HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Here it is: Bernie's Sin...

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:30 PM

 

Here it is: Bernie's Single Payer Healthcare Plan

https://berniesanders.com/issues/medicare-for-all/

Similar to his 2013 proposal. Check it out for yourselves.

Some Highlights:

Bernie’s plan will cost over $6 trillion less than the current health care system over the next ten years.

The United States currently spends $3 trillion on health care each year—nearly $10,000 per person. Reforming our health care system, simplifying our payment structure and incentivizing new ways to make sure patients are actually getting better health care will generate massive savings. This plan has been estimated to save the American people and businesses over $6 trillion over the next decade.

The typical middle class family would save over $5,000 under this plan.

Last year, the average working family paid $4,955 in premiums and $1,318 in deductibles to private health insurance companies. Under this plan, a family of four earning $50,000 would pay just $466 per year to the single-payer program, amounting to a savings of over $5,800 for that family each year.

Businesses would save over $9,400 a year in health care costs for the average employee.

The average annual cost to the employer for a worker with a family who makes $50,000 a year would go from $12,591 to just $3,100.


The Plan Would Be Fully Paid For By:

A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.
Revenue raised: $630 billion per year.
A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.
Revenue raised: $210 billion per year.

This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan.

A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.

Progressive income tax rates.

Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.

Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:
37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)

Taxing capital gains and dividends the same as income from work.

Revenue raised: $92 billion per year.

Warren Buffett, the second wealthiest American in the country, has said that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. The reason is that he receives most of his income from capital gains and dividends, which are taxed at a much lower rate than income from work. This plan will end the special tax break for capital gains and dividends on household income above $250,000.

Limit tax deductions for rich.

Revenue raised: $15 billion per year

Under Bernie’s plan, households making over $250,000 would no longer be able to save more than 28 cents in taxes from every dollar in tax deductions. This limit would replace more complicated and less effective limits on tax breaks for the rich including the AMT, the personal exemption phase-out and the limit on itemized deductions.

The Responsible Estate Tax.

Revenue raised: $21 billion per year.

This provision would tax the estates of the wealthiest 0.3 percent (three-tenths of 1 percent) of Americans who inherit over $3.5 million at progressive rates and close loopholes in the estate tax.

Savings from health tax expenditures.

Revenue raised: $310 billion per year.

Several tax breaks that subsidize health care (health-related “tax expenditures”) would become obsolete and disappear under a single-payer health care system, saving $310 billion over ten years.

Most importantly, health care provided by employers is compensation that is not subject to payroll taxes or income taxes under current law. This is a significant tax break that would effectively disappear under this plan because all Americans would receive health care through the new single-payer program instead of employer-based health care.

