The real reason why we don't have single payer is because nobody wants to pay for it

[hill2016]

(1) Why didn't Vermont try to fund it?
(2) Why are the young invincibles participating in the ACA exchanges below expectations? By design, their role was to subsidize the sick and elderly but apparently they decided they would rather not.
(3) Why are the unions complaining about the Cadillac tax, so much so that it's getting postponed?

If even the bluest liberal blocs would rather not pay for someone else's health care, why makes you think a much more divided America would want to do so?

[litlbilly]

1. Wrong, its because big insurance and big pharma would lose money so they bought the removal of

the public option. Try again. And, don't bring up fking Vermont, like Bernie said, ask the governor.

[hill2016]

4. fortunately

Clinton doesn't say "ask the Governor". She got on the Governor's ass over Flint, Michigan.

[juxtaposed]

7. she's our champion!

[litlbilly]

11. And you people call us Republican Right wingers? Bernie said it last night at the debate

So did Bernie on that Gov, you must not have listened at all. Unbelievable.

[Ed Suspicious]

51. Why doesn't Arkansas have Universal Health care then?

[Duckhunter935]

53. yep, they have clean water now

She fixed it

[whathehell]

77. Flint is in a different state and it's a different issue. n/t

Last edited Tue Jan 19, 2016, 07:15 PM - Edit history (1)

[hill2016]

9. take a guess

out of the entire health care spend in the US, how much do drug spend and health care insurance profit account for?

[enid602]

62. costs

Clearly, Big Pharma and the Insurace Industry are two of the rhree reasons our per capita health costs are twice those of othet industrialized countries. The third, of couurse is our lack of tort reform. Why, we are the ONLY country in the world with Universal Health Care (we were reconized by the WHO in 2014 as having it for the first time) that DOES NOT have some form of tort reform. Of course Bernie's not afraid of powerful lobbying interests like the ABA. Still, he's voted against tort reform twice while in Congress.

[Hoyt]

68. Drugs make up 10% of expenditures and save tons of money in hospitalization, doctor visits,

etc. If you put tough controls on costs you might save 2—4%. I'd rather see government do drug research, but the billions of $ needed aren't there with our Congressm

[vt_native]

2. Hillary, is that you?

If people understood the nominal tax increase would eliminate outrageous insurance premiums, which are often unattainable, people would flock to single payer. It takes time to overcome 70 years of propaganda against "socialized medicine".

Peter Shumlin ran as a progressive and governed as a third wayer, he is not well liked after he sold out on his primary campaign issue.

[Karma13612]

6. And, funny thing: Shumlin has already endorsed, yup: Hillary Rodham Clinton. yea, I know, it is so

flippin' transparent, just wanna scream.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

23. Thank you for saying what needed to be said!

If people knew about the tax vs. premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc., they would would be far ahead.

It's disgusting that Hillary wants to continue with the propaganda. What a horrible candidate. What a horrible person to have as a leader to fight for progressive causes and the middle class.

What a horrible person all around. She flat out disgusts me now.

[LuvLoogie]

31. Does Bernie's bill include

Unemployment benefits and workforce retraining for the hundreds of thousands who work for private insurance providers. Does it include subsidized mortgage and car payments?

Will the displaced workers have first crack at the new government administrative jobs?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

41. I know that HR 676 does, but that came out of the House under Kucinich

And I do remember hearing Bernie saying that part of the bill was geared toward retraining. As far as subsidized mortgage or car payments, I don't know.

Does the Obamacare cover everyone?

We know the answer to that one.

[LuvLoogie]

48. There's money in the ACA to cover more through expanded

Medicaid. The newly elected governor of Louisiana just added a bunch of people.

[Duckhunter935]

54. and Kentucky?

[LuvLoogie]

67. The money is there in the ACA for Kentucky as well.

[TIME TO PANIC]

56. Better to lose your job than your life. n/t

[LuvLoogie]

66. Should the people displaced by Bernie's bill get unemployment benefits,

training for a new job, first crack at the new BernieCare jobs? Mortgage and car loan forbearance?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

74. First, I know Bernie's proposal is very similar to HR 676.

Go ahead and read all 30 pages for it. It does allow for retraining.

