Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:30 PM Jan 2016

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 = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Here it is: Bernie's Single Payer Healthcare Plan (Original Post) HerbChestnut Jan 2016 OP
Beautiful. Kentonio Jan 2016 #1
Awesome!!!!! Less than one fucking insurance premium!! Autumn Jan 2016 #28
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Jan 2016 #2
Awesome!!! darkangel218 Jan 2016 #3
Released just in time for somebody in Hillary's camp to misinterpret something thereismore Jan 2016 #4
They're already "misinterpreting" this in other threads. arcane1 Jan 2016 #35
When they say the 6.2% payroll tax is passed on to employees what does that mean? Agschmid Jan 2016 #5
If I had to guess... HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #6
Thanks. Agschmid Jan 2016 #8
As for salaries... HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #10
no... employers are NOT paying 6.2% of employee salaries into HCI on avg. They've payed lower uponit7771 Jan 2016 #60
No kidding gwheezie Jan 2016 #67
16k per worker avg employer cost. Warren Stupidity Jan 2016 #78
Your employer multiplies your salary by .062 and pays that much in tax Recursion Jan 2016 #91
That employers will pay workers 6.2% less in cash. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2016 #93
Where do I sign up? FlatBaroque Jan 2016 #7
what might the tax rate be for those who are middle class? grasswire Jan 2016 #9
It's in the plan. Read it. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #11
from the link questionseverything Jan 2016 #12
Wait, how is the 6.2 + 2.2 increase in payroll tax an employer "savings" !?!?! The 6.2 increase uponit7771 Jan 2016 #13
You're assuming employers are assholes. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #14
We have unions cause employers are assholes and have no shame at being so and 6.2 + 2.2 is 8.4... uponit7771 Jan 2016 #17
You added the 8.4 to the $400...nevermind HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #21
8.4% of 50000 is 4200 + 466 is 4666 which around 300 bucks from what the Sanders plan says the uponit7771 Jan 2016 #25
Again, your math is terrible. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #26
How about you.... progress.... the conversation and be specific... if there's no answer there's no.. uponit7771 Jan 2016 #31
You're forgetting tax deductions. JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #41
There's no mention of the deduction for the FED tax payed into SP in Sanders plan for 50 a year uponit7771 Jan 2016 #43
His plan doesn't include a full spread sheet. However, I would assume he factors that in when comput JonLeibowitz Jan 2016 #45
Unnnn, its pretty simple... the 6.2% in employer fees seem to stand out...we know they're aren't... uponit7771 Jan 2016 #49
.... Loudestlib Jan 2016 #40
With no cost to employees?!??! Please link and quote that one?! The employers who have been paying uponit7771 Jan 2016 #52
A quick Google search reveals... pinstikfartherin Jan 2016 #61
Not for those making 50,000 a year... that's the avg which includes stupid plans for folk makin 200k uponit7771 Jan 2016 #64
Payroll taxes are REGRESSIVE taxes. Period. It doesn't make sense. George II Jan 2016 #63
+1, I just made this point on the other thread that 2 hrs before the debate doesn't give folk real uponit7771 Jan 2016 #65
For most workers 6.2% is a reduction in health care costs. Warren Stupidity Jan 2016 #80
Not in that salary range its not, AVG includes salaries for millionaires the means is 50,000 ... uponit7771 Jan 2016 #83
Pay close attention now Ok INdemo Jan 2016 #81
That doesn't include the 466 they added in the end on their own cost... I'm including that... uponit7771 Jan 2016 #84
What are you talking about the 466 INdemo Jan 2016 #88
There is no passing off anything to the employees INdemo Jan 2016 #89
Woo!!!! jkbRN Jan 2016 #15
Single payer would lower property taxes as well. redwitch Jan 2016 #16
There's so many wins with this type of plan. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #18
Here Comes The Bouncing Ball! ChiciB1 Jan 2016 #19
One more BIG reason hifiguy Jan 2016 #20
No doubt. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #22
Sounds good to me. CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #23
It's showtime folks SmittynMo Jan 2016 #24
I like it. I'm surprised that I like it actually. Joe the Revelator Jan 2016 #27
So he gets this fantasy through a GOP congress...how? Gman Jan 2016 #29
Not taking into account the likelihood of this being passed... HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #33