106 replies, 5042 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 106 replies Author Time Post
Reply Here it is: Bernie's Single Payer Healthcare Plan (Original post)
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 OP
Kentonio Jan 2016 #1
Autumn Jan 2016 #28
Uncle Joe Jan 2016 #2
darkangel218 Jan 2016 #3
thereismore Jan 2016 #4
arcane1 Jan 2016 #35
Agschmid Jan 2016 #5
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #6
Agschmid Jan 2016 #8
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #10
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #60
gwheezie Jan 2016 #67
Warren Stupidity Jan 2016 #78
Recursion Jan 2016 #91
jeff47 Jan 2016 #93
FlatBaroque Jan 2016 #7
grasswire Jan 2016 #9
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #11
questionseverything Jan 2016 #12
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #13
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #14
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #17
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #21
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #25
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #26
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #31
JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #41
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #43
JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #45
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #49
Loudestlib Jan 2016 #40
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #52
pinstikfartherin Jan 2016 #61
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #64
George II Jan 2016 #63
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #65
Warren Stupidity Jan 2016 #80
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #83
INdemo Jan 2016 #81
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #84
INdemo Jan 2016 #88
INdemo Jan 2016 #89
jkbRN Jan 2016 #15
redwitch Jan 2016 #16
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #18
ChiciB1 Jan 2016 #19
hifiguy Jan 2016 #20
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #22
CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #23
SmittynMo Jan 2016 #24
Joe the Revelator Jan 2016 #27
Gman Jan 2016 #29
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #33
Gman Jan 2016 #44
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #47
Kentonio Jan 2016 #34
Gman Jan 2016 #48
Post removed Jan 2016 #56
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #58
neverforget Jan 2016 #36
bluestateguy Jan 2016 #51
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #55
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #54
Gman Jan 2016 #90
INdemo Jan 2016 #86
Gman Jan 2016 #99
INdemo Jan 2016 #103
jeff47 Jan 2016 #94
Gman Jan 2016 #100
jeff47 Jan 2016 #101
fleur-de-lisa Jan 2016 #30
in_cog_ni_to Jan 2016 #32
Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #39
yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #102
Armstead Jan 2016 #37
Kentonio Jan 2016 #46
in_cog_ni_to Jan 2016 #38
Old Crow Jan 2016 #42
mountain grammy Jan 2016 #50
AzDar Jan 2016 #53
itsrobert Jan 2016 #57
gwheezie Jan 2016 #59
Beartracks Jan 2016 #75
bluestateguy Jan 2016 #92
jeff47 Jan 2016 #95
gwheezie Jan 2016 #104
jeff47 Jan 2016 #106
George II Jan 2016 #62
Kentonio Jan 2016 #66
George II Jan 2016 #72
Kentonio Jan 2016 #73
George II Jan 2016 #79
uponit7771 Jan 2016 #70
Beartracks Jan 2016 #71
Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #77
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #82
George II Jan 2016 #85
HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #87
jeff47 Jan 2016 #97
jeff47 Jan 2016 #96
Hoyt Jan 2016 #68
paleotn Jan 2016 #69
99Forever Jan 2016 #74
LWolf Jan 2016 #76
senz Jan 2016 #98
Duppers Jan 2016 #105

Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:36 PM

1. Beautiful.

 

"THE PLAN WOULD BE FULLY PAID FOR BY:
A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.
Revenue raised: $630 billion per year.
A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.
Revenue raised: $210 billion per year.
This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan.

A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.

Progressive income tax rates.
Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.
Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:

37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)"

No co-pays and no deductibles. The system America deserves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:13 PM

28. Awesome!!!!! Less than one fucking insurance premium!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:38 PM

2. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, HerbChestnut.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:38 PM

3. Awesome!!!

 

Go Bernie!!!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:39 PM

4. Released just in time for somebody in Hillary's camp to misinterpret something

and for Hillary to parrot it at the debate. Note to Hillary: don't go there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thereismore (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:21 PM

35. They're already "misinterpreting" this in other threads.

 

By which I mean "deliberately being dishonest about it".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:40 PM

5. When they say the 6.2% payroll tax is passed on to employees what does that mean?

Just trying to figure that out.

Also my current plan has zero copays but I do pay at the pharmacy if I need perscriptions, will I pay under this plan for prescriptions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:42 PM

6. If I had to guess...

 

I'd say that any tax the employers pay is taken out of their employee's salaries. The same thing happens currently with insurance premiums. It's one of the reasons salaries have remained stagnant for the last 20-30 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:44 PM

8. Thanks.

I wonder what that will do to salaries, can't imagine much since companies already pay some portion of premium costs.

How far into his term does he think this could happen?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #8)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:51 PM

10. As for salaries...

 

This plan would likely save employers a ton of money so it's possible salaries will go up (depends on the employer, obviously). As for when it can happen? Tough to say. A lot of that depends on folks like you and me becoming more active in politics and demanding it from our representatives. And a Democratic majority in either of the houses wouldn't hurt either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #10)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:57 PM

60. no... employers are NOT paying 6.2% of employee salaries into HCI on avg. They've payed lower

... premiums while kicking the deductible to the employee making 50,000 a year

Most companies now offer health coverage that requires employees to pay an annual deductible before insurance kicks in, and the size of that deductible has soared in the past decade, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #60)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:07 PM

67. No kidding

I just had to pay 1k for a deductible on a ct scan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #60)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:31 PM

78. 16k per worker avg employer cost.

 

6.2% will lower employer costs for most workers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:33 AM

91. Your employer multiplies your salary by .062 and pays that much in tax

So, if he has $50,000 budgeted for your salary, he instead pays you $47,080, which with the 6.2% tax he's also paying comes to $50,000 total for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Agschmid (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:32 PM

93. That employers will pay workers 6.2% less in cash. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:43 PM

7. Where do I sign up?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:49 PM

9. what might the tax rate be for those who are middle class?

All those lunkheads who listen to talk radio and believe that Bernie will tax them at 90 percent?

Same as it is now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:52 PM

11. It's in the plan. Read it.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grasswire (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 07:58 PM

12. from the link

This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan.

A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:00 PM

13. Wait, how is the 6.2 + 2.2 increase in payroll tax an employer "savings" !?!?! The 6.2 increase

... will be passed to employers in a split second.

So 8.4 increase in payroll taxes on someone making 50000 a year along with the 466 is almost the same damn thing they were paying in premiums...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:01 PM

14. You're assuming employers are assholes.

 

Might be true in some cases, but that's hardly a reason to criticize this plan. And you're math is terrible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #14)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:05 PM

17. We have unions cause employers are assholes and have no shame at being so and 6.2 + 2.2 is 8.4...

... that's not terrible math that's fact.

Either way, I'm thinking were saving a lot more than a 20 - 30 a month on HCI premiums...

this stinks... no wonder the for profits have been in business

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #17)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:07 PM

21. You added the 8.4 to the $400...nevermind

 

You're against it. We get it. The numbers disagree with you, but hey, gotta stick up for your candidate at all costs right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #21)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:11 PM

25. 8.4% of 50000 is 4200 + 466 is 4666 which around 300 bucks from what the Sanders plan says the

... avg payer pays a year.

I'm expecting less than half... OUT OF POCKET... not just moved over to another category called tax.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:12 PM

26. Again, your math is terrible.

 

I'll let you figure out the mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #26)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:16 PM

31. How about you.... progress.... the conversation and be specific... if there's no answer there's no..

... mistake.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #25)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:37 PM

41. You're forgetting tax deductions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #41)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:41 PM

43. There's no mention of the deduction for the FED tax payed into SP in Sanders plan for 50 a year

... and I'm mostly talking abut the 2.2 + 6.2 payroll tax increase that the emploYEE has to pay...

Cause we all know dog on well the emploYER wont be paying the 6.2 increase and it's not a fair trade of premium seeing they've passed that already to employees via higher deductibles

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #43)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:44 PM

45. His plan doesn't include a full spread sheet. However, I would assume he factors that in when comput

when computing the Revenue Raised figures. We will of course need to see more details of computations.

I was just correcting why your figures seemed off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JonLeibowitz (Reply #45)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:46 PM

49. Unnnn, its pretty simple... the 6.2% in employer fees seem to stand out...we know they're aren't...

... going to pay those... they're going to pass them off like they have been

Most companies now offer health coverage that requires employees to pay an annual deductible before insurance kicks in, and the size of that deductible has soared in the past decade, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust.


http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d1b60cf0c7554e0aa7360597c1273275/study-shows-employers-shifting-more-medical-costs-workers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:37 PM

40. ....

Under the ACA companies with 50 or more employees already cover healthcare. So no, it would not get passed on. It would not cost more. It's not even close. It would save middle class Americans a ton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Loudestlib (Reply #40)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:50 PM

52. With no cost to employees?!??! Please link and quote that one?! The employers who have been paying

... into HCI have continually been passing the cost to employees and there's' no reason to think they're not going to pass that 6.2% increase which right now most employers don't pay 6.2% of salary into HCI premiums

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d1b60cf0c7554e0aa7360597c1273275/study-shows-employers-shifting-more-medical-costs-workers

Most companies now offer health coverage that requires employees to pay an annual deductible before insurance kicks in, and the size of that deductible has soared in the past decade, according to a survey released Tuesday by the Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:59 PM

61. A quick Google search reveals...

That the average percentage of compensation that private employers spend on health care is 7.7% as of the end of 2015. Some pay more and some pay less, of course.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm

Previous year information:

https://www.ebri.org/publications/benfaq/index.cfm?fa=hlthfaq7

http://kff.org/health-costs/issue-brief/snapshots-employer-health-insurance-costs-and-worker-compensation/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pinstikfartherin (Reply #61)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:03 PM

64. Not for those making 50,000 a year... that's the avg which includes stupid plans for folk makin 200k

... a year.