As far as mortgage, we could include that in the bill - I don't see any reason not to. We should compensate these people for transforming health care and covering everyone. The initial costs may be a little high, but that works for everyone, and the system would pay for itself.

[TIME TO PANIC]

78. Should people die because they can't afford health care?

We are the wealthiest nation in history, we can transition.

[LuvLoogie]

80. How long should the displaced insurance workers

Receive unemployment benefits? At what percentage of their previous earnings? Should they get mortgage and loan forbearance or subsidies ? These aren't trick questions.

[TIME TO PANIC]

82. I'm sure we can transition. n/t

[LuvLoogie]

83. You are begging the question.

[Wilms]

3. We pay MORE for LESS of it than any industrial nation.

I hear what you're saying. I hear it over and over again.

And we pay MORE for LESS healthcare than any industrial nation.

We're #!1!

[Karma13612]

8. The very definition of 'exceptionalism', dontchaknow! eom

[Human101948]

79. The argument is so stupid it makes me sick...

This entire argument about paying for healthcare is based on the idea that U.S. costs are necessarily sky high to provide good care. They are not!

The United States health care system is the most expensive in the world, but this report and prior editions consistently show the U.S. underperforms relative to other countries on most dimensions of performance. Among the 11 nations studied in this report—Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States—the U.S. ranks last, as it did in the 2010, 2007, 2006, and 2004 editions of Mirror, Mirror. Most troubling, the U.S. fails to achieve better health outcomes than the other countries, and as shown in the earlier editions, the U.S. is last or near last on dimensions of access, efficiency, and equity.


http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror

Even Cuba with a very, very poorly funded system does better!

Figures from the World Health Organization clearly show that The United States lags behind 36 other countries in overall health system performance ranging from infant mortality, to adult mortality, to life expectancy.

20 countries in Europe and four countries in Asia have a better life expectancy than the U.S. If you are a male between the ages of 15 and 59, your chances of dying are higher in the U.S. (140 per thousand) than in Canada, 95, Costa Rica 127, Chile 134, and Cuba, 138.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-fleetwood/cuba-has-better-medical-c_b_19664.html

It is not about needing more money, it's about capitalists sucking the blood out of the populace like the slimey leeches they are.

[juxtaposed]

5. cut it out

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

10. Do people like paying thousands of dollars to private insurance companies

to fatten the wallets of their CEOs? When even after paying those premiums they have to use up thousands of dollars in deductibles before the insurance kicks in, plus copays? Good example is a relative of mine: He pays about $700/mo. in premiums, then has a deductible of $10,000 before insurance pays anything. So there's $18,400 down the sewer (or into the insurance company's coffers) before they pay anything at all. It's good for nothing but asset protection in case they have some catastrophic illness. If we got single payer insurance do you seriously think his taxes would go up by $18,400 per year? And even if they did, at least he'd have his medical bills paid. Seems to me that when people figure out that any increase in taxes will be more than offset by not having to pay outrageous premiums to buy new BMWs for insurance executives, and that they will actually get health care, all that libertarian bullshit will go right down the toilet.

[Punkingal]

12. +1000

[hill2016]

17. yeah

but at least 80 - 85% of those premiums (as a pool) go to medical claims.

The rest go to the insurance company (claims processing, underwriting, salaries, and of course profits). So the actual profits are much less than you imagine.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

20. Then where is all this money coming from?

http://www.fiercehealthpayer.com/story/top-health-insurance-ceo-pay-exceeds-10-million-2014/2015-04-10

If for-profit health insurance companies aren't gouging individuals and their employers to pay these parasites, where else are these multi-million dollar salaries and bonuses coming from? Bake sales? If we had government-run single-payer, money wouldn't be wasted paying those salaries. That's just one reason single-payer would be cheaper.

[hill2016]

21. um...

10m is not a lot for a CEO.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

24. It's too fucking much. And it doesn't include the stock options and bonuses

that are handed out to these parasites like candy.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

28. Keep this link and spread the word:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1028647

[Live and Learn]

29. +10,000 nt

[hill2016]

35. according to your link

that includes the stock options and bonuses.

their base is only about $1m.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

39. Still too fucking much.

Whatever it is, there's no reason to be paying big bucks to executives and their minions when the whole thing can be done for a fraction of the cost, like Medicare, with a less than 2% overhead. Private insurers' overhead costs are 20-25%. Why should we be paying that?

