We've Always Had the Money for Medicare for All -- We've Just Given It to Corporations Instead

[Judi Lynn]

BY
DAVID SIROTA

Since 2008, the US has spent $20–35 trillion on corporate bailouts. It’s about the same “unaffordable” amount that Medicare for All has been projected to cost — used for lining corporate pockets instead of providing health care to people who need it.


In recent weeks, we’ve seen health care industry CEOs report paying themselves $2.4 billion as twenty-seven million people were thrown off their health care coverage. We’ve also seen Americans being charged anywhere from $400,000 to $1.1 million for COVID-19 treatment and facing $2,000 bills for coronavirus tests.

In response, polls show Americans remain deeply concerned about the current health care system, and support for Medicare for All has surged. And yet, despite data showing that a single-payer system would save big money, surveys still indicate some popular trepidation about the price tag of government-sponsored health care. That reflects, in part, a Democratic primary season that saw most candidates, the press corps, and the Washington political class try to pretend that the planet’s wealthiest nation cannot possibly afford the kind of Medicare for All system that other less wealthy nations have had for decades.

“No matter how you cut the numbers, there is absolutely no way to pay for Medicare for All without tax increases — or spending cuts — on the middle class,” one pro-austerity group told Politico in a story breathlessly touted by the health care industry’s dark money group.

But here’s what few seem to have noticed: as of the last few months, we just definitively proved we actually did have the money all along — and we had it even if we never hiked taxes to raise new revenues.

More:
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2020/06/medicare-for-all-coronavirus-health-care-taxes-government-spending

[Midnightwalk]

1. The argument can't be cost

Universal healthcare costs less.

We pay twice as much for worse outcomes.

No one should be confused about that.

[Amy-Strange]

2. You'd think corporations would be behind this, because...

-

it would save them a lot of money.
===========

[nilram]

4. On the one hand, it would.

It’s a competitive advantage that companies in other countries have. On the other hand, there would be less risk for people to change jobs or start their own thing. More people in Britain move up the economic ladder than here. Companies here would rather you were indentured.

[Voltaire2]

3. yup.

but it would demonstrate that government can provide social goods and services that benefit everyone, so that can't happen.

[JustGene]

5. How much

would be saved by eliminating the "health insurance" industry.
Thay have painted themselves as "healthcare" for so long
that people think they do more than collect and pay money.
Very expensively.

[marble falls]

6. We can always find the cash for weapons systems.

[hydrolastic]

7. Looking forward to seeing how this is figured out

But if you look at the amount of taxes i pay out of my weekly check and the amount of taxes my employer matches (1 for 1) and the 10% sales tax on everything i buy. It would add up over 40% and thats being kind and conservative. Now when they go to pay for medicare for all I am expecting the taxes to be increased on the wealthy and corporations to be in the same percentage I pay. Oh wow more than enough!