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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: Which do you Favor and Why: Medicare for All or ACA expansion? [View all]Gothmog
(180,452 posts)53. How will you pay for it-societal savings are not tax revenues and cannot be used to pay for MFA
Such a plan in theory may generate societal savings but such savings would not pay for a program. Governments can only spend tax revenues and/or borrowings. This study does not say how one would pay for such a program in the real world. I note that Prof. Krugman like the concepts of such a plan in theory but notes that taxes will have to be raised a great deal to pay for such a plan
Back in 2016, here is his position Prof. Krugman compares Sanders hoped for health care savings to the GOP tax cuts. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0
On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders plan isnt just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.
To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich and single-payer really does save money, whereas theres no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, its not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.
To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich and single-payer really does save money, whereas theres no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, its not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.
Today, Prof. Krugman says that such a plan is feasible if you are willing to pay a great deal more in taxes
https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/paul-krugman-explains-why-single-payer-health-care-entirely-achievable-us-and-how
If we went to government provision of all insurance, wed pay more in taxes but less in premiums, and the overall burden of health spending would probably fall, because single-payer systems tend to be cheaper than market-based."
The amount of higher taxes are not quantified in this article by Krugman. To pay for any such plan will require massive tax hikes
Again sanders has utterly failed in his attempts to get Vermont to adopt his magical single payer plan because the state of Vermont cannot use hypothetical societal saving to pay for this plan. Even Krugman admits that much higher taxes are needed
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
88 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I favor which ever one is most popular and will win us the election. Then get to work on the best
dem4decades
Sep 2019
#1
How will you pay for it-societal savings are not tax revenues and cannot be used to pay for MFA
Gothmog
Sep 2019
#53
It is so easy to knock something with made up assumptions when what you support isn't even defined.
wasupaloopa
Sep 2019
#9
This whole debate is about adding a public option. With that all your points are null and void
wasupaloopa
Sep 2019
#51
This is rediculous. Desease prevention starts and ends with the individual. You can't force
wasupaloopa
Sep 2019
#10
Medicare For All because it is immoral to make profits from denying people healthcare.
Nanjeanne
Sep 2019
#27
Warren and Sanders say Americans don't like their health insurance. Polls don't back that up.
Gothmog
Sep 2019
#30
Speaker Pelosi-There's no need to reinvent health care -- just improve Obamacare
Gothmog
Sep 2019
#43
NBC/WSJ poll shows Biden's healthcare stance (optional Medicare buy-in) much more popular
Gothmog
Sep 2019
#58
The ACA...MFA will never happen and why would we start over? Americans like the ACA and would
Demsrule86
Sep 2019
#59
Voters will not tolerate an additional 10 or 15% paycheck deduction to fund M4A
madville
Sep 2019
#60
I'd like to go to Medicare for all; I don't think you can sell it in this election.
brooklynite
Sep 2019
#61
She now has. She claims it will put 11 trillion dollars of savings in the pocket of the middle class
andym
Nov 2019
#87
I'm tired, and I could (really) write a short book on this, so I'll keep it short
Algernon Moncrieff
Sep 2019
#65
Improve BOTH Medicare and Obamacare and begin phasing out the patchwork...
TreasonousBastard
Sep 2019
#67
73% of people favor [the] public option that would keep private insurance in place
Gothmog
Oct 2019
#69
Support for a public option has been increasing, and for Medicare-for-All has been decreasing
Gothmog
Oct 2019
#70
If those projection are anywhere close, MFA ain't gonna happen without big changes. That's unlikely.
Hoyt
Oct 2019
#77
That's depressing. But why Vermont, Colorado and Cal abandoned consideration of single-payer quickly
Hoyt
Oct 2019
#78
Yep. I figured the legislators in all those states just didn't have the guts to tell voters what it
Hoyt
Oct 2019
#81
ACA expansion. Because it is feasible in any congress makeup we could imagine in 2021
scheming daemons
Nov 2019
#88