to the $750 billion cost to implement 'Medicare for All' you've assumed.
Where do you get these 'lots of people' that hate the NHS Waldo?.....
You made a 1/2 dozen posts in response to what I said. Very LONG posts. In my experience, the more one speaks, the less meaning their words have.
I stick by what I said. Lots of people in the UK hate the NHS. They don't like the doctors brought in who can't speak English. They don't like being discharged at 1:30 in the morning. They don't like having to wait forever to get treatment.
The people who are well off go to private hospitals. It's a thriving industry in the UK. This speaks for itself.
How would you structure the buy-in for those under age 65? Look at what people pay in Medicare tax over the span of their careers just to be able to buy Medicare insurance (it's not free, you pay premiums, co-pays, and deductibles) at age 65+? I gave two examples, above.
If you look at the most recent Republican bill to replace Obamacare, you'll find a clue. Trumpcare for a single person 64 years old was going to be almost $15,000/year. Medicare for all seniors is under $10,000 and the 65 year olds certainly aren't that expensive. That leaves us with a ballpark estimate that Medicare for all would be at least 1/3 cheaper than private insurance.
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.
