Medicare for all would cost more than what we are paying now. We need to stop avoiding this fact.

[DirkGently]

151. The studies don't agree with your Internet Logic.

You're basing your conclusions on pulling together numbers and drawing conclusions without any actual analysis.

Those who have actually looked at the likely results of a single-payer system comprehensively find that it would both save money and allow coverage for everyone.

Respectfully, I think they probably put a bit more into theirs.

Edit: I also just noticed someone pointing out you didn't subtract the cost of the employer-based system that would presumably be gone? As if we'd all be paying for the current system PLUS single-payer?

Say it isn't so -- that's the go-to Republican dodge on this issue -- remember how they trotted it out against Sanders to grossly inflate the cost of his proposals?!

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single-payer-system-cost

June, 1991 General Accounting Office

“If the US were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs [10 percent of health spending] would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage” (“Canadian Health Insurance: Lessons for the United States,” 90 pgs, ref no: T-HRD-91-90. Full text available online at http://archive.gao.gov/d20t9/144039.pdf).

December, 1991 Congressional Budget Office

“If the nation adopted…[a] single-payer system that paid providers at Medicare’s rates, the population that is currently uninsured could be covered without dramatically increasing national spending on health. In fact, all US residents might be covered by health insurance for roughly the current level of spending or even somewhat less, because of savings in administrative costs and lower payment rates for services used by the privately insured. The prospects for con-trolling health care expenditure in future years would also be improved.” (“Universal Health Insurance Coverage Using Medicare’s Payment Rates”) http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/76xx/doc7652/91-CBO-039.pdf

(snip)
June, 1998, Economic Policy Institute

“In the model presented in this paper, it is assumed that in the first year after implementing a universal, single-payer plan, total national health expenditures are unchanged from baseline. If expenditures were higher than baseline in the first few years, then additional revenues above those described here would be needed. However, these higher costs would be more than offset by savings which would accrue within the first decade of the program.”

August, 2005

The National Coalition on Health Care

Impacts of Health Care Reform: Projections of Costs and Savings

By Kenneth E. Thorpe, Ph.D.

This fiscal analysis of the impact of four scenarios for health care reform found that the single payer model would reduce costs by over $1.1 trillion over the next decade while providing comprehensive benefits to all Americans. The other scenarios would be improvements over the status quo, but would not reduce costs as dramatically or provide the same high-quality coverage to all.