Don't we have enough money for national healthcare?
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.
That’s more storytelling. Like your whopper the other day claiming that TX lawyers won’t take malpractice cases because there is no money to be made. When reality is TX is #2 in malpractice cases.
Are the stories from various media outlets wrong about AI denying care for Medicare Advantage patients?
We can't find the money for a national healthcare system to help US citizens as an essential service much like we fund the fire fighters or police officers, but we have enough money to:
-Fund Taiwan's defense against China
-Fund Israel's war in Gaza
-Fund Ukraine's war
-Fund Ukrainian pensions and other civil services
-Spent $1.9 Trillion in Iraq, with future expenses estimated to push it to $2.4 Trillion
-Spend as much money on the military as the next 6 countries combined
-Spent $2,260 Billion in Afghanistan
-Spent $83 Billion training the Afghan military that disintegrated
-Left behind $7 Billion in weapons in Afghanistan
-We're building more military bases in Syria
-$245 Billion in TARP to bail out big businesses
-$22 Billion to bail out 2 failed banks in 2023, including bailouts above the FDIC limit so it was helping the rich who didn't follow the rule
-$1.7 Billion a year in maintenance on empty government buildings
-$3 million to study if hamsters on steroids are more aggressive
In this context AI would mean a non-human takes the call/logs the info., reasons it out, learns and makes decisions on its own. Natural language processing and all that stuff.
What's really going on at ins. cos. is that humans have decided what the parameters are and then blame a machine for making tough calls. That's not AI. That's some co's. marketing team calling what was once an on paper algorithm hashed out by CFOs, lawyers and risk managers.....years on that same logic is computerized. That's not AI.
Your premise is incorrect. Priorities have nothing to do with it.
It is not the job of Federal Government to purchase personal health care for individuals any more than it is the job of the Federal Government to purchase food or car insurance or oil changes or any other private good.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_good
I just don’t get why this is such a complicated issue. I never hear anybody ever complain when they turn 65 and have to go on Medicare, in fact most people can’t wait until they are Medicare eligible.
It's a heck of a deal for seniors, financially speaking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenBouy
There’s plenty of money already generated, it just has to be redirected .
Respectfully, that is factually incorrect. (BTW, I wish it were true and as simple as that.)
And, for the record, I agree that our current system is screwed up beyond belief (most of us agree it is screwed up) - but a "Medicare For All" a.k.a. "Universal Healthcare" a.k.a. "Single Payer" doesn't unscrew our screwed up system.
<I'm going to apologize in advance because my response is probably longer than necessary. I hope some will find it worthwhile.>
***
Universal Healthcare aka "Medicare For All" is an economic pipe dream. It makes no economic sense.
Single Payer doesn't solve the problem that medical care costs too darn much in this country.
Single Payer doesn't rip costs out of the system. It doesn't unscrew our screwed-up system.
Single Payer doesn't reduce the total expenditures on health care - it just changes who pays.
Pre-pandemic, TOTAL U.S. health care spending for 2019 reached $3.8 Trillion or $11,582 per person. As a share of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, health spending accounted for 17.7 percent.
For 2022, total healthcare spending in the United States reached $4.5 Trillion, or $13,493 per person for every man, woman and child in the nation.
So, on average, across the entire nation, we consumed about $13,493 per person of health care goods and services. A family of 4, on average, consumed about $51,656 in health care goods and services.
And, to be clear, that $13,493 per person is just for the health care expenditures - not for any insurance overhead or insurance company profit.
If we implemented Universal Healthcare, people could stop buying insurance from Aetna, Cigna, UNH etc. so their household costs go down and their employer's contribution to health insurance would zero out as well - but simultaneously, people's individual taxes must go up to pay for Single Payer.
So - what would the extra taxes be per person to pay for that?
Well, each human being alive in the USA would need to pay about $13,493 to the Federal Government in extra taxes (insurance premium equivalents) so the Federal Government could turn around and dole out that same $13,493 to the various health care providers of hospitals, doctors, respiratory therapists, physical therapists, X-Ray technicians, RNs, NPs, PAs, nursing homes, CT/MRI imaging centers, pharmacies for prescription drugs, home health care aid companies, etc. In facilities such as hospitals and nursing homes, that money also goes to pay for plumbers, electricians, handymen, cafeteria food prep workers, janitors, landscaping maintenance people and armies of non-clinical clerks who sit in front of computer screens.
But wait. There's more.