Read my post. Gman Jan 2016 #44
Ah, sorry I missed that part. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #47
When the people AND the employers like something Kentonio Jan 2016 #34
Nope. No it's not Gman Jan 2016 #48
Post removed Post removed Jan 2016 #56
nnnnnoooooooo, the histroically gerrymandered GOP congress doesn't have to listen to anyone uponit7771 Jan 2016 #58
How does she get her plans through a GOP Congress? neverforget Jan 2016 #36
Here's how bluestateguy Jan 2016 #51
Don't forget bully pullpit and fight... gottah have those words in there or they'll call him sellout uponit7771 Jan 2016 #55
Revolution Dammit!! /sarcasm uponit7771 Jan 2016 #54
That's the only practical solution Gman Jan 2016 #90
Well Bernie will have enough coattail wins in the Senate to take back the INdemo Jan 2016 #86
First, Gman Jan 2016 #99
I disagree with you. Hillary Clinton will get those Democrats that will INdemo Jan 2016 #103
Plans like this is how you change that GOP congress. jeff47 Jan 2016 #94
The DLC hadn't been around for many years Gman Jan 2016 #100
They basically renamed themselves several times. jeff47 Jan 2016 #101
K&R! fleur-de-lisa Jan 2016 #30
Holy shit! in_cog_ni_to Jan 2016 #32
This is wonderful! Rosa Luxemburg Jan 2016 #39
Well plus the 6.2 percent in payroll yeoman6987 Jan 2016 #102
I donl't understand this one Armstead Jan 2016 #37
I think it's just to show how the current rates would rise Kentonio Jan 2016 #46
This is an incredible plan! I'm sure it'll need tweaks along the way, but THIS IS WHAT WE NEED! in_cog_ni_to Jan 2016 #38
Magnificent. GO, BERNIE, GO! K&R (N/T) Old Crow Jan 2016 #42
Kick, kick, kick... mountain grammy Jan 2016 #50
Hell. Yes. AzDar Jan 2016 #53
So what happens to my Retired Military Tricare? itsrobert Jan 2016 #57
What happens to employees of insurance co's gwheezie Jan 2016 #59
Well... "Medicare for All" would be hiring! Beartracks Jan 2016 #75
I never get straight answers to that question bluestateguy Jan 2016 #92
Unfortunately, they will have to become productive members of society. (nt) jeff47 Jan 2016 #95
The IT guy? gwheezie Jan 2016 #104
Again, private insurance is not "productive" jeff47 Jan 2016 #106
So that's TWO tax increases on the middle class. So much for being the candidate "for the people"! George II Jan 2016 #62
OMG!!! Taxes?!? Whatever will we do?!? Kentonio Jan 2016 #66
You found out that about his plan in an hour? His tax is a PAYROLL tax - RICH PEOPLE aren't on... George II Jan 2016 #72
It's a 2.2% payroll increase and completely removes insurance premiums and deductibles. Kentonio Jan 2016 #73
No, it's 6+ percent. And how much does someone like Donald Trump pay in "payroll taxes"? George II Jan 2016 #79
+1, I don't believe no one is looking at the details.. that 6.2% increase is going to be passed to uponit7771 Jan 2016 #70
I'm being taxed by my premiums right now! Beartracks Jan 2016 #71
I'm laughing at your avatar. Spitfire of ATJ Jan 2016 #77
Come on, George. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #82
It's a tax increase of the lower and middle class. How much is he going to tax the rich? ZERO! George II Jan 2016 #85
Not true at all, George. HerbChestnut Jan 2016 #87
Reading. Try it. jeff47 Jan 2016 #97
I pay $10k/year in health insurance premiums + high deductible. jeff47 Jan 2016 #96
Kudos for releasing the plan. Have to wait for some other experts to evaluate it. It's easy to Hoyt Jan 2016 #68
But, but, but.... paleotn Jan 2016 #69
K&R 99Forever Jan 2016 #74
K & R LWolf Jan 2016 #76
Bernie's top income tax rate is LOWER than the mid-1930s thru 1970s senz Jan 2016 #98
Saving for the personal discussions Duppers Jan 2016 #105
 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
1. Beautiful.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:36 PM
Jan 2016

"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.

thereismore

(13,326 posts)
4. Released just in time for somebody in Hillary's camp to misinterpret something
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:39 PM
Jan 2016

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

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
35. They're already "misinterpreting" this in other threads.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:21 PM
Jan 2016

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

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
5. When they say the 6.2% payroll tax is passed on to employees what does that mean?
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:40 PM
Jan 2016

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?

