Send Us Hatemail ! mailbag@conservativecave.com
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Star Member Recursion (39,268 posts) How would you pay for Medicare For All?For all of the vocal support here on DU for Medicare For All I rarely see this addressed, and I don't think it can be a serious proposal until it is (Sanders just advocated it but, unless they cut out that part, he didn't address this question). This is why Vermont gave up on Single Payer recently too. Currently, the Medicare Part A premium is $407 / month (for most retirees this comes out of the Trust Fund, but that won't be able to happen with Medicare For All), and the full price of Medicare Part B is $335.70 / month (this is subsidized for retirees depending on their income -- again, the trust fund can't also cover current workers here). With zero subsidy, that's $742.70 / month for a A + B benefit scheme that does not include prescription drugs or nursing homes (the two biggest growth sectors in health care costs), and leaves enough people dissatisfied that Medicare Advantage is extremely popular. This also leaves you a $147 deductible, for a monthly price just north of $750. It's likely that expanding the covered population would lower premiums -- how much, and what's the basis for the number you pick? It's also likely that with no private insurance market, providers would have to negotiate higher prices with Medicare -- how much, and what's the basis for the number you pick? Usage would probably go up if user fees don't block access to health care anymore. Do you use copays to return that signal? How much are they? If not, how much will usage (and so cost) go up? If $750 per month per person is at least the right ballpark, how do we pay for it? In principle this would free up our current insurance payments, but few people pay that much for insurance. It would also free up our employer's insurance payments for us, but there's no reason to think businesses would give that money to employees rather than pocketing it. So do you raise a new payroll tax? $750 per month per person works out to $240 billion per year, or about half of the Defense Budget, or about one third of Social Security benefits. What ballpark of premium do you expect someone at the median income to pay? As an example, Ontario charges premiums of about $50 / month and has a 2% payroll tax dedicated to the health care system. Roughly what level of user premiums vs. copays vs. payroll taxes do you want, and can you get the numbers from that to at least have the correct amount of digits? If you do it largely through taxes, is this a dedicated levy, or does it go through the general fund?
Anyone want to bet they say to cut the military in half and then tax the rich at 99%?
We have to elect democrats to find out how(Nancy P.)I am guessing the same way Hitler, Stalin, Mao.....etc. addressed the problem......with lead injections.
Just 99%? Make it a 100%!
Response to csziggy (Reply #113)Mon Jun 29, 2015, 05:18 PMStar Member Recursion (39,298 posts) 117. Medicare for all doesn't touch the providers' profit, which is where I think the problem isI still think the finance side is the wrong direction to come at this from.
Cleita (72,958 posts)3. Not this again. It has been explained over and over.All that money that insurance companies collect in premiums would go into single payer instead. Yes you would pay premiums for it. I have Medicare and my premiums are deducted from my Social Security. The great thing about it is that since it will cost half as much per capita for health care as we pay now it will be more cost effective, especially when bringing in younger and healthier participants who won't be using the system as much as the elderly Medicare recipients do today.The rest of your concerns are basically Heritage foundation bullshit. All money going into medical care today will be diverted to a more efficient system of delivery and probably over time become less costly. Nothing will change as far as more taxes and the hair on fire scenarios.
I'll see your 100% and raise you another 10%!
