General Discussion

Recursion

(56,582 posts)

61. I just mean that preventive care *can* save money, or it can waste money

Reply to treestar (Reply #56)

Sun Nov 1, 2015, 12:11 PM

Nov 2015

But it's very hard to thread that needle with politics being as they are.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

268 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Medicare for all would cost more than what we are paying now. We need to stop avoiding this fact. [View all] Recursion Nov 2015 OP

Dgaf. Take it from the military budget. elehhhhna Nov 2015 #1

That's $300 billion per year. That's 80% of the defense budget (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #8

That's the facile solution. Igel Nov 2015 #18

Oh, brother. WinkyDink Nov 2015 #27

And you have lots of new job openings for nurse, medical technicians, etc. Seems you ... Scuba Nov 2015 #32

foreign bases in Buttfuckistan? librechik Nov 2015 #40

Actually.. when you add all the bells and whistles... Bigmack Nov 2015 #45

How about jobs building rather than destroying? Generic Other Nov 2015 #46

Not quite Doubledee Nov 2015 #64

Really? Because I'm pretty sure we're conversing on the Internet, funded originally by DARPA Recursion Nov 2015 #98

And what? pangaia Nov 2015 #214

The internet is one of the backbones of the modern economy mythology Nov 2015 #220

Well, I guess that is one way to look at the military. pangaia Nov 2015 #222

And the Internet is a very good example of money spent on defense returning to the economy Recursion Nov 2015 #232

So we need a militray to... create technological innovation? pangaia Nov 2015 #249

Well historically the military and religion have been the two biggest drivers of it Recursion Nov 2015 #250

Your opinion is duly noted Doubledee Nov 2015 #247

Sanctimony always wins hearts and minds... Recursion Nov 2015 #248

Do I feel better? Doubledee Nov 2015 #261

That was pretty good. :>)))))))))))))))))) pangaia Nov 2015 #265

Really? SammyWinstonJack Nov 2015 #67

As someone that lives in a community where it's largest private ... 1StrongBlackMan Nov 2015 #106

O M G !! pangaia Nov 2015 #213

What value do health insurers add? Zero. What do they do? Make profit. CurtEastPoint Nov 2015 #2

I did. Like I showed, it gives us a 6.5% savings off of $916 billion Recursion Nov 2015 #4

I'm glad to see JackInGreen Nov 2015 #3

Was it the multiplication or the division you disagree with? Recursion Nov 2015 #5

Actually it's your framing JackInGreen Nov 2015 #7

You're right: there are no solutions without drastically lowering costs Recursion Nov 2015 #9

This is something that most overlook. Igel Nov 2015 #21

And, in fact, the compulsion in Canada isn't just economic but legally explicit Recursion Nov 2015 #22

You seem to know very little about how costs are managed in American health care settings. Scuba Nov 2015 #36

Does this view take the cost of the uninsured into account? DirkGently Nov 2015 #132

Gah! No, we don't pay for everyone's medical care. You're sticking your head in the sand here Recursion Nov 2015 #148

Misleading. The uninsured use the Emergency Room DirkGently Nov 2015 #150

No, no, they don't. Read the Kaiser link Recursion Nov 2015 #153

It's both. And the conservative solution is magic "free" E-room care. DirkGently Nov 2015 #157

Where the hell do you get the idea that I think this is "Fine"? (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #159

Please cite your source for the claim that "Medicare pays 80% of what private insurance pays." Scuba Nov 2015 #34

CNN link SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #44

Doctors represent only a small part of healthcare reimbursement. Scuba Nov 2015 #60

No, it's a very large part Recursion Nov 2015 #65

Yep, just over a quarter of services, which is about 3/4 of everything. Scuba Nov 2015 #79

Much bigger than, say, "profits", which is the usual boogeyman here (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #80

Still disproves the claim that Medicare only pays 80% of healthcare costs. Scuba Nov 2015 #87

Medicare pays 80% of a given person's treatment. That's the limit Recursion Nov 2015 #90

As I said, the thread hasn't ventured into costs vs. charges, nor into DRG's. Nor into ... Scuba Nov 2015 #107

Which is why we should just move to FQHCs. Hell, Sanders supports them Recursion Nov 2015 #174

Shouldn't math with real world dollars be done within the box? mythology Nov 2015 #221

And that is a bad goal? I thought the goal was to insure all jwirr Nov 2015 #91

No one on this thread has said it's a bad goal SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #93

Well I guess it never crossed my mind that it would not cost jwirr Nov 2015 #96

Per capita we are ALREADY SPENDING twice what other countries pay to cover everyone eridani Nov 2015 #244

That is the goal, but that's not going to *save* us money. It's going to *cost* us money. Recursion Nov 2015 #94

I did not think it would be any different. But one thing we jwirr Nov 2015 #101

If we can spend a trillion dollars on a war of choice, I don't really care what we spend Vinca Nov 2015 #6

+1 mountain grammy Nov 2015 #11

Sadly Medicare for everyone wouldn't do that Recursion Nov 2015 #15

It doesn't have to be Medicare as it exists now. It can be anything that we want it to be. Vinca Nov 2015 #16

Their bankruptcy rate is identical to ours Recursion Nov 2015 #17

Higher taxes on the wealthy would very much help. And I agree with your suggestions, BTW. CTyankee Nov 2015 #20

Yes. They have bankruptcies, but not "medical" bankruptcies. Vinca Nov 2015 #28

You keep saying $1 Trillion... Bigmack Nov 2015 #47

After you get to a trillion, it doesn't really matter. Vinca Nov 2015 #102

With apologies to Everett Dirksen... Bigmack Nov 2015 #143

The status quo of US imperialism is clearly not negotiable to the establishmentarians. ronnie624 Nov 2015 #52

Then it's clear the government doesn't work "for" the people. But we already knew that. Vinca Nov 2015 #105

Please cite your source for the claim that "about 8% of debt discharged in US bankruptcies is for .. Scuba Nov 2015 #37

I advocate for Medicare for All, including dental, optical, hearing aids and mental health care. Scuba Nov 2015 #10

Clearly the richest country in the world can afford it Recursion Nov 2015 #12

I don't believe your numbers will stand up to scrutiny, but I haven't the time (or inclination) ... Scuba Nov 2015 #38

Don't forget to factor in that those already insured should no longer be paying premiums + Medicare yellowdogintexas Nov 2015 #39

What? No, the current Medicare levies would have to stay Recursion Nov 2015 #48

What sbout all the money going to the medical part of other insurance? ReasonableToo Nov 2015 #13

That's an interesting idea Recursion Nov 2015 #14

There are other, not so easily quantifiable numbers. Turbineguy Nov 2015 #19

People who must be treated for severe illnesses because it was not caught early loyalsister Nov 2015 #226

You're assuming that people without insurance don't already geek tragedy Nov 2015 #23

I'm assuming that because unreimbursed emergency care is about $500 million per year Recursion Nov 2015 #24

Preventive care does pay for itself--over the long term. geek tragedy Nov 2015 #26

Fair enough Recursion Nov 2015 #30

No it does not. It saves lives, and dramatically improves the quality of life. It COSTS money. eridani Nov 2015 #239

Very good point; it's the old "smoking saves the government money" thing Recursion Nov 2015 #242

dead people also don't pay taxes geek tragedy Nov 2015 #255

A lot of preventive care doesn't pay for itself. I look at Canada's numbers, for example. Yo_Mama Nov 2015 #127

"It is to avoid dying in an ugly fashion" Yes. And way too young eridani Nov 2015 #243

Proposal of the Physicians' Working Group for Single-Payer National Health Insurance Downwinder Nov 2015 #25

Notice they don't address the current rate of underutilization Recursion Nov 2015 #29

How much does early diagnosis save? Downwinder Nov 2015 #35

We don't actually know. More than zero. Probably. Recursion Nov 2015 #50

If we are looking at cost effective, Downwinder Nov 2015 #104

And the cost of treating everyone in the Emergency Room? DirkGently Nov 2015 #136

Odd that you mention magical thinking Recursion Nov 2015 #147

The studies don't agree with your Internet Logic. DirkGently Nov 2015 #151

What? Yes, I did subtract it Recursion Nov 2015 #160

And the savings from cost controls and a healthier pool? DirkGently Nov 2015 #161

What are you talking about? It's the exact same pool as private insurance has now Recursion Nov 2015 #172

So it's the $5 trillion in cost savings you're throwing out? DirkGently Nov 2015 #184

Because they're ignoring the currently under-insured Recursion Nov 2015 #185

So you've helped them by making up a theoretical increased cost? DirkGently Nov 2015 #186

Well, no, that's widely believed but studies keep disproving it Recursion Nov 2015 #189

Government control of healthcare is the ONLY way to lower costs. We have to do it soon librechik Nov 2015 #31

It does hinge on the pushback from the insurer cprise Nov 2015 #55

+1 ronnie624 Nov 2015 #85

Why were my not-for-profit insurers never noticeably cheaper than my for-profit ones? Recursion Nov 2015 #116

Because what's driving costs is the mix of uninsured/underinsured plus low-paying government, Yo_Mama Nov 2015 #118

Does this take into account the advantages of combining risk pools and premium differences? Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #33

This is just aggregate *treatment* costs Recursion Nov 2015 #77

But it seems incomplete to not account for the added income created by adding healthy... Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #88

What does the risk pool have to do with this? We're talking about outputs, not inputs Recursion Nov 2015 #92

Healthcare is inflexible, you cannot shop around except for some elective procedures... Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #129

You absolutely can shop around for non emergency care Recursion Nov 2015 #145

You do realize that most poor people don't get proper dental treatment because its too expensive? Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #154

There were three dentists on my street in DC Recursion Nov 2015 #155

How many of them went in there to get crowns, implants, bridges, etc.? Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #164

I have no idea, but those procedures were listed so I assume it was non-zero Recursion Nov 2015 #233

Adding healthy people to the risk pool is only applicable SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #95

Yes there would, either in the form of increased taxes, most likely under FICA, or as a separate... Humanist_Activist Nov 2015 #124

Doesn't pass the smell test. We already spend the money for those services now, plus CEO bonuses GoneFishin Nov 2015 #41

No. We don't. 90 million people are going without medical treatment that they need. Recursion Nov 2015 #69

The ship has already sailed on pretending it can't be done. Unfortunately for those who profit from GoneFishin Nov 2015 #140

No, we don't. We haven't been. At least third of the population just gets basic care. Yo_Mama Nov 2015 #128

Thank you SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #131

Some individuals will pay more and get less. On the whole, there will be more security. Less risk. Yo_Mama Nov 2015 #133

No need for spurious extrapolations. Follow the examples out there. whatthehey Nov 2015 #42

The NHS isn't single-payer SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #71

The NHS isn't single payer Recursion Nov 2015 #72

True, but it's interesting to note that countries that have adopted universal health care-- eridani Nov 2015 #179

I'm no expert, but when employers provide private health plans, Tanuki Nov 2015 #43

Yes, that was a WWII-era way to get around wage limits Recursion Nov 2015 #53

Yep SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #49

There's some prevention that would make it cost less treestar Nov 2015 #51

It's possible. But look at the recent mammogram study Recursion Nov 2015 #54

that's another one treestar Nov 2015 #56

I just mean that preventive care *can* save money, or it can waste money Recursion Nov 2015 #61

Me, too. All insurance companies enrolled in the ACA exchanges BlueCaliDem Nov 2015 #63

Nope portlander23 Nov 2015 #57

Nope. PNHP does not address current underutilization Recursion Nov 2015 #70

I'm good with them posting it portlander23 Nov 2015 #73

In a medicare for all program would doctors still need malpractice insurance? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #58

Sure. Don't they need it now? (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #62

Just have the government deal with malpractice suits discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #74

The government isn't paying doctors' wages under single payer Recursion Nov 2015 #76

Do UK docs pay malpractice insurance? discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #97

No, because it's government-operated healthcare. Which is not the same thing as single payer. Recursion Nov 2015 #100

I'm okay with either gov-operated or single discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #103

Doctors won't be government employees under single-payer SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #81

That is what I was thinking discntnt_irny_srcsm Nov 2015 #99

Other countries provide malpractice insurance at 1/10 of what our providers pay. eridani Nov 2015 #245

Yup. Also government healthcare funding means only punitive damages need to be covered Recursion Nov 2015 #246

Also, and maybe I missed it SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #59

So what you are basically saying Doubledee Nov 2015 #66

Healthcare that is free at point of delivery is very rare worldwide Recursion Nov 2015 #68

Doing your homework Doubledee Nov 2015 #251

Yep. Do your homework Recursion Nov 2015 #252

Aside from showing your massive ego Doubledee Nov 2015 #257

And Switzerland and Singapore both have costs to the patient at delivery Recursion Nov 2015 #258

Gee. Almost polite this time Doubledee Nov 2015 #260

No, he's not saying that at all SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #75

If we can pay for war Politicalboi Nov 2015 #78

I think you are right about cost and need to change Medicare a bunch. Doesn't mean we shouldn't go Hoyt Nov 2015 #82

Agree 100% on all counts n/t SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #84

actually it wouldnt, if you are talking about actual Medicare the way it is today. first of still_one Nov 2015 #83

Part A is $440. Part B is $107 Recursion Nov 2015 #86

Thanks for the correction, my comment still hold though. A younger age demographic should reduce still_one Nov 2015 #108

There aren't premiums under a single-payer system n/t SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #110

The cost is through taxes still_one Nov 2015 #120

Yes, I know that SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #123

agreed. Anyway, good points are being discussed in this thread still_one Nov 2015 #126

I wholeheartedly agree! SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #130

"fairy dust", I love it... Also, not every doctor will accept Medicare. The reimbursement still_one Nov 2015 #134

No, the risk pool has nothing to do with this. Recursion Nov 2015 #111

interesting. Then the short fall would need to be made up with increased taxes. This is really still_one Nov 2015 #122

It wouldn't be like Medicare is today SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #89

I was specifically addressing the title of the OP, not single payer or universal healthcare which still_one Nov 2015 #109

Medicare for all is the current term for single-payer n/t SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #112

Though just to be clear, the calculations in my OP were not based on HR 676, just on literally Recursion Nov 2015 #113

Oh got it, my bad and I apologize!! SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #115

You points are good, and there is no doubt it would require an increase in taxes. There was a lot still_one Nov 2015 #119

Thanks for the accepted vernacular. It would have to be paid for with increased tax dollars, and still_one Nov 2015 #114

Yes, I figured the payroll tax would be about 15-17%. That doesn't include SS taxes, which must rise Yo_Mama Nov 2015 #117

Lol, I can search any right winger site to get articles like this. PowerToThePeople Nov 2015 #121

Irrelevant and untrue. nt Live and Learn Nov 2015 #125

Here's a few studies showing that's not a fact at all. DirkGently Nov 2015 #135

Maybe the CEOs could escalate the coming economic dystopia. HughBeaumont Nov 2015 #137

Please explain why we have the highest PER CAPITA health care costs in the world. GeorgeGist Nov 2015 #138

Same faulty assumptions as last time. Warren Stupidity Nov 2015 #139

All excellent catches. I knew there was a mound of horseshit burried amongst the weeds but chose GoneFishin Nov 2015 #142

Wrong on all three counts Recursion Nov 2015 #163

Yep. Rex Nov 2015 #208

Yep. marmar Nov 2015 #259

Bernie Sanders has a plan to pay for it. A .1% tax on financial transactions riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #141

$130 billion a year gets us about half of the way there Recursion Nov 2015 #165

Shrug, then raise the percentages by a fraction riderinthestorm Nov 2015 #171

We pay twice per capita for health care compared to other developed countries eridani Nov 2015 #144

Ironically we have a plan that would work nationally, that Sanders has strongly supported: FQHCs Recursion Nov 2015 #173

That's true, but why stop there? We could eliminate deductibles entirely eridani Nov 2015 #177

Please explain why you keep posting fiscal attacks on progressive ideas. daredtowork Nov 2015 #146

Getting people to face what this will cost isn't "undermining" it Recursion Nov 2015 #169

And defending NAFTA. And Job offshoring. And free trade in general. HughBeaumont Nov 2015 #181

But this one is funny! Rex Nov 2015 #211

+100,000. LOL. Awesome. GoneFishin Nov 2015 #253

I saw an OECD graph the other day daleo Nov 2015 #149

Canada's poverty rate is 9% and ours is 14%. Their Gini is 32 and ours is 41. Recursion Nov 2015 #158

Did you ever think that having the health-care system we do is one of the largest polly7 Nov 2015 #162

I think the opposite: they can do it because they have less poverty (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #166

No. polly7 Nov 2015 #167

Yeah, that's really not why very many people are poor in the US Recursion Nov 2015 #170

Yeah, our wages haven't been so shit-hot for the middle and lower class lately polly7 Nov 2015 #176

The error in your math quaker bill Nov 2015 #152

OK, so add that in Recursion Nov 2015 #156

Reality Check ....our Hospital Bills Healthcare can't continue lovuian Nov 2015 #168

Except it wouldn't magically reign in costs -- Medicare pays way too much as it is. Recursion Nov 2015 #175

I don't even know where to start there is so much wrong here. Hiraeth Nov 2015 #178

I don't think that's right MannyGoldstein Nov 2015 #180

Nice post, full of good stats. PatrickforO Nov 2015 #182

Moving off of scarcity-based pricing is a huge interest of mine Recursion Nov 2015 #183

Yeah it is. I don't know if it will happen in our lives or not, but PatrickforO Nov 2015 #198

Well, perception is everything TexasBushwhacker Nov 2015 #187

Plenty of other countries have universal health care. Very few have single payer. Recursion Nov 2015 #190

I'm not wedded to single payer TexasBushwhacker Nov 2015 #194

Would a public option be affordable to people who need it? Recursion Nov 2015 #201

I think $800 sounds a little high TexasBushwhacker Nov 2015 #219

That's the full premium for Medicare Part A and B Recursion Nov 2015 #223

Because ours works? polly7 Nov 2015 #206

France's does too. Better, in fact Recursion Nov 2015 #207

We're very happy with ours. nt. polly7 Nov 2015 #209

And I'm glad you have it, and it seems to work very well for you Recursion Nov 2015 #210

Why not? polly7 Nov 2015 #212

Because Medicare already does that and pays twice as much for the same procedure as you do Recursion Nov 2015 #215

Overhaul it all, then. polly7 Nov 2015 #216

But Mississippi would really rather let people die Recursion Nov 2015 #225

You fix that only by some degree of control of the purse, either single payer and forcing providers TheKentuckian Nov 2015 #267

There is only one thing you need to know about our health care costs eridani Nov 2015 #188

It's completely erroneous that 'very few countries' have Single Payer Matariki Nov 2015 #191

"Single Payer" and "universal health care" do not mean the same thing Recursion Nov 2015 #193

No kidding. Read the link, it has a long list of countries that have SINGLE PAYER Matariki Nov 2015 #196

It's simply false. Recursion Nov 2015 #197

Disingenuous Matariki Nov 2015 #199

Name one other than Canada Recursion Nov 2015 #200

"UK .....funding coming from national and local sources" TubbersUK Nov 2015 #227

The towns and counties. But government-operated healthcare is not "single payer" to begin with Recursion Nov 2015 #229

"Towns and Counties" TubbersUK Nov 2015 #230

Yes, I did some work for Leeds a few years ago Recursion Nov 2015 #231

Do you have a link? n/t TubbersUK Nov 2015 #234

bookmark to read later hill2016 Nov 2015 #192

Medicaid, the VA, public health Recursion Nov 2015 #195

complete bullshit Doctor_J Nov 2015 #202

You can't seriously think that. Recursion Nov 2015 #204

This message was self-deleted by its author TubbersUK Nov 2015 #228

Right, health care is expensive. elleng Nov 2015 #203

And I'd vote for that in a second. Bring on a 20% VAT Recursion Nov 2015 #205

It may surprise lots of people but Medicare Part B cost $104 a month, the average SS is $1200 a Thinkingabout Nov 2015 #217

The single payer bill already submitted to congress was calculate to cost 15 trillion over 10 years. RichVRichV Nov 2015 #218

Sorry, thank you: I read the wrong line there. It's about 50% Recursion Nov 2015 #224

Now I think you're overestimating. RichVRichV Nov 2015 #254

Veterans would demand continuation of their VA health care pinboy3niner Nov 2015 #235

Though VA centers could pretty easily be brought into the FQHC fold Recursion Nov 2015 #236

Being 'brought into the fold' is what they fear pinboy3niner Nov 2015 #237

I know the Legion is against the idea Recursion Nov 2015 #238

It's not just the Legion, it's all of them pinboy3niner Nov 2015 #240

And I don't think we should change the VA, particularly (I was just throwing that out as a response) Recursion Nov 2015 #241

Yep. The eye-popping tax increases needed is why Vermont abandoned single payer. SunSeeker Nov 2015 #256

private insurance inflation *is* an eye popping tax increase. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2015 #264

I agree. But Sanders didn't defend the proposed tax increases in Vermont. SunSeeker Nov 2015 #266

"most achieve universal health care some other way" KamaAina Nov 2015 #262

Tons of other ways. Look at France, Switzerland, Japan... Recursion Nov 2015 #268

Your entire argument rests on a shaky foundation: the belief that 50 million don't get any care. lumberjack_jeff Nov 2015 #263