The work of collecting the extra $13,493 in tax revenue and then doling it out to the various health care providers isn't free. It requires employees. Lots of employees. Lots of computer systems. Lots of buildings and infrastructure and consultants and procedure manuals
The easiest way to accomplish all that work would be to just nationalize all the health insurance companies out there - Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana and and the scores of medium-sized and hundreds of smaller-sized insurance companies. On Friday, all those employees worked for Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana etc... and on Monday they all work for the Federal Government, doing the exact same thing they did the previous Friday: collecting money from citizens, accounting for it, and doling it out to health care providers of hospitals, doctors, etc etc.
So in addition to the $13,493 each man, woman and child must pay to the Federal Government as an insurance premium-equivalent tax, each would need to add on to that money to pay for all those insurance company employees who will now be on the federal payroll. How much? 10% more? 20% more?
So - with "Single Payer" a.k.a "Medicare for All" a.k.a. "Universal Healthcare," each person would have their taxes go up by at least $13,493 per person plus extra for administration (the work Aetna, Cigna et al currently perform) plus extra for government inefficiency. Those former employees of Aetna & Cigna that now work for the Federal Government will get raises & federal defined benefit pensions, don't forget.
So a family of 4 must have their taxes go up by $53,972 (to pay for health care delivery) plus extra for government overhead under a "Medicare For All a.k.a. Universal Healthcare a.k.a. Single Payer system.
Each time a woman gives birth to a baby, she is handed her bundle of joy swaddled in a baby blanket PLUS a tax bill for an extra $13,493 to pay for the health care tax (insurance premium) for that new life. If she has twins? Make that $26,986.
The primary reason Single Payer aka "Medicare For All" doesn't work -- and the reason our current system is screwed up -- is we don't really have a system of health insurance in the USA. Instead, we have a system of pre-paid all-you-can-eat health care, for the most part. Insurance is a transfer of risk for a fee, and that does not describe what we have in our country with Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana, etc. We do not pay to transfer risk.
To illustrate this point, we all have cars and car insurance, which of course kicks in when we have an accident. But, we don't expect Allstate, State Farm or Geico to pay for oil changes, brake jobs, and A/C repair. But somehow, we think Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare and Humana ought to pay for a knee replacement.
A pregnant woman and her doctor know months in advance that she is pregnant and will give birth about 38 weeks after conception - yet for some dumb reason we finance this the same way we finance the repair of an accidental fender-bender in the parking lot: by filling out insurance claim forms.
So when people say they want Single Payer, what they REALLY mean is they want SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY. They want some other person to pay for their health care. That doesn't unscrew our screwed up system. That doesn't make health care cost less. That doesn't fix the problem. That doesn't rip costs out of the system.
Fixing this screwed up system is another topic, of course.
In economics, there is a distinction between a "public good" and a "private good." These are terms-of-art. A public good (term of art) is like national defense and good air quality.
Health care goods and services are private goods (term of art), not public goods. Health care goods and services are products consumed by the individual consumer (patient) just like food: if I eat a hamburger, it is not available for you to eat that hamburger. Private goods such as health care goods and services are fundamentally different from a public good such as national defense or a fire department's protection.
It's a heck of a deal for seniors, financially speaking.
Respectfully, that is factually incorrect. (BTW, I wish it were true and as simple as that.)
And, for the record, I agree that our current system is screwed up beyond belief (most of us agree it is screwed up) - but a "Medicare For All" a.k.a. "Universal Healthcare" a.k.a. "Single Payer" doesn't unscrew our screwed up system.
<I'm going to apologize in advance because my response is probably longer than necessary. I hope some will find it worthwhile.>
***
Universal Healthcare aka "Medicare For All" is an economic pipe dream. It makes no economic sense.
Single Payer doesn't solve the problem that medical care costs too darn much in this country.
Single Payer doesn't rip costs out of the system. It doesn't unscrew our screwed-up system.
Single Payer doesn't reduce the total expenditures on health care - it just changes who pays.
Pre-pandemic, TOTAL U.S. health care spending for 2019 reached $3.8 Trillion or $11,582 per person. As a share of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, health spending accounted for 17.7 percent.
For 2022, total healthcare spending in the United States reached $4.5 Trillion, or $13,493 per person for every man, woman and child in the nation.
So, on average, across the entire nation, we consumed about $13,493 per person of health care goods and services. A family of 4, on average, consumed about $51,656 in health care goods and services.
And, to be clear, that $13,493 per person is just for the health care expenditures - not for any insurance overhead or insurance company profit.
If we implemented Universal Healthcare, people could stop buying insurance from Aetna, Cigna, UNH etc. so their household costs go down and their employer's contribution to health insurance would zero out as well - but simultaneously, people's individual taxes must go up to pay for Single Payer.
So - what would the extra taxes be per person to pay for that?
Well, each human being alive in the USA would need to pay about $13,493 to the Federal Government in extra taxes (insurance premium equivalents) so the Federal Government could turn around and dole out that same $13,493 to the various health care providers of hospitals, doctors, respiratory therapists, physical therapists, X-Ray technicians, RNs, NPs, PAs, nursing homes, CT/MRI imaging centers, pharmacies for prescription drugs, home health care aid companies, etc. In facilities such as hospitals and nursing homes, that money also goes to pay for plumbers, electricians, handymen, cafeteria food prep workers, janitors, landscaping maintenance people and armies of non-clinical clerks who sit in front of computer screens.
But wait. There's more.
The work of collecting the extra $13,493 in tax revenue and then doling it out to the various health care providers isn't free. It requires employees. Lots of employees. Lots of computer systems. Lots of buildings and infrastructure and consultants and procedure manuals
The easiest way to accomplish all that work would be to just nationalize all the health insurance companies out there - Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana and and the scores of medium-sized and hundreds of smaller-sized insurance companies. On Friday, all those employees worked for Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana etc... and on Monday they all work for the Federal Government, doing the exact same thing they did the previous Friday: collecting money from citizens, accounting for it, and doling it out to health care providers of hospitals, doctors, etc etc.
So in addition to the $13,493 each man, woman and child must pay to the Federal Government as an insurance premium-equivalent tax, each would need to add on to that money to pay for all those insurance company employees who will now be on the federal payroll. How much? 10% more? 20% more?
So - with "Single Payer" a.k.a "Medicare for All" a.k.a. "Universal Healthcare," each person would have their taxes go up by at least $13,493 per person plus extra for administration (the work Aetna, Cigna et al currently perform) plus extra for government inefficiency. Those former employees of Aetna & Cigna that now work for the Federal Government will get raises & federal defined benefit pensions, don't forget.
So a family of 4 must have their taxes go up by $53,972 (to pay for health care delivery) plus extra for government overhead under a "Medicare For All a.k.a. Universal Healthcare a.k.a. Single Payer system.
Each time a woman gives birth to a baby, she is handed her bundle of joy swaddled in a baby blanket PLUS a tax bill for an extra $13,493 to pay for the health care tax (insurance premium) for that new life. If she has twins? Make that $26,986.
The primary reason Single Payer aka "Medicare For All" doesn't work -- and the reason our current system is screwed up -- is we don't really have a system of health insurance in the USA. Instead, we have a system of pre-paid all-you-can-eat health care, for the most part. Insurance is a transfer of risk for a fee, and that does not describe what we have in our country with Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare, Humana, etc. We do not pay to transfer risk.
To illustrate this point, we all have cars and car insurance, which of course kicks in when we have an accident. But, we don't expect Allstate, State Farm or Geico to pay for oil changes, brake jobs, and A/C repair. But somehow, we think Aetna, Cigna, United Healthcare and Humana ought to pay for a knee replacement.
A pregnant woman and her doctor know months in advance that she is pregnant and will give birth about 38 weeks after conception - yet for some dumb reason we finance this the same way we finance the repair of an accidental fender-bender in the parking lot: by filling out insurance claim forms.
So when people say they want Single Payer, what they REALLY mean is they want SOMEONE ELSE TO PAY. They want some other person to pay for their health care. That doesn't unscrew our screwed up system. That doesn't make health care cost less. That doesn't fix the problem. That doesn't rip costs out of the system.
Fixing this screwed up system is another topic, of course.
In economics, there is a distinction between a "public good" and a "private good." These are terms-of-art. A public good (term of art) is like national defense and good air quality.
Health care goods and services are private goods (term of art), not public goods. Health care goods and services are products consumed by the individual consumer (patient) just like food: if I eat a hamburger, it is not available for you to eat that hamburger. Private goods such as health care goods and services are fundamentally different from a public good such as national defense or a fire department's protection.
Yeah, no energy to read the whole thing.
It's pretty easy to control costs, Medicare does exactly that.
Also, universal healthcare, does not necessarily mean single payer. All developed countries (with one exception, lol) have UHC and it's all different.
For instance, Switzerland is completely private insurance based. But guess what private insurance companies are told how much they can charge. Hospitals, drugs are tightly regulated. Swiss gdp per capita is much higher than that of the US. But guess what the HC per capita is much lower.
It's pretty easy to control costs, Medicare does exactly that.
Also, universal healthcare, does not necessarily mean single payer. All developed countries (with one exception, lol) have UHC and it's all different.
For instance, Switzerland is completely private insurance based. But guess what private insurance companies are told how much they can charge. Hospitals, drugs are tightly regulated. Swiss gdp per capita is much higher than that of the US. But guess what the HC per capita is much lower.
medicare/medicaid is 2t of the budget.... and sucks.... too many denial of service
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.