Sanders plan stays in this 50,000 range so I'm staying in that range too...

That 6.2% sticks out like a sore thumb

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:03 PM

63. Payroll taxes are REGRESSIVE taxes. Period. It doesn't make sense.

This is a shell game. And he drops this an hour or two before the debate? He's starting to show his true stripes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #63)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:05 PM

65. +1, I just made this point on the other thread that 2 hrs before the debate doesn't give folk real

... time to comb over it.

If it was on the up and up and something that was a game changer I'd release it last week and let HRC stew...

It's not a game changer, for those making 50,000 a year there's no way the employer isn't going to kick that 6.2% down to them like they've been doing for the last 10 years via higher deductibles.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:37 PM

80. For most workers 6.2% is a reduction in health care costs.

 

Employers are currently paying an average of 16k per worker for insurance premiums. They will instead be paying 6.2%.

That's $6200 for a worker making 100,000.

Was your point that for employees making around 300,000 their employers will be paying more?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #80)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:59 PM

83. Not in that salary range its not, AVG includes salaries for millionaires the means is 50,000 ...

... and most of the employers are NOT paying 6.2% avg for a 50k a year salary... that's nearly 3,000 yearly.

They're passing the cost to employees not via the deductions and lowering premium cost since 2006

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #13)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:46 PM

81. Pay close attention now Ok

$50,000 income X 2.2% =$1,100 Annual tax on employee or $91.66 per month
$50,000 income X 6.2% = $3,100 Annaual tax employer or $258.34 per month

I think you might have has the decimal point in the wrong place

Ok

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #81)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:02 PM

84. That doesn't include the 466 they added in the end on their own cost... I'm including that...

.. and no one in their right mind believes the employers will STOP passing the cost of HCI premiums off to employees like they have been doing in the last 10 years.

That 6.2 gets passed to the 50,000 a year worker...

None of those guys pay an extra 3100 a year per employee for a 50,000 yr job... they pay the least they can in preimiums and then make the employee pay the high deductible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #84)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:26 PM

88. What are you talking about the 466

What are you talking about extra. $3100 is the amount employers will pay with the tax rate of 6.2%
I think you are forgetting that there is no extra anything because private insurance wont exist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #84)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:29 PM

89. There is no passing off anything to the employees

You are scrambling to find something that you can use to try and discredit Bernie Sanders with and this plan,Right


Well there is nothing there to use to falsely assume it wont work
If this was Hillary's plan would you approve? Of course you woould
Well in 2008 Hillary was for such a plan as Bernie has proposed. Do you want references?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:02 PM

15. Woo!!!!

As a nurse who sees people struggling to make copays or making sure a procedure is covered by their insurance companies, this is awesome and amazing.

If you don't want to get sick, you better make sure that the people around you can get the healthcare they need. People not having healthcare puts everyone else at risk--and that goes for things like anti-vaccination advocates (which I know has nothing to do with cost, but still reveals what happens, because diseases and virus are fucking CONTAGIOUS) (lol sorry), as well as the people who may not be able to afford the care they need & deserve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:04 PM

16. Single payer would lower property taxes as well.

As municipalities wouldn't be passing on the cost of insuring their employees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redwitch (Reply #16)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:05 PM

18. There's so many wins with this type of plan.

 

Really goes to show just how powerful the insurance lobby is to keep something like this from becoming law sooner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:06 PM

19. Here Comes The Bouncing Ball!

At least my bouncing ball.


AND AND

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:07 PM

20. One more BIG reason

 

to get behind Bernie!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #20)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:08 PM

22. No doubt.

 

How any self-described progressive could be against a single payer program as good as this one is beyond me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:10 PM

23. Sounds good to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:10 PM

24. It's showtime folks

Can't wait for the debate. The Bern plays a good game. Makes the best of what little coverage he gets. He's good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:13 PM

27. I like it. I'm surprised that I like it actually.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:16 PM

29. So he gets this fantasy through a GOP congress...how?

He may as well say he'll fly around the moon on wings he spontaneously will grow if this happens.
It's a great plan. I would love it. I'll bet employers would love it too. But it's NOT going to happen. It's pie in the sky BS for the sake of putting something out there.

She's going to eat his lunch tonight on thus fantasy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:18 PM

33. Not taking into account the likelihood of this being passed...

 

Do you support the plan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:41 PM

44. Read my post.

I said its s great plan

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #44)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:45 PM

47. Ah, sorry I missed that part.

 

That's what happens when you read about 100000 posts in a few minutes. That said, the only way this plan passes is if we pressure congress and elect representatives that support it. The same could be said about a lot of progressive legislation, but such is the reality that we live in. It's no secret that our government doesn't represent us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:18 PM

34. When the people AND the employers like something

 

That's a powerful force to have behind you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #34)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:46 PM

48. Nope. No it's not

That's a very simple view. Do you not know about the Kochs, big pharma and the health care lobby? The US Chamber will not support it. Wall Street won't support if. Banks won't support it.

So just how are employees, who's rights and voices have been whittled to nothing, and a few businesses beat that?

It's pie in the sky fantasy. Good at getting gullible people to vote for him. But he's promising the impossible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #48)


Response to Kentonio (Reply #34)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:53 PM

58. nnnnnoooooooo, the histroically gerrymandered GOP congress doesn't have to listen to anyone

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:24 PM

36. How does she get her plans through a GOP Congress?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:48 PM

51. Here's how

He'll just make a few speeches around the country, make a few strongly worded phone calls to members of Congress and poof! It will get done!

At least that's the fantasy world some progressives live in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #51)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:51 PM

55. Don't forget bully pullpit and fight... gottah have those words in there or they'll call him sellout

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:51 PM

54. Revolution Dammit!! /sarcasm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #54)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:32 AM

90. That's the only practical solution

Almost no sarcasm here!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:13 PM

86. Well Bernie will have enough coattail wins in the Senate to take back the

Senate and will have a huge gain in the House After two years its likely we take back the House
But as long as there is pessimistic people like you they have such one way tunnel vision with Hillary, nothing changes
We will still maintain the Status Quo.
Large Corporations ,Wall St,Big Banks,Insurance Companies,Pharmaceuticals will still own our Democracy

You should understand there is a large percentage of Democrats that will not vote for Hillary if she is the nominee and we will end up with Trump or Rubio or Cruz
And you give me the assumption that if Bernie wins the nomination you wont be voting for him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to INdemo (Reply #86)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:53 PM

99. First,

Whoever gets the nomination will have a good majority in the Senate. Regardless of cost tails. Democrars will pick up House seats. How many is hard to say as the GOP districts are very well gerrymandered. There's only a small handful of swung districts. It would be nice to say we'll finish the job in 2years but I don't expect it in any event the job needs to be done by 2021 when redistricfing occurs. I'm not optimistic.

And no, there will not be a large percentage of Democrats who will not vote for Hillary. They may have to pass out clothes pins for people to hold their nose with while they vote, but there is not also a large number of Democrats that are that stupid either.

Other than "revolution" yours is the best plan of all responses. But it's not likely. The best strategy is incrementally change the ACA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #99)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 05:07 PM

103. I disagree with you. Hillary Clinton will get those Democrats that will

hold their nose and vote but will not get the Progressive Democrats to the polls(17%) There are also those that don't want a Monarchy with the Clinton's or a Bush that wont vote for her.
Do the research
I didn't say it would be done in 2 years after Bernie is elected to get his healthcare plan through . It will take two years ,till(2018) to get the House back.
I said Democrats will pick up House Seats with Bernie, but probably not enough in 2016 if he does, well that's Great for our Country.

There are those that just want to criticize Bernie's Healthcare plan without even knowing how the plan will works You need to read it.
As far as Hillary being so against the plan,well she is being paid to do that. Think about it. Large Insurance Companies and pharmaceuticals own her. If she would have stood there last night and said I agree with Sanders on healthcare,large donors would have probably cut off her funding. http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=H
2.5% Employee tax
6.5% Employer Payroll Tax
This reminds me of all the negatives the Republicans used in 2008 against Obama when he was trying to get the ACA through.
100's of non factual negative reasons but the ACA evolved.
Bernie will get his Medicare for All through.
You can come and tell me in two years "Guess Bernie was right and you were right" and I will just say "Thank You"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #29)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:37 PM

94. Plans like this is how you change that GOP congress.

The way you get the 60% of the electorate who are too disaffected to show up to the polls in off-year elections is to offer a significant contrast. Not, "We'll do whatever the Republicans say we can do".

This isn't something that will pass in the first 2 hours of a Sanders presidency. The point of plans like this is to rebuild the party from the utter cowardice instilled by the DLC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #94)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:02 PM

100. The DLC hadn't been around for many years

So I don't know why you bring them up. Maybe you know something nobody else knows. What you say about contrast was done in Texas with Wendy Davis's and she got her ass kicked. If you can figure out how to get people to quit voting for guns and against abortion because Jesus wants them to, let us know.

And if you find a way to get people off their asses and to the polls for just once, that would help too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gman (Reply #100)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:10 PM

101. They basically renamed themselves several times.

Yes, the literal group is gone, but the philosophy is not. And as you are well aware, using their name as shorthand for their philosophy is extremely common.

So odd you suddenly forgot that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:16 PM

30. K&R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:16 PM

32. Holy shit!

We pay $900 A FREAKIN' MONTH for three insurance policies! $900 A MONTH. This is $466 A YEAR!!!!!

---------> a family of four earning $50,000 would pay just $466 per year to the single-payer program, amounting to a savings of over $5,800 for that family each year.<-----------

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to in_cog_ni_to (Reply #32)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:33 PM

39. This is wonderful!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to in_cog_ni_to (Reply #32)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:31 PM

102. Well plus the 6.2 percent in payroll

 

You will pay close to 5 grand a year. Still cheaper then you pay now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:29 PM

37. I donl't understand this one

 

Sorry but I don;t get how this fits in with healthcare costs. I'm assuming this lumps in all income tax rates, not just healthcare?


Progressive income tax rates.

Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.

Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:
37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Armstead (Reply #37)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:44 PM

46. I think it's just to show how the current rates would rise

 

With the addition of the new healthcare costs. So presumably that would be a final payroll tax figure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:29 PM

38. This is an incredible plan! I'm sure it'll need tweaks along the way, but THIS IS WHAT WE NEED!

Businesses would save over $9,400 a year in health care costs for the average employee.

The average annual cost to the employer for a worker with a family who makes $50,000 a year would go from $12,591 to just $3,100.

GO Bernie!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:38 PM

42. Magnificent. GO, BERNIE, GO! K&R (N/T)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:47 PM

50. Kick, kick, kick...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:50 PM

53. Hell. Yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:52 PM

57. So what happens to my Retired Military Tricare?

Doesn't seem I get any benefit out of this plan. Looks like I would be worse off. Unless there is an exemption for Employees who are military retirees with earned Military benefits such as Tricare Prime for retirees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:54 PM

59. What happens to employees of insurance co's

Who lose their jobs. I'm still not understanding the plan. Does this eliminate insurance co's? Is health insurance administered by the fed government under expanded Medicare. Is there a part B and who pays the 20% not covered by mcare?
When we go to single payer, it is not just going to be about how it's paid for. It will change the health insurance industry dramatically, not saying its a bad thing but people are going to lose their jobs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #59)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:35 PM

75. Well... "Medicare for All" would be hiring!



====================

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #59)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:52 AM

92. I never get straight answers to that question

I posed that question some years ago on DU and got a lot of nasty and sarcastic non-answers.