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
6. If I had to guess...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:42 PM
Jan 2016

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.

Agschmid

(28,749 posts)
8. Thanks.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:44 PM
Jan 2016

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?

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
10. As for salaries...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:51 PM
Jan 2016

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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
60. no... employers are NOT paying 6.2% of employee salaries into HCI on avg. They've payed lower
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:57 PM
Jan 2016

... 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.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
91. Your employer multiplies your salary by .062 and pays that much in tax
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:33 AM
Jan 2016

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.

grasswire

(50,130 posts)
9. what might the tax rate be for those who are middle class?
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:49 PM
Jan 2016

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

Same as it is now?

questionseverything

(9,654 posts)
12. from the link
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:58 PM
Jan 2016

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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
13. Wait, how is the 6.2 + 2.2 increase in payroll tax an employer "savings" !?!?! The 6.2 increase
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:00 PM
Jan 2016

... 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...

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
14. You're assuming employers are assholes.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:01 PM
Jan 2016

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

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
17. We have unions cause employers are assholes and have no shame at being so and 6.2 + 2.2 is 8.4...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:05 PM
Jan 2016

... 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

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
21. You added the 8.4 to the $400...nevermind
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:07 PM
Jan 2016

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

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
25. 8.4% of 50000 is 4200 + 466 is 4666 which around 300 bucks from what the Sanders plan says the
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:11 PM
Jan 2016

... avg payer pays a year.

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

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
31. How about you.... progress.... the conversation and be specific... if there's no answer there's no..
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jan 2016

... mistake.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
43. There's no mention of the deduction for the FED tax payed into SP in Sanders plan for 50 a year
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:41 PM
Jan 2016

... 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

JonLeibowitz

(6,282 posts)
45. His plan doesn't include a full spread sheet. However, I would assume he factors that in when comput
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:44 PM
Jan 2016

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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
49. Unnnn, its pretty simple... the 6.2% in employer fees seem to stand out...we know they're aren't...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:46 PM
Jan 2016

... 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

Loudestlib

(980 posts)
40. ....
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:37 PM
Jan 2016

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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
52. With no cost to employees?!??! Please link and quote that one?! The employers who have been paying
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:50 PM
Jan 2016

... 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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
64. Not for those making 50,000 a year... that's the avg which includes stupid plans for folk makin 200k
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:03 PM
Jan 2016

... 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

George II

(67,782 posts)
63. Payroll taxes are REGRESSIVE taxes. Period. It doesn't make sense.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:03 PM
Jan 2016

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

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
65. +1, I just made this point on the other thread that 2 hrs before the debate doesn't give folk real
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:05 PM
Jan 2016

... 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.

 

Warren Stupidity

(48,181 posts)
80. For most workers 6.2% is a reduction in health care costs.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:37 PM
Jan 2016

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?

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
83. Not in that salary range its not, AVG includes salaries for millionaires the means is 50,000 ...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:59 PM
Jan 2016

... 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

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
81. Pay close attention now Ok
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 11:46 PM
Jan 2016

$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

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
84. That doesn't include the 466 they added in the end on their own cost... I'm including that...
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:02 AM
Jan 2016

.. 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.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
88. What are you talking about the 466
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:26 AM
Jan 2016

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.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
89. There is no passing off anything to the employees
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:29 AM
Jan 2016

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?

jkbRN

(850 posts)
15. Woo!!!!
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:02 PM
Jan 2016

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.

redwitch

(14,944 posts)
16. Single payer would lower property taxes as well.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:04 PM
Jan 2016

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

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
18. There's so many wins with this type of plan.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:05 PM
Jan 2016

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

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
22. No doubt.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:08 PM
Jan 2016

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

SmittynMo

(3,544 posts)
24. It's showtime folks
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:10 PM
Jan 2016

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

Gman

(24,780 posts)
29. So he gets this fantasy through a GOP congress...how?
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jan 2016

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.

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
47. Ah, sorry I missed that part.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:45 PM
Jan 2016

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.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
48. Nope. No it's not
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:46 PM
Jan 2016

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.

Response to Gman (Reply #48)

bluestateguy

(44,173 posts)
51. Here's how
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:48 PM
Jan 2016

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.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
86. Well Bernie will have enough coattail wins in the Senate to take back the
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:13 AM
Jan 2016

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.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
99. First,
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 04:53 PM
Jan 2016

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.

INdemo

(6,994 posts)
103. I disagree with you. Hillary Clinton will get those Democrats that will
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 06:07 PM
Jan 2016

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"

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
94. Plans like this is how you change that GOP congress.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:37 PM
Jan 2016

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.

Gman

(24,780 posts)
100. The DLC hadn't been around for many years
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 05:02 PM
Jan 2016

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.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
101. They basically renamed themselves several times.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 05:10 PM
Jan 2016

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.

in_cog_ni_to

(41,600 posts)
32. Holy shit!
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jan 2016

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

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
102. Well plus the 6.2 percent in payroll
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 05:31 PM
Jan 2016

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

 

Armstead

(47,803 posts)
37. I donl't understand this one
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:29 PM
Jan 2016

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.)

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
46. I think it's just to show how the current rates would rise
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:44 PM
Jan 2016

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

in_cog_ni_to

(41,600 posts)
38. This is an incredible plan! I'm sure it'll need tweaks along the way, but THIS IS WHAT WE NEED!
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:29 PM
Jan 2016
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

itsrobert

(14,157 posts)
57. So what happens to my Retired Military Tricare?
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:52 PM
Jan 2016

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.

gwheezie

(3,580 posts)
59. What happens to employees of insurance co's
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 09:54 PM
Jan 2016

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.

gwheezie

(3,580 posts)
104. The IT guy?
Tue Jan 19, 2016, 02:41 AM
Jan 2016

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.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
106. Again, private insurance is not "productive"
Tue Jan 19, 2016, 11:03 AM
Jan 2016

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?

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
66. OMG!!! Taxes?!? Whatever will we do?!?
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:06 PM
Jan 2016

It saves most people money for gods sake.

Taxes indeed. Did you borrow that off Paul Ryan?

George II

(67,782 posts)
72. You found out that about his plan in an hour? His tax is a PAYROLL tax - RICH PEOPLE aren't on...
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:29 PM
Jan 2016

....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.

 

Kentonio

(4,377 posts)
73. It's a 2.2% payroll increase and completely removes insurance premiums and deductibles.
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:31 PM
Jan 2016

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.

uponit7771

(90,336 posts)
70. +1, I don't believe no one is looking at the details.. that 6.2% increase is going to be passed to
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:18 PM
Jan 2016

... the employee with the quickness

Beartracks

(12,814 posts)
71. I'm being taxed by my premiums right now!
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:24 PM
Jan 2016

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.

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

 

HerbChestnut

(3,649 posts)
87. Not true at all, George.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 12:15 AM
Jan 2016

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.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
97. Reading. Try it.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:46 PM
Jan 2016
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.)

jeff47

(26,549 posts)
96. I pay $10k/year in health insurance premiums + high deductible.
Mon Jan 18, 2016, 02:44 PM
Jan 2016

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.

 

Hoyt

(54,770 posts)
68. Kudos for releasing the plan. Have to wait for some other experts to evaluate it. It's easy to
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:08 PM
Jan 2016

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.

paleotn

(17,913 posts)
69. But, but, but....
Sun Jan 17, 2016, 10:13 PM
Jan 2016

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.

Duppers

(28,120 posts)
105. Saving for the personal discussions
Tue Jan 19, 2016, 02:56 AM
Jan 2016

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


Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Here it is: Bernie's Sin...