46 Percent of Republicans Want Medicare for All ? (illegal, health care system, borders)

[BoBromhal]

Originally Posted by southernnaturelover

I wouldn't be opposed to lowering the Medicare age to 50. This is the age when most people start to have health problems such as diabetes, heart issue, cancer, etc... This is also the age group where many people have a hard time finding another job if they get let go from the one where they have worked for years.

If everyone over 50 were on Medicare, I think it would drastically reduce private insurance costs to people 49 and under.

I like your reasoning.

I would assume, since the 15 years from 50-65 is about the life expectancy past 65, that we'd need to double the Medicare portion of the payroll tax. Maybe there's some actual data/estimate on that.

[krichton]

Originally Posted by jonbenson

yeah if you want to call Countries with Universal Healthcare "socialist", lol


Australia
Austria
Bahrain
Belgium
Brunei
Canada
Cyprus
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hong Kong
Iceland
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Singapore
Slovenia
South Korea
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom

All dictatorships, according to those on the right.

[rjshae]

I think England has a medical system that is similar to Medicare. It works, but has inefficiencies; its probably not the best approach. Something like the well-respected Dutch model may work better for this country. At any rate, I'd prefer an evidence-based approach to modifying the medical establishment, rather than just a random political experiment that may or may not work. We should be looking at foreign models and seeing which approaches would work best here.

[jonbenson]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Curious where they discuss the cost?

https://smartasset.com/insurance/med...-pros-and-cons


If everything stays the same as it is right now, the combined healthcare spending by private and public sectors is projected to reach $45 trillion by 2026.

The libertarian-oriented Mercatus Center at George Mason University estimated that the cost of Medicare for All would be more than $32 trillion over a 10-year period.

Kenneth Thorpe, a health finance expert at Emory University looked at a version of Sanders’ Medicare for All during the 2016 campaign and estimated that the cost would be about $25 trillion over 10 years.

In order to pay for the program, Sanders has suggested redirecting current government spending of about $2 trillion per year into Medicare for All. To do that, he would raise taxes on incomes over $250,000, reaching a 52 percent marginal rate on incomes over $10 million. He also suggested a wealth tax on the top 0.1 % of households.

[jonbenson]

Originally Posted by krichton

All dictatorships, according to those on the right.

according to some the only nations that have have universal healthcare are Venezuela and China

[middle-aged mom]

Trump campaigned in 2015-6 on replacing Obamacare with something wonderful that would take care of everybody and the government would pay for it.

There was no daylight between Trump's pitch and Bernie's M4A, except Bernie had a tad of a clue what it would cost.

Here we are 5.5 years later, and Trump has not produced a plan. He did however change the Republican narrative from Repeal to Repeal and REPLACE.

Democrat Primary voters rejected Bernie/M4A.

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by Cape Cod Todd

I don't care about where our health insurance comes from but I say whatever they mandate for us they should be required to use as well. They threw Obamacare at us and forced us to take it but they exempted themselves from it. How is that fair? Laws for thee but not for me is how.

Who are they?

The ACA is legislation, not insurance.

All government employees are insured by ACA compliant planns. The Federal Government subsidizes about 73% of the premium.

[mascoma]

Originally Posted by michiganmoon

I am actually not opposed to a national healthcare system if set up well. .

Have you ever worked for the government? There's NO WAY it is competent enough to run a medicare for all system.

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by jonbenson

yeah if you want to call Countries with Universal Healthcare "socialist", lol


Australia
Austria
Bahrain
Belgium
Brunei
Canada
Cyprus
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hong Kong
Iceland
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Japan
Kuwait
Luxembourg
Netherlands
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Singapore
Slovenia
South Korea
Spain
Sweden
Switzerland
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom

Universal healthcare is a right to healthcare. No two countries that grant this right use the same model to deliver healthcare. A few countries rely entirely on private insurance. A few rely on public insurance. Most are a mixed bag.

While the US has decades-old legislation that requires most ERs to stabilize those who present in the ER, regardless of insurance or ability to pay, ERs do not manage healthcare. Cancer will not be treated. Diabetes will not be managed. Joints are not replaced. Etc.

[middle-aged mom]

Originally Posted by WK91

Medicare for all translates to horrible health care for the vast majority, while the elites pay whatever they need to in order to get the very best care.

This country is toast.

I am not an M4A /Single Payor advocate. Having said this, healthcare in those countries with Single Payor different, it is not horrible.