Here: from 2007.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1147061

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #59)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:41 PM

95. Unfortunately, they will have to become productive members of society. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #95)

Tue Jan 19, 2016, 01:41 AM

104. The IT guy?

Do you think everyone working for an insurance co owns it. They have secretaries, mail clerks, lots of low wage workers. I don't care what happens to the top level but most if the people actually working are living pay check to pay check.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #104)

Tue Jan 19, 2016, 10:03 AM

106. Again, private insurance is not "productive"

In that it does not benefit society. All it does is extract profit from something that should not have a profit motive.

We would be much better off having these workers do something that actually is productive. Yes, they will lose their jobs in the short run. Some of them will gain new jobs in the expanded Medicare system. Others will have to find work elsewhere.

Should we leave private insurance in place just so the IT guy doesn't have to find a new job?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:59 PM

62. So that's TWO tax increases on the middle class. So much for being the candidate "for the people"!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:06 PM

66. OMG!!! Taxes?!? Whatever will we do?!?

 

It saves most people money for gods sake.

Taxes indeed. Did you borrow that off Paul Ryan?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #66)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:29 PM

72. You found out that about his plan in an hour? His tax is a PAYROLL tax - RICH PEOPLE aren't on...

....the payroll, they own the company. The only people who are on payrolls are poor and middle class.

Payroll taxes are the second most regressive taxes in the world, only behind sales taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #72)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:31 PM

73. It's a 2.2% payroll increase and completely removes insurance premiums and deductibles.

 

While simultaneously covering every single person in America for their entire medical requirements.

It's the kind of deal Americans could only dream of up until now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kentonio (Reply #73)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:33 PM

79. No, it's 6+ percent. And how much does someone like Donald Trump pay in "payroll taxes"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:18 PM

70. +1, I don't believe no one is looking at the details.. that 6.2% increase is going to be passed to

... the employee with the quickness

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:24 PM

71. I'm being taxed by my premiums right now!

They are quite taxing on my budget. And a mess of copays and deductibles on top of that.

I'd rather pay $500-$1,000 in taxes than burdened by $5,000 in insurance costs.

===============

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:21 PM

77. I'm laughing at your avatar.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:58 PM

82. Come on, George.

 

This tax increase ends up saving families thousands of dollars per year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Reply #82)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:10 PM

85. It's a tax increase of the lower and middle class. How much is he going to tax the rich? ZERO!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #85)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:15 PM

87. Not true at all, George.

 

Read his plan. Families making less than 28,000 per year pay nothing. Middle class families pay a modest payroll tax that ends up saving them thousands of dollars on health insurance. The upper class pays a progressive income tax to cover the rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #85)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:46 PM

97. Reading. Try it.

Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:
37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #62)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:44 PM

96. I pay $10k/year in health insurance premiums + high deductible.

I'd pay much less under those terrible, terrible tax increases.

Someday, you might understand that whether the money goes to Blue Cross or the money goes to the government, it still leaves my paycheck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:08 PM

68. Kudos for releasing the plan. Have to wait for some other experts to evaluate it. It's easy to

make projections based on "savings" that are projected to occur in the future. We'll see. If he's anywhere close, he has a winner assuming GOPers will enact it. They might have trouble obstructing if the plan stands rigorous analysis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:13 PM

69. But, but, but....

think of the CEO's and shareholders of.....Cigna, Aetna, United Healthcare, Humana, etc., etc....

After all they've done to gouge, uh I mean deny, ummm...provide health insurance to millions of Americans, and at costs so high as to be unbelievable in the rest of the industrialized world, THIS is the thanks they get. It's NOT a matter of how many yachts they can ski behind, damn it. It's a matter of fairness. Here they have the bulk of America's populous having to come crawling to Big Healthcare for their very lives in some circumstances, and Bernie wants to blow all that up. Damn it, it's downright unAmerican!



You go, Bernie! It's not much of a stretch to think removing the profits, dividends, costly complexity and inefficiency from basic health care will reduce the overall cost to everyone. It simply makes sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:31 PM

74. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:50 PM

76. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Mon Jan 18, 2016, 01:52 PM

98. Bernie's top income tax rate is LOWER than the mid-1930s thru 1970s

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HerbChestnut (Original post)

Tue Jan 19, 2016, 01:56 AM

105. Saving for the personal discussions

where I have to defend Bernie. It's happened twice with total strangers.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread