General Discussion

Stinky The Clown

(68,965 posts)

48. Where did $750 come from?

Mon Jun 29, 2015, 02:54 PM

Jun 2015

Also, the actual rate tax (analogous to an insurance premium) will have to be determined by government actuaries.

In such a scheme, everyone is in the pool and the cost for older people is offset by younger people paying their fair share. It will be the lowest possible cost for the greatest number of people.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

197 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

How would you pay for Medicare For All? [View all] Recursion Jun 2015 OP

First you have to eliminate for profit hospitals other than those who cater to rich people. randys1 Jun 2015 #1

...you're going to lower the cost of health care by closing hospitals? N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2015 #161

Dont close them, absorb them and make them part of the system, unless the owner randys1 Jun 2015 #179

Like every other developed nation. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #2

I've specifically not done that Recursion Jun 2015 #4

Take the current total cost of providing insurance outside of medicare. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #7

Now you're making the ridiculous assumption that usage won't go up Recursion Jun 2015 #8

It is not clear at all that discouraging people from using health services reduces costs Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #14

It costs $750/mo because they're OLD! Start a thread asking each DUer their average monthly medical FourScore Jul 2015 #196

I pointed out that problem up thread. The op insists that despite using the 750 figure to Warren Stupidity Jul 2015 #197

New Yorker had an excellent article in 2005 debunking this moral hazard theory about usage suffragette Jun 2015 #18

If usage doesn't go up what's the point? Recursion Jun 2015 #29

The point is more people having access to actual health care and them being able to access suffragette Jun 2015 #38

Insurance companies, for all their flaws, are very good at predicting what things will cost Recursion Jun 2015 #97

I think they're good at maximizing their profits, at the expense suffragette Jun 2015 #123

And paying obscene salaries to top executives. hifiguy Jun 2015 #126

Exactly so. As long as it's a profit generator for these executives, they'll fight suffragette Jun 2015 #128

You can have co-pays and still have Medicare for all. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #156

A system that emphasizes health rather than quarterly earnings would be an improvement. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #145

I hate waiting in doctor's offices. JDPriestly Jun 2015 #158

I'd prefer people seek health care Aerows Jun 2015 #92

Huh? I want people to seek health care, but I recognize it costs money Recursion Jun 2015 #95

If we just left people to die that's one thing, it probably would be cheaper to do that Fumesucker Jun 2015 #133

But is that *actually* more expensive? Recursion Jun 2015 #134

Why do greedy people gamble? JDPriestly Jun 2015 #160

Is there a single payer program in Europe? Recursion Jun 2015 #167

This may help Hestia Jun 2015 #182

I suppose UK could be called single payer, though that's not commonly done Recursion Jun 2015 #184

A big challenge in our healthcare system if care for the mentally JDPriestly Jun 2015 #157

Some European countries use a lot more nurse practitioners than JDPriestly Jun 2015 #154

You of course, have objective data to validate your allegation, yes? LanternWaste Jun 2015 #189

Not only 20% profit eliminated, but single payer is more cost efficient on point Jun 2015 #94

I'm trying to keep it simple as possible as the op is determined to prove it can't work. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #115

Gotcha. Your initial point is sufficient, but there are additional arguments in reserve! :-) on point Jun 2015 #119

Not this again. It has been explained over and over. Cleita Jun 2015 #3

Most of the money going to insurance companies comes from employers, not workers Recursion Jun 2015 #6

Yes you raise the payroll tax and the employers, relieved of the Cleita Jun 2015 #10

This would make low-wage jobs more expensive for employers Recursion Jun 2015 #12

Yes. For once they are going to have to pay up. Incidentally, back in the day Cleita Jun 2015 #13

Or they just automate a few more jobs Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #140

They can. They already have. My job has pretty much been automated across Cleita Jun 2015 #141

You do realize that you're on the 'better people die.... daleanime Jun 2015 #91

No, and accusing anyone who talks seriously about how to pay for it of that Recursion Jun 2015 #186