[Half-Century Man]

63. 10 million is heaven sent salvation for 100 families.

It is over two hundred times the median wage of the USA.
It is over four hundred times what I am trying to raise a family of four on.

10million dollars salary is an abomination.
For a person in Healthcare that can't write a prescription? For a person who doesn't add value to the process? For a person who should have no legal standing what so ever in making a decision about someone else's healthcare?

No matter who the CEO is, with over 317 million people in the USA, it is mathematically impossible to not be able to find someone who can do the job better for far less money.

Salaries like that are key indicators of over priced products and ripped off stock holders.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

27. Under single-payer ...

Administrative costs for single-payer is far less than what a multiple-payer system costs. Medicare operates around 1.3%.

So, even with your dubious 80-85% (which assumes honest accounting), your system costs almost 15 to 20 times as much as single-payer.

[hill2016]

32. most of your costs are actually

in the medical claims paid.

So you cut the overhead. But you still have the medical claims to actually pay out.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

40. How is Medicare managing with a less than 2% overhead?

Medicare pays medical claims for lots of sick old people and its operating costs are still less than 10% of private insurers.

[hill2016]

42. well

sick old people have much higher claims per person while private insurers have to deal with much smaller claims. So there's one distortion there.

Medicare doesn't need underwriting (everyone is covered according to statutory requirements), marketing, payment collection (done by the IRS), etc.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

46. You made my point for me.

Single payer wouldn't need underwriting, marketing or payment collection either. Another reason it would be cheaper.

[hill2016]

47. sure you can save on that

but the bulk of your costs are still medical claims

[Fantastic Anarchist]

73. Which are still cheaper overall.

Especially with the risk pool spread out among a healthier population.

[dsc]

43. nope

Medicare is 3, private insurance is 20. that is less than 7 times.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

44. No, Medicare is 1.3%

But even for the sake of argument, private insurance costs 7 times as much as single-payer.

Thank you for making my argument.

[Live and Learn]

30. Now who is naive?

[yeoman6987]

57. He does not pay 18K a year

Annual checkup and other medical appointments are not part of the deductible.

[Bread and Circus]

13. no. we already pay more for health care than single payer would cost.

Single payer is a SAVINGS.

Why can't you understand that?

The REAL reason we can't have single payer is exactly as stated by Sanders said: the vested moneyed interests own the politicians.

Why can't you understand that?

[Live and Learn]

14. The only one I have heard say they don't want to pay for it is you.

Most of us realize it will be far cheaper, fairer and better than what we currently have.

[hill2016]

18. answer my three questions please

I've pointed out three blocs of people who would rather not pay for other people's health care.

[shawn703]

19. Do they complain about social security?

Nope. Because everyone needs it eventually.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

25. I'm getting Social Security and Medicare and I am sure as hell not complaining.

Everyone should get Medicare.

[Live and Learn]

26. Why don't you post your sources first since your questions are suspect?

But here are some advance answers.

Single payer will only work nationwide not statewide.

From what I have read, 'the invincibles' as you call them, have been some of the major beneficiaries of the ACA.

What do the Cadillac Tax or the 'invincibles' have to do with single payer? Single payer would eliminate both problems. In effect, we would all have 'Cadillac' insurance and the 'invincibles' would automatically be covered.

[Half-Century Man]

65. You have listed three groups of people.

Links to proof they wouldn't support National Single Payer Healthcare.
If you would be so kind.

[libdem4life]

15. Yep...that's why were the only civilized nation without it. Just can't figure it out Can't be done

We're not No. 1 in anything but milit..., oh wait, maybe that's a clue. We can blast the globe to kingdom come but can't find the funds to provide health care for all. Might as well just go curl up in the corner and hope we don't get sick.

The last sentence with its question provides an answer..."I've got mine, so it sucks to be you." The answer: Americans have no clue other than what the monied interests tell them via the MSM and every other 1% organization and their political leaders to do and say...one exception.

