Reply With Quote
What's their yearly tax bill?
What's their yearly tax bill?
That would make sense if you're keeping costs current. But, AFAIK, his proposal also include negotiating cost control measures (ie: steep reductions with pharmaceuticals, like most other countries, negotiating provider pricing, etc).
I'm dubious he can pull it off in America, but that's really the only way to go if you wanna reduce healthcare costs.
That's exactly it. The severe cost controls you're mentioning are utopian.
Pointless line of questioning considering i JUST posted we are ready to payer higher tax rates so we can climb out of the hole this country is currently in.
Theres no. Way. Around. Paying. Higher. Taxes.
Period. At least, if we EVER want to eliminate the deficit, cut out chasing profits in healthcare, and end the ever growing bubble of higher education debt.
The rich need to get raped. The middle class needs to pay more. The working class needs to pay more. The rabid expansion of big corporations and wall street must end, as well, so Americans can make a living wage. It is really not that complicated. The problem is, no one wants to take responsibility, no one wants to make sacrifices. Thats good old establishment poliics for ya, and exactly the emotion they want you to feel.
If other countries can pull it off, we can as well. Even if it is not through Bernie now, the very fact he is bringing the discussion to the table distinguishes him. The faster the voting populace realizes this is not a fairy tale, it is happening already in other countries NOW, the quicker real, systematic change can occur.
Speaking of pointless . . .
It's very easy to be willing to pay higher taxes when others shoulder a much, much higher tax burden so that you get your free .
But what about other countries that Sanders often cites? Don’t those examples show that a system of national health insurance is cheaper and better than one with private insurance?
Here’s where I agree with that argument: If we could wind back the clock to the 1940s, when health care was just 4 percent of GDP and private insurance was just beginning to develop, we might well be able to design a national insurance program—as Harry Truman proposed—that would have kept down the growth of costs. But we can’t wind back the clock. In the mid-to-late 20th century, a very different system developed with the rise of both private, employer-based insurance and the adoption of public programs that accommodated the interests of physicians and hospitals.
This is a story I’ve told in two books—The Social Transformation of American Medicine (1983) and Remedy and Reaction (revised edition, 2013). The financing arrangements that emerged in the United States had two complementary effects: They created incentives for high-cost specialized care and protected much of the public from the full, direct cost of that system. As a result, starting from 4 percent of GDP, health care grew to 17.5 percent, far more than in any other country. That level of costs is reflected in investments in medical technology, the physical infrastructure of hospitals and other facilities, the patterns of medical training and specialization, and the size and structure of the health-care labor force. Adopting a government insurance plan won't undo a system that's been built up over decades, though it would certainly alter its future evolution.
While having the federal government take over all private health expenditures (and state and local government spending too, unless Sanders can also appoint new justices to the Supreme Court), the Sanders plan attempts to squeeze per capita health expenditures down to Canadian levels. The plan doesn’t explain how it is going to bring this about, and Thorpe’s analysis says it won’t. But if the federal government did impose sufficient controls, the results would be to bankrupt many ins utions that are counting on future streams of revenue to cover debt payments, meet payroll, and satisfy other obligations.
Umm. Bernie is not selling debt reduction. His plans, by any reasonable accounting, cost even more than the taxes he will raise to fund them. He's got a shovel, not a ladder.
Lol the free angle thats been overcome again and again and again. Lets ignore the fact that investing in educating our workforce and paying them a living wage is worth many times the cost. For me, it is quite simple: If you are not willing to pull your load getting America back on its feet in the middle of this multifaceted crisis occurring right the now, you dont belong here.
No one wants to make sacrifices? Our highest income tax bracket (counting states that have income taxes, payroll taxes, and FIC - is ~55%; Netherlands = 60%. Not a huge difference, is it. Check the low end of the scale, where here it is 0, and there - 36%. The high payroll earners in this country (people with salaries over $250K, but below $1 M, and the ones carrying the water - the 1%'s - the .01's are getting a break, as are the bottom 80 - 85.
As for the "profit" in healthcare? Is Bernie talking about, or only about the profit in healthcare insurance? Are you ready to salary cap the doctors? Is that a sacrifice your non ever gone to medical school ass is willing to make?
How big of you.
So now we're not talking about hard numbers anymore and instead about the value-add to America's economic compe iveness by paying for some ****'s gender studies degree? Is that your position now?
Thats a blanket statemwnt, so I dont really agree. And, fwiw, I dont agree with Bernie on every issue. I am actually fiscally moderate, leaning conservative, believe it or not - but now is NOT the time for sticking to principle. We need effective change and a real discussion about it. It doesnt take a genius to realize we all need to pay higher taxes right now considerin the massive deficit. It doesnt take a massive leap to see cuttin out the middleman in healthcare is the logical next step for protscting ourselves from profiteers in HC industr. Or making college affordable. These are issues that MUST be addressed. Im a realist and I know Bernie wont be able to.pull everything hes saying off. The point is the discussion, the momentum hes creating demanding we look at these issues and make the hard decisions instead of the same partisan bull weve seen for most of my lifetime.
Crofl.
vy's point is that if you're currently a student in his 20's, then its easy to say "yeah im ready to pay higher taxes" when you aren't on your own making rent, car, insurance payments while on a tight budget or supporting a family
It's pretty much been determined throughout history that people pull their load to pull themselves and their own up; not for some enlightened sense of responsibility and pride. Greed/self serving are real, and are the ONLY consistent, true motivators.
Rigged - DNC will do anything for HRC. This lying, teflon-lined ____ has nine lives.
Im doing all those things. I dont relish the thought of higher taxes AT ALL. But i understand the necessity. More and more people are realizing if we ever want to reduce the amount of people on the government teat, we need to educate them and make sure they get paid enough money to support themselves. If we ever want to reduce the deficit and raise the value of our money, we need to work together and pay more.
Again, if you want to act helpless, blame the populace for being ignorant and greedy in massive blanket statements, go ahead. Some of us are actually willing to put our money up and bet on America actually being the greatest nation on earth again some day.
this is just your way of saying that you aren't actually leaning conservative fiscally. if you lean conservative fiscally, then you'd think fiscal conservatism will lead to a better road ahead. if not, then you aren't leaning conservative.
You think making the United States Government the middle man is going to reduce costs?
Why would you believe that? The US government is the most inefficient payor that has ever been conceived.
If you want to cut out the middle man, make everyone pay their own way, out of their own pocket. Get rid of all third party payors.
That would lower what we spend on healthcare a whole lot. You are on to something.
Some underestimate human nature and the profit/greed motive. Much better motivator/driver than "FREE." Does anyone wonder what will happen to the VALUE of a bachelor's when it's free? Or what will happen to the cost of college when govt is paying for it?
You want to wean people off the government by making all healthcare and education free for all provided by the government?!?!!!
Not taken many classes that demand you draw logical conclusions yet, huh?
My wife (the Biochemistry professor) certainly does.
How does a woefully inaccurate health care plan make America great again?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions