Europe is struggling to meet their rapidly increasing health care costs; even though they are already heavily taxed.
America has one of the highest survival rates for cancer; a good measure of medical care.
The only Democratic plan is medicare for all, based on medicare which is already is already bankrupt
Republicans haven't proposed anything to reduce costs beyond cutting benefits to seniors.
If you are going to cut costs in healthcare - you can (1)give drug companies less money...or (2) give providers less money....or (3) give insurerers less money.....or (4) give people less care. Those are your choices. Period.
Demcorats are aiming at the first 1-3. Republicans are aiming at number 4. And thats the choice America has in the next election. Thats why we have them. I'm just glad Republicans coming clean finally after 10 years. Their idea is number (4)...and thats it. It did not play well in the midterms. Good luck with it in 2020.
If only life was as simple as Mark & PJ make it out to be;
1) Pharma margins are high at about 14% on revenues of $800 billion. If that was cut in half the savings would be about $56 billion. A lot, but not a game changer
2) Most providers who accept medicare/medicaid lose money. They make their money on private insurance. If they were to be paid at medicare/medicaid rates many would go out of business. A bad solution.
3) Medical insurance margins are among the lowest; around 6%; not much room there & that has been repeatedly pointed out.
So mark/Pj's dream is just that
Tom, if it is attainable everywhere else in the first world, it is attainable here. The consevative George Mason University study funded by the Koch brothers shows if we simply shift what we are already paying into the healthcare system into a universal coverage system we would save money and everyone would end up with zero out of pocket cost.
DonDiego suggests those interested in this issue not get their panties in a knot so quickly.
The decision in the District Court striking down the Affordable Care Act has yet to face a few hurdles. The Texas decision will be appealed to the U.S Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. And whatever that decision is, it will in turn be appealed to the Supreme Court.
As HAL in 2001 counseled: "I honestly think you ought to calm down; take a stress pill and think things over."
On the other hand the tax basis on which the Supreme Court upheld the law in 2012 has changed, . . . so the decision might well turn out differently.
The good news is that America is still operating as a Republic under the Constitution. So DonDiego says: "Relax."
And besides, . . . having a knot in one's panties for the next several years cannot be good for the health of one's perineum.
The Mercatus study that mark quotes had several conclusions. The one Mark likes. assumes that providers will accept Medicare reimbursement. Since many providers lose money under this scenario, they will go out of business; now creating a shortage of providers.
The more likely scenarios in the Mercatus study shows costs going up higher under the medicare for all plan.
Universal health care is only possible thru huge across the board income taxes & value added (sales ) taxes to name a few.
Tom, its not often that you say things I agree with....but this statement is true:
"Universal health care is only possible thru huge across the board income taxes & value added (sales ) taxes to name a few. "
But here's the thing - your massive tax increases dont even begin to compare to the massive amount you pay for private insurance (I believe you said 13K for premiums and 3000 deductible). All of the universal healthcare countries aren't even half that per capita.
So...you know....do that math to your bottom line.
As anyone who is graph literate can see, we will clearly go bankrupt if we adopt the more expensive healthcare system of Australia.
Studies have shown that the proposed program is even more expensive.
For example, Medicare would now be “free”. But people are now paying $400 for premiums, supplemental & prescription coverage.
Where will that $400 come from?
Well I cant comment on the proposed program you reference - because you didnt reference it. And I cant validate your figures because those aren't referenced either.
But I can tell you the $13K you claim to pay in your earlier post is double what people pay in Europe....and they dont have any out of pocket expenses either. The data doesn't lie.
