Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, October 17, 2019

Urban Institute: Policymakers, including candidates in the 2020 presidential campaign and members of Congress, have proposed a variety of options to address the shortcomings of the current health care system. These range from improvements to the Affordable Care Act to robust single-payer reform. There are numerous challenging trade-offs when choosing an approach to health care reform, including covering the uninsured, improving the affordability of health care, and raising the government funding required to implement them. The public and policymakers alike need more information about the potential effects of various health reform proposals. This study, funded by the Commonwealth Fund, analyzes eight health care reforms and their potential effects on health insurance coverage and spending. Each of the analyzed reform proposals makes health insurance considerably more affordable by reducing people's premiums and cost sharing. Some reforms also reduce US health care costs, and all require additional federal dollars.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

How dare The Atlantic post the real numbers for M4A!!

-Progressives everywhere

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-10-17 12:03 PM | Reply

"The Urban Institute, a center-left think tank highly respected among Democrats, is projecting that a plan similar to what Warren and Senator Bernie Sanders are pushing would require $34 trillion in additional federal spending over its first decade in operation."

The Trump tax cut for the 1% is nearly as expensive and does little good for anyone except to make the rich even richer. Then add the fact that we won't be paying expensive healthcare insurance premiums nor deductibles and have vision and dental insurances included and it becomes obvious that MFALL is entire doable just like it is in all other modern nations. We could pay over half the cost just by repealing the Trump tax cuts for the 1%.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-17 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 7

I wonder how much is being spent over a ten year period (a decade) for private health insurance by American corporations and individuals? It might be much larger number than most people think. And lets not forget the cost to the country in terms of work missed, and other costs associated with what happens when medical conditions go untreated.

OCU

#3 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-10-17 12:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I wonder how much is being spent over a ten year period (a decade) for private health insurance by American corporations and individuals? It might be much larger number than most people think. And lets not forget the cost to the country in terms of work missed, and other costs associated with what happens when medical conditions go untreated.

OCU

#3 | POSTED BY OCUSER AT 2019-10-17 12:37 PM | FLAG: Difference will be that all those who receive a paycheck will have substantially more deducted for FICA/SS and will have not recourse whereas many now can decide what amount/cost of coverage they want. No freedom of choice. btw you will also find out that Medicare also has a denial of services rate.

Claim denials and Delayed Payments Cost Hospitals Billions thessigroup.com
Excerpt: Fee-for-service Medicaid is the most challenging type of insurer to bill, with a claim denial rate that is 17.8 percentage points higher than that for fee-for-service Medicare.
The denial rate for Medicaid managed care was 6 percentage points higher than that for fee-for-service Medicare, while the rate for private insurance appeared similar to that of Medicare Advantage.

Remember, if this went into affect your only choice will be go out of country [if you have the money] when service denied.

#4 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-10-17 12:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"The Eye-Popping Cost of Medicare for All"

Unless it's more 18% of GDP, it's cheaper than what we currently have.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-17 01:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

"Fee-for-service Medicaid is the most challenging type of insurer to bill, with a claim denial rate that is 17.8 percentage points higher than that for fee-for-service Medicare."

50 States run Medicaid, one Fed runs Medicare.

And those rates must be relative, e.g. 2% denial rate for Medicare, 2.4% for Medicaid.

#6 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-10-17 01:21 PM | Reply

More expensive than 2 tax breaks for the rich?

#7 | Posted by fresno500 at 2019-10-17 01:31 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I've been on Medicare since January 2016. During the last 3 1/2 years, I've had five surgical procedures; a heart valve replaced, my gall bladder removed, a nerve rerouted in my elbow to get feeling back in the fingers of my left hand, and two surgical procedures on my prostrate. The elbow and gall bladder procedures were out patient, but the others required hospital stays, in the case of the heart valve replacement, I was in for five days. I also see my personal physician every three months as I'm diabetic and need to be monitored on a regular basis. And I see my ophthalmologist once a year, and my urologist and cardiologist a couple of times a year. Now, except for the co-pay for my prescriptions, I have not paid a single dime out-of-pocket to any doctor, lab or hospital since going on Medicare. Granted, in addition to the no-cost Part 'A', I also have Parts 'B' and 'D' coverage, as well as a supplemental policy from AARP (United Healthcare).

From where I sit, Medicare looks like it's working pretty well, so far at least.

OCU

#8 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-10-17 02:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

More expensive than 2 tax breaks for the rich?

#7 | POSTED BYFRESNO500

Exactly

Or, more expensive than bailing out Wall Street criminals who crashed the world's economy ...

U.S. Lent, Spent, and Guaranteed $12.8 Trillion To Rescue The Economy
youtu.be
[9:27]

#9 | Posted by PinchALoaf at 2019-10-17 02:20 PM | Reply

We could pay over half the cost just by repealing the Trump tax cuts for the 1%.

So we just borrow the other half?

If the math shook out in favor of the policy Warren would be selling it.

Problem is that it doesn't, not without tax increases for everybody.

#10 | Posted by jpw at 2019-10-17 04:36 PM | Reply

#8 - How many years did you and your employer pay into medicare?

#11 | Posted by homerj at 2019-10-17 07:00 PM | Reply

Total health care spending in the US is 3.5 Trillion per year. So 34 trillion over 10 years seems like .1 Trillion less per year to me.

I understand that there is questions to who pays what part of that 3.4 trillion per year for M4A but the fact is the money is already being spent, plus some.

#12 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2019-10-17 07:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Do you know how much a human being is worth? Medicare has a 2% overhead. Private plans are 20-30% and many are frauds.

#13 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-10-17 08:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

1/4th of hospital space is taken up by billing. Only one room is needed for medicare.

#14 | Posted by HeliumRat at 2019-10-17 08:26 PM | Reply

Buttigieg has the best plan IMO.
People who can afford it should be able to buy better healthcare then others... they can buy better homes, cars, clothes, vacations..ect. as they should as a reward for success.
But basic healthcare should be afforded to everyone

#15 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2019-10-17 11:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

There is no cost it's free. Everyone knows that.

#16 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-10-18 12:16 AM | Reply

A medicare option will cut many billions in insurance overhead. It is almost certain that doctor compensation will drop as well. The US health system is by far the most wasteful one.

Taxes will go up, most will be better off without premiums. Insurance execs, medical sales reps will get hammered. Doctors will lose pay.
Almost everyone will know that they can't be denied medically necessary care, and they can change jobs without worrying about coverage.

Private and premium care options should be kept, just like in Europe.

#17 | Posted by bored at 2019-10-18 03:53 AM | Reply

The Trump tax cut for the 1% is nearly as expensive and does little good for anyone except to make the rich even richer.

There were two goals in that plan.

1. Shift the burden tax burden egregiously from the 1% to the middle class which has now happened as billionaires PAY LESS IN PERCENT than the middle class in taxes. www.theguardian.com

and

2. Create a budget catastrophe that *can* only be solved by draconian cuts to social security and medicare. www.newsweek.com

Fat Nixon lied his way into office promising tax cuts for everyone, pay off the debt, jobs jobs jobs, forcing companies to come back to the US with jobs and giving everyone low cost good health care.

Everyone who knew what a liar he has been his entire life knew his promises were just bullcrap.

#18 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-10-18 06:49 AM | Reply

The only people that cannot afford M4A are the health insurance companies who are going to lose their trillion dollar cash cows.

#19 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-10-18 06:53 AM | Reply

Medicare has a 2% overhead. Private plans are 20-30% and many are frauds.
#13 | POSTED BY HELIUMRAT

Its interesting ...

2-3% administrative costs is relative to expenses. Health care costs will be inherently larger when dealing with the disabled and over-65 population,
artificially deflating the amount spent on administering that care.

18% (I haven't seen 30%) is relative to revenue.

Apple to oranges.

#20 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-10-18 06:55 AM | Reply

The non-hysterical sensible conservative person knows that this M4A is:
1. A payback war on insurance companies.
2. A payback war on doctors.

The non-hysterical sensible conservative person knows that:
1. Transferring 1000 troops does not fund the wall.
2. The US is NOT going to reduce and emasculate our military to pay for M4A.
3. There are continual hot spots all over the world that we *might get involved in
4. If we ignore the hong Kong problem, Trump will be gutted by the left.
5. If we go in to help hong Kong, Trump will be gutted by the left.

#21 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2019-10-18 08:36 AM | Reply

"The non-hysterical sensible conservative person knows that this M4A is:
1. A payback war on insurance companies.
2. A payback war on doctors."

So dumb. M4A is just a better, more efficient, and cheaper way to provide healthcare to our population...as all other industrialized nations have discovered before us. I don't hate my doctor, not crazy about my insurance company but why should they get to keep 20% of my healthcare expenses? When you only think within your idiotic ideology you don't realize that the 1% are laughing their asses off at you.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 08:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"2. Create a budget catastrophe that *can* only be solved by draconian cuts to social security and medicare. www.newsweek.com"

The typical talking point from the dishonest right. It never occurs to these idiots that taxes on the 1% can be raised just like FDR did. FDR...the greatest President of the 20th Centuury. Better than any we've had in the 21st Century.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:00 AM | Reply

"2-3% administrative costs is relative to expenses."

When you think about the lack of logic in that sentence it is astonishing.

#24 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"There are continual hot spots all over the world that we *might get involved in"

Spoken by a Trump supporter after Trump abandoned our Kurd allies. Time to just shut up Phester.