Don't forget the secondary insurance yeoman6987 Jun 2015 #19

They could do it without the secondary insurance and give full coverage. Cleita Jun 2015 #23

That would be an interesting way to do it yeoman6987 Jun 2015 #24

France has a 30% copay with supplementary private insurance after that Recursion Jun 2015 #27

I want something like Canada and 70% do, however, when France crafted their plan, Cleita Jun 2015 #47

It is a valid question. There is no single solution, and it has to be coordinated to be successful. still_one Jun 2015 #5

Raise taxes on the extremely wealthy people. eShirl Jun 2015 #9

A dedicated levy, or a surtax into the general fund? Recursion Jun 2015 #11

I thought we were doing that to cover the cost of college yeoman6987 Jun 2015 #20

They own most of the wealth in the world. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #44

World? We are talking US yeoman6987 Jun 2015 #69

If not, their tax rate is ridiculously low for an advanced Western country, and needs to come up. eShirl Jun 2015 #84

The same way. Adding younger healthier people would bring medical costs down. mmonk Jun 2015 #15

How much? If it's not $750, roughly what is it? (nt) Recursion Jun 2015 #16

Elderly pay around 350 a month yeoman6987 Jun 2015 #21

$750. The difference is made up by the trust fund Recursion Jun 2015 #25

Your points do not invalidate mine. mmonk Jun 2015 #42

Right but the money has to come from somewhere. Recursion Jun 2015 #46

Garnish your wages or maybe volunteer them aspirant Jun 2015 #81

Give up subsidizing nuclear weapons? mnhtnbb Jun 2015 #17

A deduction, like SS. HooptieWagon Jun 2015 #22

The same way SS is funded. Vinca Jun 2015 #26

Wait. What does this have to do with for-profit hospitals? Recursion Jun 2015 #28

Medicare is much more efficient at prosecuting fraud than insurance companies csziggy Jun 2015 #114

Insurance companies don't care how much they pay providers? Recursion Jun 2015 #116

If everyone is covered by the same system, it's much easier to contain costs. Vinca Jun 2015 #122

Cut the military budget in half and realocate the money. Lint Head Jun 2015 #30

Which programs do you want to cut? (nt) Recursion Jun 2015 #31

What *military spending* could be cut? Marr Jun 2015 #53

Yes. We spend 800 times more on the military than all Lint Head Jun 2015 #192

All of them. nt truebluegreen Jun 2015 #58

+100! Lint Head Jun 2015 #194

Even if we were to do that, that probably wouldn't cover it. Adrahil Jun 2015 #177

Across the board. Lint Head Jun 2015 #193

A tax that would save every American real money Stinky The Clown Jun 2015 #32

Most of us don't pay 750/month for insurance Recursion Jun 2015 #33

Where did $750 come from? Stinky The Clown Jun 2015 #48

$750 is the monthly premium for part A and part B Recursion Jun 2015 #52

...for the least healthy portion of the population, just by virtue of age. truebluegreen Jun 2015 #62

So, how much less do you expect this to be? Recursion Jun 2015 #76

You are asking the wrong person, truebluegreen Jun 2015 #86

I would agree with that - back-of-the-napkin-wise. Stinky The Clown Jun 2015 #124

Some facts Hestia Jun 2015 #183

Oddly, if you divide the $9000 per person the US spends on health care csziggy Jun 2015 #118

Payroll or income tax, basically. DanTex Jun 2015 #34

Well, it matters to the employee and the employer... Recursion Jun 2015 #98

According to the standard economic theory (which I think is accurate in this case), DanTex Jun 2015 #109

Single pool; single payer MineralMan Jun 2015 #35

Why can nobody give a number here? Recursion Jun 2015 #40

The reason there are no numbers is that there is not MineralMan Jun 2015 #45

Vermont calculated it taught_me_patience Jun 2015 #65

Why do you expect us to have a number you don't have? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #49

None of us here is even close to competent to figure this out. MineralMan Jun 2015 #51

I actually think there are probably plenty of folks who could do a competent job, given the data Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #54

How can you advocate a policy you have no numbers on? Recursion Jun 2015 #55

Because we're already paying for it anyhow. MineralMan Jun 2015 #64

I advocate not going 95 mph on the highway. Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #82

again, you are using the cost for elderly and disabled. For younger people, it's closer to zero a merrily Jun 2015 #36

Why is it so hard to get a damn number here? Recursion Jun 2015 #37

It's impossible to say without doing the calculations, and MineralMan Jun 2015 #41

What the hell are we talking about then? Recursion Jun 2015 #43

Frankly, it's not ready for primetime. MineralMan Jun 2015 #50

And thus you reveal your true purpose tkmorris Jun 2015 #72

Single payer is very rare among industrialized countries Recursion Jun 2015 #73

You got a number in my prior post. Health care for most 22 year old costs next to nothing a year. merrily Jun 2015 #56

Because I want to know how much less it will be Recursion Jun 2015 #57

YOU want to know how much less it will be, so I have to tell you? merrily Jun 2015 #61

Because it is really expensive, as Vermont found out taught_me_patience Jun 2015 #66

That's about $575/person/mo taught_me_patience Jun 2015 #70

Was the VA going to keep operating in VT? Recursion Jun 2015 #74

Current spending on healthcare in the US is around $3 trillion. bornskeptic Jun 2015 #162

Other nations spend much less and get much better outcomes. merrily Jun 2015 #163

This article is a few years old. However, aside from inflation, I don't think merrily Jun 2015 #165

We spend SO MUCH on end of life care. n/t Adrahil Jun 2015 #178

Let's see, how can we raise some money... Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jun 2015 #39

$750/mo per person? Seems like a lot. Adrahil Jun 2015 #59

The Medicare population is mostly old Recursion Jun 2015 #89

I dunno... maybe that's right. Adrahil Jun 2015 #99

Medicare doesn't cover long-term and end of life care, and the $750 doesn't include drugs Recursion Jun 2015 #100

My estimate came in higher than your number. Adrahil Jun 2015 #104

Other countries are a lot less heroic with some interventions Recursion Jun 2015 #106

You have extremely inexpensive insurance then. bornskeptic Jun 2015 #164

I was Wrongy McWrongikins. Adrahil Jun 2015 #175

What we're going to paying pharmaceutical megalopolis those and their off-shore money should, WHO orpupilofnature57 Jun 2015 #60

I'll just leave this here gollygee Jun 2015 #63

Sad fact is, if you cut out the overhead -- which won't be easy -- the resultant premium or taxes Hoyt Jun 2015 #67

I find myself in broad agreement with you. Adrahil Jun 2015 #110

stop letting repugs steal money for their corporate masters samsingh Jun 2015 #68

Ding..ding...ding! Cleita Jun 2015 #79

I would implement all of these changes LonePirate Jun 2015 #71

Thanks Recursion Jun 2015 #83

Seperate line item federal tax on income. NCTraveler Jun 2015 #75

Interesting. Most of our other social insurance is funded regressively Recursion Jun 2015 #78

Stop robbing from the people to fund fake for-profit wars... polichick Jun 2015 #77

Lifting the laughably low cap on taxable earnings is a start Warpy Jun 2015 #80

If wages had kept up with productivity we wouldn't have many problems Recursion Jun 2015 #85

Yes, the PTB kept wages low because they were afraid of inflation Warpy Jun 2015 #107

The same way that it is done in Canada. guillaumeb Jun 2015 #87

Canada also has premiums in some provinces Recursion Jun 2015 #88

I did mention the B.C. premium/surcharge. guillaumeb Jun 2015 #93

So you're talking about (roughly) a 10% tax increase Recursion Jun 2015 #96

Plus so much depends on the wording. guillaumeb Jun 2015 #102

And most of us have no idea how much our employers contribute to our insurance Recursion Jun 2015 #103

The more you earn the more you pay Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2015 #90

Cut the military budget in half for one. Kalidurga Jun 2015 #101

So Medicare would be like a Federal public option there? Recursion Jun 2015 #105

Yes, exactly Kalidurga Jun 2015 #108

Per capita spending on healthcare in the US is over $8000/year. GeorgeGist Jun 2015 #111

But it's not the case that every person is spending $8000 Recursion Jun 2015 #112

We as a nation are already paying for health insurance csziggy Jun 2015 #113

Medicare for all doesn't touch the providers' profit, which is where I think the problem is Recursion Jun 2015 #117

Something similar to the way all the other industrialized countries of the world do it. nt Zorra Jun 2015 #120

That's about 50 different ways, each with their own pros and cons (nt) Recursion Jun 2015 #121

Excellent post, but you aren't going to get many to engage with it. Yo_Mama Jun 2015 #125

Quite the comment, for being the 125th. WinkyDink Jun 2015 #130

12% is what I keep coming up with Recursion Jun 2015 #132

I spend more than that for health insurance JEB Jun 2015 #136

Your insurance costs 12% of your gross pay? Recursion Jun 2015 #138

Vermont couldn't implement single payer for that reason. joshcryer Jun 2015 #144

Before really proposing national health care one needs to produce ways to pay for Thinkingabout Jun 2015 #127

Is the Defense budget "a designated levy"? See how it can work now? WinkyDink Jun 2015 #129

No, which is why it's a political football and the Army gets howitzers it doesn't want Recursion Jun 2015 #131

The Federal government is already spending 1.1 Trillion annually Paulie Jun 2015 #135

So $1.1 trillion covers 1/3 or so of the population Recursion Jun 2015 #137

Plus the money currently being spent on private insurance Paulie Jun 2015 #139

.003% transaction tax on every $100 stock trade riderinthestorm Jun 2015 #142

How about one Trident missile out of the military budget? or even two? Hekate Jun 2015 #143

How do we pay for the system we have now? It costs 17% of gdp. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2015 #146

That money is not being used efficiently for health care. Cleita Jun 2015 #147

Rainbows. Rex Jun 2015 #148

First, we do not collect a voluntary premium. We make it a tax. McCamy Taylor Jun 2015 #149

Canada and France have very different systems. We can't copy both Recursion Jun 2015 #150

I'd let the Libertarians decide JonLP24 Jun 2015 #151

Instead of paying your insurance premium to a private company, JDPriestly Jun 2015 #152

All my insurance has been nonprofit except one Recursion Jun 2015 #168

As a society, we are already paying for Medicare for All, or close to it. merrily Jun 2015 #153

Really dtupid question, given that we pay twice per capita what other developed countries pay eridani Jun 2015 #155

Norway spends more than us per capita Recursion Jun 2015 #169

If you want Medicare Insurance JustAnotherGen Jun 2015 #159

Precisely what the fuck is your problem with everyone having access to decent health care? 99Forever Jun 2015 #166

Precisely what the fuck is your problem with paying for Single Payer? Recursion Jun 2015 #170

I told you how to pay for it. 99Forever Jun 2015 #171

Nothing. I'm for it Recursion Jun 2015 #172

And I answered it. 99Forever Jun 2015 #173

He's trying to be this board's "freakonomics" guy. It doesn't work very well. nt Romulox Jun 2015 #181

+1. He's blowing by answers up thread. I proposed a financial transaction tax (FTT) riderinthestorm Jun 2015 #188

Tariffs B Calm Jun 2015 #174

Take all the money we spend bombing and killing WDIM Jun 2015 #176

Like every other developed country on the planet. Next silly question? nt Romulox Jun 2015 #180

That's about 50 different ways, each with their own pros and cons Recursion Jun 2015 #185

None of which are possible here, we are to be assured! We get your schtick. nt Romulox Jun 2015 #190

Most of them are, but advocates need to get behind one Recursion Jun 2015 #191

Tax the rich. Orsino Jun 2015 #187

I don't think my generation will get a chance to retire before 70. We might as well get this we'll craigmatic Jun 2015 #195