Hmmm. And here are we Good Democrats/Blues...saying it just can't be done. Well, just some of us.

But I do take issue about liberals of which I am a proud member...there are many, many of us who would gladly participate in this health care fix...if someone led. And someone is trying and he is getting support.

[Orangepeel]

16. 1/2 of the country has insurance through their employer, and many are afraid of change

Maybe they are misinformed, maybe they are selfish... But a lot of people won't want to give up their blue cross or whatever they have.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

22. With single-payer insurance, employers wouldn't have to pay for

insurance as an employee benefit. The employer typically pays a lot more than the employee, on average about $15,000 for a family. Wouldn't the employee rather have that $15K in their paycheck?

[Orangepeel]

49. That money (at least most of it) will still go to pay for their heathcare

The only way the plan would work is if the employer pays what the currently pay (or less) in taxes rather than as a health care expense. So at least most of it won't go to the employee, it will go to Medicare.

I'm not saying that's bad -- I'm just saying that people who have good health insurance (or think they do) are going to be reluctant to want to give it up.

[Armstead]

33. Thank you Newt Gringrich

[elleng]

34. Right, No more taxes.

[hill2016]

37. I'm pointing out the reality of the country we live in

very few people are willing to pay for other people's health care. Period.

[elleng]

50. You're right, I agree with you,

and people are too foolish to understand 'insurance.'

[Bluenorthwest]

71. So you oppose Obamacare, which involves expanded Medicaid, which low income people get for free?

Do you also think Americans are upset to be paying for the VA? How about all those Union members with collectively bargained benefits?
In reality, to be pragmatic about it, we have to admit that every single American already helps to pay for other people's health care. They are obviously willing because they already do that. Your entire premise is based on nonsense.

[MH1]

36. It pains me to agree with you, but I do.

I see I'm pretty much in the minority, too.

I'm not even a Hillary fan but I also don't deny reality.

There's a lot of sucky people in this country, and a lot of them vote.

Just look at those morons camping out at that wildlife refuge in Oregon.

That's what we're up against, folks.

I like Bernie's ideals but I think he's a little short on pragmatism.

That's why I like O'Malley, sigh.

[immoderate]

59. Bernie's pragmatism means better health care for less money.

You think our system is too corrupt to handle that?

--imm

[Bluenorthwest]

70. Those morons are camped out in a State with expanded Medicaid, automatic voter registration, the

least restrictions on abortion rights, LGBT equality, and ERA in the State Constitution, legal marijuana for all over 21 and extra taxes for the very top earners along with no sales tax because that's regressive. That's what the morons are up against.

[ChiciB1]

38. I'm Not Tech Savvy Enough To Post Links, But

I did copy this information from Thom Hartmann's Show last Friday when these guess were on. All three guests agreed on the same Healthcare proposal. They also talk about what happened in VT and why it failed. There are 2 parts to this link so if someone can download this as a youtube video I think it will make it simpler. This wasn't just "quickie" discussion, it's very comprehensive and all 3 agreed with each other. He doesn't always have 3 guests who agree like this. I was very impressed by what they had to say, especially the doctor's personal views. THIS does explain pretty clearly WHY Bernie's proposal is the best way to go. If you're unwilling to see a different view from ACA then don't watch, but informed voters SHOULD WANT to see this if for no other reason than to make a fair comparison.

I so wish I could provide the video, much more effective I know... Still I believe this pretty straight forward presented by people who work in Health Care.

Dr. Robert Zarr, Physicians For a National Health Program & Dr. Eric Naumburg, Healthcare Now-Maryland/Physicians for a National Health Program (MD Chapter) & Vijay Das, Public Citizen's Congress Watch. all join Thom. Bernie Sander has proposed expanding Medicare access to all Americans in order to create single payer healthcare here in the US. But is this the only way to create a functional single payer system? And if so - how feasible are they?

For more information on the stories we've covered visit our websites at thomhartmann.com - freespeech.org - and RT.com. You can also watch tonight's show on Hulu - at Hulu.com/THE BIG PICTURE and over at The Big Picture YouTube page. And - be sure to check us out on Facebook and Twitter!

Thom Hartmann Administrator's pictureJan. 15, 2016 6:18 pm
By Thom Hartmann A...
- See more at: http://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/single-payer-showdown-p1-cost-single-payer-health-care#sthash.kZfL2I5h.dpuf

[srobert]

45. Single Payer is Less Expensive than What We Have Now

We're going to pay for health insurance one way or another. Premiums to private insurance companies or taxes to government agencies. In the U.S. 17 cents out of every dollar spent is spent on health care. In Canada, where they have Medicare for All, it's closer to 11 cents. They cover everyone. We don't. In the U.S., if you lose your job you may also lose the ability to pay the private premiums for your health insurance. Very inconvenient if you should become unemployed while a family member is ill. It's a safe bet that if we had single payer, the vast majority of people would pay less in the additional taxes, than they are currently paying in premiums, And they wouldn't have to pay the premiums anymore. (Or it could cost their employers less if the insurance is a benefit of employment). The only reason this is "too contentious to be debated" is that insurance companies want to make sure it's not discussed. Hillary Clinton is smart enough to understand this, so for her to suggest that it will be costly rather than save money is a deliberate deception. She'll say anything to win.

[Duckhunter935]

52. wrong it is

Because our politicians like Hillary are bought and paid for.

[chervilant]

55. Thank Gaia for my IL... n/t

[leveymg]

58. Why we don't have single payer? Because private insurance can charge $15K/ yr

That's why. They have an enormous incentive to prevent Medicare for all.

[Agony]

60. The reason we don't have War, … is because nobody wants to pay for it

[bigwillq]

61. I would gladly pay my share for it

Please speak for yourself.

[GeorgeGist]

64. to follow on your lead ...

The reason they don't want to pay for it is because opponents won't allow a reasoned review of how it's paid for under capitalism.

Hint: it's a grand rip off. Dwarfing even the MIC.

[Bluenorthwest]

69. And the reason we have wars is because some always see a way to pay for that, no matter how costly

or pointless that war might be, no matter how unethical.


The most liberal voting blocks are not as you think. Every person in a Union contributes to collective health and benefit plans.

Also, by the by, as a taxpayer each of us already pays for health care for others-Veterans, children, those on Medicaid. Do you and yours also seek to relieve yourselves of that responsibility? Obamacare involved the Medicaid expansion which is in fact us paying for others to have healthcare because those others can not afford it. Do you oppose Obamacare? If not, what are your specific metrics on who you refuse to 'pay for'?

I don't expect an answer because obviously you have not thought this through.

[mmonk]

72. Or a middle man wants to be paid for it and has

a lot of money to throw around Capitol Hill to keep it flowing.

[Skwmom]

75. You're right. The American people would rather continue to be ripped off by the insurance companies

and face ever rising health insurance costs than opt for something cheaper where everyone is covered.

I'm sure this makes perfect sense in your world.

[guillaumeb]

76. The real reason why we don't have single payer is because

weak Democrats are too much in the pay of the financial interests that benefit from this privatized system. And many Democratic voters fall for pathetic the GOP talking points that are laid out here.

[Logical]

81. Lol, I love this, all of a sudden the Democrats hate single payer! Nt

[Bread and Circus]

84. Brought to you by Hillary, Inc.

[OrwellwasRight]

85. Baloney.

"nobody" wants to fund it means the big corporations and the 1% don't want to fund it. I would be perfectly happy, as would most people who work for a living and most small biz owners, to swap out the big bucks we currently throw to price gouging insurers and put it toward health care for all.

For most Americans it would be a costs savings. For some, it would be a wash. For a few at the top, they would have to pay more, and those are the only voters that the US political system listens to.

BTW, same for "free higher education." That would mean a savings or a wash for most of us b/c the private payments we currently make would be wiped out and replace with (lower) taxes. But the rich don't give a fuck. And they are driving this country's bus.

The Cadillac tax has ZERO to do with single payer. Get educated. The "cadillac tax" is actually a tax that drives people into shittier plans with less coverage. That is the opposite of universal care.
http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Political-Action-Legislation/Emergency-Physicians-Cadillac-Tax-Leads-Patients-to-Delaying-Necessary-Care

[Skwmom]

86. It would save average Americans money but the Insurance Companies own members of Congress.

That is why we don't have it.