"If we go in to help hong Kong, Trump will be gutted by the left."

If we goin to help Hong Kong we will face the world's largest army. We would be in an unwinnable situation, sacrifice tens of thousands of troops and still lose. Remember Vietnam stupid? Hong Kong would be 100 times worse. We have no obligation to go into Hong Kong, we don't have the resources, we don't have the million man army it would require. Only stupid people talk about us going into Hong Kong. Hong Kong is China. It will always be China. It is for the Chinese to figure out how to govern it.

#25 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:06 AM | Reply

"18% (I haven't seen 30%) is relative to revenue."

You haven't seen it since Obamacare became law. It limits the amount the insurance company can keep for administration, advertising and profits. Before the ACA 30% was common.

"Oh but, Obama was a black guy! Got to destroy everything he did."

Trumpers

#26 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:10 AM | Reply

Only stupid people talk about us going into Hong Kong. Hong Kong is China. It will always be China. It is for the Chinese to figure out how to govern it.
#25 | POSTED BY DANNI

You are 100% correct. My original point was, if Trump does nothing about it (its China's business) the left will gut him.
And I will bet you the farm on that.

#27 | Posted by phesterOBoyle at 2019-10-18 09:15 AM | Reply

"Oh but, Obama was a black guy! Got to destroy everything he did."

There are a lot of Trump supporters here who are clearly racist, as well as a good number of the Never Trumpers. Mackris never struck me as one of them.

#28 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-10-18 09:23 AM | Reply

Roc thinks these numbers look bad for progressives?

What a moron.

#29 | Posted by JOE at 2019-10-18 09:32 AM | Reply

"You are 100% correct. My original point was, if Trump does nothing about it (its China's business) the left will gut him."

I would happily "gut him" but that wouldn't be a reason for it. The "left" is not clamoring for action in Hong Kong just like we weren't clamoring for action in Vietnam or Iraq. In both wars propagandists ginned up support for nefarious reasons but it's just not true that the "left" had anything to do with it. WE were in the streets protesting both wars. In hindsight, nothing we have done since perhaps Korea was something we should have been involved with.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:36 AM | Reply

And, I'd be the first one to admit, I'm not even sure about Korea. I'm not old enough to have had an opinion about that war. Because of the success of S. Korea, I do suspect we helped millions of people live in freedom and for that I am glad.

#31 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:38 AM | Reply

The Cost of Medicare for All?

for the Dems the Union vote

#32 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-10-18 09:39 AM | Reply

"Mackris never struck me as one of them."

Possibly, I just see her as a rich person who doesn't want to pay any taxes and doesn't give a crap about most of the people in our country. Sort of an "Ivanka."

#33 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:40 AM | Reply

"for the Dems the Union vote"

""There is widespread and unprecedented support from unions for Medicare for All. In fact, unions representing a majority of union workers in the United States " over 9 million workers " have endorsed these bills," a representative from NNU said in a statement to ThinkProgress. "We are at historic levels of labor support for this legislation, a fact of which we are extremely proud."

The organization sent ThinkProgress a list of 20 national unions who support House and Senate single-payer bills, including those representing government employees, the postal industry, and utility workers. The Coalition of Labor Union Women and several state federations of the AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor federation, and AFL-CIO central labor councils are also on the list."

thinkprogress.org

And, remember, lots of union members voted for Trump. Democrats can't and don't depend on the union vote. But if, M4ALL Passed, union members would just demand higher pay because their employers wouldn't have to pay for healthcare insurance, it would be a win/win for them.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2019-10-18 09:43 AM | Reply

"Possibly, I just see her as a rich person who doesn't want to pay any taxes and doesn't give a crap about most of the people in our country."

That is much closer to the mark.

#35 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-10-18 10:02 AM | Reply

Here's another reason for Democrats to want Trump out of office.
There's no chance of a single payer system under Trump.

#36 | Posted by Ray at 2019-10-18 11:08 AM | Reply

Why are we talking about healthcare, Obama fixed just a few years ago? It was a big F#(!ing deal.

#37 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-10-18 12:03 PM | Reply

#25 | Posted by danni Why not review the treaty that the CCP accepted when Hong Kong fell into the Chinese jurisdiction. Little guarantees of civil rights and one nation, two systems concept. Treaties as I remember are made on paper, which is not bullet proof. The Chinese Communist Party knows this.

#38 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-10-19 08:15 AM | Reply

#30 | Posted by danni, You might remember that in 5 years of "peace" after our withdraw in 1975 the body count in Indochina was much higher than in 10 years of war. Vietnam contributed about a million to that total along with another two million that fled the country. Cambodia added about two to three million and Laos lost about half it's population. Such a noble cause you protested for.

#39 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-10-20 07:39 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort