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 General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Democratic Primaries

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin

(107,738 posts)
Wed Oct 16, 2019, 07:55 PM Oct 2019

The eye-popping cost of Medicare for All [View all]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s refusal to answer repeated questions at Tuesday night’s debate about how she would fund Medicare for All underscores the challenge she faces finding a politically acceptable means to meet the idea’s huge price tag — a challenge that only intensified today with the release of an eye-popping new study.

The Urban Institute, a center-left think tank highly respected among Democrats, is projecting that a plan similar to what Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders are pushing would require $34 trillion in additional federal spending over its first decade in operation. That’s more than the federal government’s total cost over the coming decade for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid combined, according to the most recent Congressional Budget Office projections.

In recent history, only during the height of World War II has the federal government tried to increase taxes, as a share of the economy, as fast as would be required to offset the cost of a single-payer plan, federal figures show. There are “no analogous peacetime tax increases,” says Leonard Burman, a public-administration professor at Syracuse University and a former top tax official in both the Bill Clinton administration and at the CBO. Raising that much more tax revenue “is plausible in the sense that it is theoretically possible,” Burman told me. “But the revolution that would come along with it would get in the way.”

At the debate, as throughout the campaign, Warren refused to provide any specifics about how she would fund a single-payer plan. Instead, whether questioned by moderators or challenged by other candidates, she recycled variants on the same talking points she has used in venues from campaign town halls to a recent appearance on The Late Show With Stephen Colbert. Rather than explaining what revenue she would raise to fund the plan, Warren insisted that under single payer, middle-income families would save more money with the elimination of health-care premiums, co-pays, and deductibles, regardless of any taxes imposed. “Costs will go up for the wealthy and for big corporations, and for hard-working middle-class families, costs will go down,” she said at the debate.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/healthcare/the-eye-popping-cost-of-medicare-for-all/ar-AAISFNC?li=BBnb7Kz

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for:
Joe Biden
194 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The eye-popping cost of Medicare for All [View all] Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 OP
How much is that counted in Trident Missiles? Hekate Oct 2019 #1
2,461 Ford class nuclear carriers (complete with electromagnetic launch systems) lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #23
No wonder EW doesn't want to talk about it. Really pleased this has come out. Voters need to know Thekaspervote Oct 2019 #2
Voters need to know that they will save $ when their new taxes are less than their current premiums. LonePirate Oct 2019 #8
It's funny how supporters never talk about how much the median taxpayer will save either... brooklynite Oct 2019 #11
Even if the savings are as low as 5%-10%, it's still a massive benefit for the country. LonePirate Oct 2019 #17
Well what are they then? qazplm135 Oct 2019 #28
For whom? Is that a serious question? Do you honestly think the average American will pay more? LonePirate Oct 2019 #33
yes it's a serious question qazplm135 Oct 2019 #35
Why would a Dem implement a system where the typical person pays more? How would that pass? LonePirate Oct 2019 #41
lol qazplm135 Oct 2019 #47
What's amusing is you thinking a Dem President can force Congress to pass such a bill. LonePirate Oct 2019 #49
What's amusing is you think qazplm135 Oct 2019 #58
have you lived in this country lately dsc Oct 2019 #160
consider recent history-- the cost of insurance under the ACA eilen Oct 2019 #144
You have no proof of what you say. wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #22
Why do you believe an MFA system implemented by Dems will increase costs to the average American? LonePirate Oct 2019 #32
for many of us, it isn't US that saves money on those premiums lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #27
if Congress has the wherewithal to pass an MFA bill, corporate taxes will definitely increase. LonePirate Oct 2019 #60
The "pound of Flesh" extracted by the repukes for lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #61
I am all for a tax increase since I would no longer pay premiums, co-pays, deductibles, meds, etc. LonePirate Oct 2019 #62
good - I'm guessing you don't have a decent employer provided ( or union provided ) plan -n/t lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #63
I have great insurance. I will still be better off under MFA as will you and every other American. LonePirate Oct 2019 #64
maybe the "insurance" will be fine... lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #65
Now take your preposterous 14% increase and start deducting everything you no longer pay for. LonePirate Oct 2019 #66
I have a decent insurance plan... medical, dental, vision lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #67
Nice, it sounds like you got yours BBG Oct 2019 #92
Copays and deductibles? Act_of_Reparation Oct 2019 #183
Look at all the anger here earlier from wealthy people who had their SALT deductions limited to 10K MichMan Oct 2019 #68
Not every American. Some who pay very little for employer-provided good quality plans won't be emmaverybo Oct 2019 #128
You can focus on selfish outliers. Real Democrats like me will focus on the good for all of society. LonePirate Oct 2019 #129
Many have very low co-pays,no deductibles, prescriptions never more than $15 and usually about emmaverybo Oct 2019 #134
Medicare pays for 80% for hospitalization eilen Oct 2019 #145
Corporate taxes are ultimately passed on to the consumer MichMan Oct 2019 #153
Yes elleng Oct 2019 #51
Societal Savings are not tax revenues and this plan will not work in the real world Gothmog Oct 2019 #122
What do you think happens to the premiums deducted from paychecks under an MFA plan? LonePirate Oct 2019 #124
You keep saying this. Can you tell me what you mean? dpibel Oct 2019 #132
Read the studies being used to support these single payer plans Gothmog Oct 2019 #167
Friend, dpibel Oct 2019 #169
Again, you have to pay for these programs with tax revenues and not societal savings Gothmog Oct 2019 #171
Again, dpibel Oct 2019 #172
I read and understood the material Gothmog Oct 2019 #174
And you still won't say what "societal savings" means dpibel Oct 2019 #175
Deepest apologies dpibel Oct 2019 #181
A dose of reality for Medicare-for-all Gothmog Oct 2019 #190
Read the material Gothmog Oct 2019 #184
Did you actuall read the material and that is what you got from it Gothmog Oct 2019 #185
Nobody has ever been able to specifically quantify the "savings" that would result, nor... George II Oct 2019 #186
EXACTLY RIGHT!! InAbLuEsTaTe Oct 2019 #176
how many people know what DRG is? Medicare effectively sets a max cost and once any provider hits beachbumbob Oct 2019 #3
34 trillion vs 1.7 trillion over 10 years wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #4
This is just bullshit. Other developed nations are able to provide healthcare for all at a fraction Doodley Oct 2019 #5
Read the article and the links provided Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #7
A "Left leaning" study in America is far right by the standards of most Doodley Oct 2019 #82
You're not in the UK Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #84
What shit? What are you talking about? Listen to yourself. Doodley Oct 2019 #87
Back at you Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #88
USA pays nearly 18% GDP for healthcare. UK less than 10%. Guess what? The Brits Doodley Oct 2019 #90
Do they now? Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #99
You didn't ask me, but here are some numbers dpibel Oct 2019 #104
Thank you for providing facts that every American should be aware of. Doodley Oct 2019 #107
Yo is Not "spreading rw propaganda".. He Cha Oct 2019 #12
Other nations do not have a population of Zoonart Oct 2019 #31
Thanks for the far right talking points. Doodley Oct 2019 #83
Other nations have two characteristics that we don't have. Blue_true Oct 2019 #79
I've heard the same talking points on Fox News. Ever heard of economies of scale? Doodley Oct 2019 #85
Shop around for MRI? Blue_true Oct 2019 #96
Why do you use the "LOL" when it comes to MRI? I don't find it funny that Doodley Oct 2019 #109
I would rather pay someone who is not going to rush through something Blue_true Oct 2019 #115
That's why we have the term "per capita" dpibel Oct 2019 #94
I understand what per capital means. Blue_true Oct 2019 #98
I'm afraid you are confused dpibel Oct 2019 #100
What are you missing? Lots. Blue_true Oct 2019 #101
Last go round dpibel Oct 2019 #102
Insurance companies have extensive claims and payment infrastructure in place. Blue_true Oct 2019 #116
Throw in free childcare for every baby, free college and eliminating student debt and I say we have UniteFightBack Oct 2019 #6
The Eye Popping costs of what we pay now are probably more. bullimiami Oct 2019 #9
Yup. We are already paying WAY MORE, inc bloated corporate overheads blm Oct 2019 #14
Overhead is an accounting term. It can be figured in many ways. That chart has no explanation. wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #20
Uh huh. No one at Physicians for National Health Program is smarter blm Oct 2019 #42
We spent $3.5 trillion, or $10,739 per person in 2017. angstlessk Oct 2019 #59
"Premiums would disappear, and 95% of all households would save money." blm Oct 2019 #10
Are you familiar with Medicare? Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #13
Yes. It all needs an overhaul. blm Oct 2019 #15
Why becuase you think so? The American people do not think so. Supporting that is supporting trump wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #18
Majority of American people DO support single-payer. blm Oct 2019 #25
I'm 69 and have been on Medicare Advantage for 3 years and beg to disagree CurtEastPoint Oct 2019 #29
But, so many Democrats believe Medicare Advantage is a scam. Hoyt Oct 2019 #80
I have Aetna and I kinda hate them for some admin and CurtEastPoint Oct 2019 #112
I liked it. But if I were one of those who had to see a certain doc, take any medicine I wanted, Hoyt Oct 2019 #113
But those are all private health insurance companies eilen Oct 2019 #147
That's why there is choice, and one can go back to Medicare if Hoyt Oct 2019 #148
All fairy tales! Where is the study that supports all that? It is just made up shit! wasupaloopa Oct 2019 #16
Go to Physicians for a National Health Program site. There are blm Oct 2019 #21
I've been hearing that since 1977 when I worked for a state Medicaid agency, even believed it. Hoyt Oct 2019 #30
I don't disagree about a public option as first step. blm Oct 2019 #36
If only a Public Option had been enacted, 80% of population would be enrolled by now, close to MFA. Hoyt Oct 2019 #44
Exactly. blm Oct 2019 #46
Yeah. If only. kcr Oct 2019 #111
Let's use some arithmetic Midnightwalk Oct 2019 #19
"The US spent 3.5 trillion in 2017 and 3.5 * 10 is close to 34 trillion." AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #40
Doh l didn't say on healthcare Midnightwalk Oct 2019 #45
I think the nature of these discussion that center around the question of The Liberal Lion Oct 2019 #24
15-20% VAT MichMan Oct 2019 #70
I agree with you on both counts The Liberal Lion Oct 2019 #106
A VAT is a tax on the poor. former9thward Oct 2019 #138
The population of thoes 3 nations is approximatly 176million...combined. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #72
Respectfully The Liberal Lion Oct 2019 #105
I respectfully disagree..it's a matter of comparing apples to a cactus. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #120
Simple: put a tax on all Wall Street financial transactions CurtEastPoint Oct 2019 #26
✔️ blm Oct 2019 #39
In 2018 the US spent ... GeorgeGist Oct 2019 #34
The real question should be "How much does it cost now?" flotsam Oct 2019 #37
The real question should be "How much does it cost now?" flotsam Oct 2019 #38
The eye popping costs of Insurance executives-AND Boxerfan Oct 2019 #43
There you go, cut execs' salary to zero, and everyone would save 5 cents a month. Hoyt Oct 2019 #81
A nickel's a bit low. It's also irrelevant. dpibel Oct 2019 #114
$4 Insulin costs $400 a month wellst0nev0ter Oct 2019 #48
The rich will pay most of it. Joe941 Oct 2019 #50
Are you sure? Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #52
No they won't.....they will move their money. AncientGeezer Oct 2019 #121
They cant move money that hasnt been made yet. Joe941 Oct 2019 #125
It will bankrupt the country and people know it BlueMississippi Oct 2019 #53
It can be done. Turin_C3PO Oct 2019 #54
That is not MFA - that is extension of ACA nt BlueMississippi Oct 2019 #55
Yes. Turin_C3PO Oct 2019 #56
Yes -- but that will take years and I have no problem transitioning nt BlueMississippi Oct 2019 #57
Agree. That's fastest way to better healthcare system as long as so many are skeptical. Hoyt Oct 2019 #78
How does that work dpibel Oct 2019 #74
Currently, the entire spending comes from older, at-risk people BlueMississippi Oct 2019 #75
What? dpibel Oct 2019 #86
Thank you. Some of the arguments against single payer blm Oct 2019 #103
We are already well on our way to bankruptcy... Joe941 Oct 2019 #133
Americans are not ready for a 65% income tax PhoenixDem Oct 2019 #69
Haven't you heard? The rich will be paying for all of it MichMan Oct 2019 #71
lol PhoenixDem Oct 2019 #73
Where did you get that number, 65%? Turin_C3PO Oct 2019 #76
Over $10,000 a year for every man, woman and child in the US lapfog_1 Oct 2019 #77
You are right. These are bullshit numbers. They are talking point numbers that are there to help Doodley Oct 2019 #89
It is hard to believe dpibel Oct 2019 #91
Yes, it is real, but the idea that we have to almost double it to cover everybody is not real. Doodley Oct 2019 #93
I'm sorry. dpibel Oct 2019 #95
You are correct. I would say that all Democrats need to wake up to what you are saying: Doodley Oct 2019 #110
Because your math is wrong dansolo Oct 2019 #150
Beg to differ dpibel Oct 2019 #155
My source? The Urban Institute dansolo Oct 2019 #182
This is pretty wild dpibel Oct 2019 #97
excuse me but how much are we paying now???????????????????????? garybeck Oct 2019 #108
K&R!!!! iwannaknow Oct 2019 #141
Ron Brownstein tweet: highplainsdem Oct 2019 #117
"Coverage" does equate to access to care dflprincess Oct 2019 #118
the eye-popping... myohmy2 Oct 2019 #119
Joe Biden's health plan looks like the winner Gothmog Oct 2019 #123
We already pay it. gibraltar72 Oct 2019 #126
Yes!!!!!!! iwannaknow Oct 2019 #142
I thought Warren's M4A plan was (essentially) the same as Bernie M4A plan. If so, why only require in2herbs Oct 2019 #127
Warren Left $30 Trillion Short of Paying for Her Health Plan Gothmog Oct 2019 #130
40% is a pretty big fraction dpibel Oct 2019 #135
Let me simplify this Crazyleftie Oct 2019 #131
Well stated! iwannaknow Oct 2019 #139
Support for a public option has been increasing, and for Medicare-for-All has been decreasing Gothmog Oct 2019 #136
Why Elizabeth Warren won't talk about the cost of 'Medicare for All' Gothmog Oct 2019 #137
This is a bogus argument. Overall healthcare costs will go down with M4A. iwannaknow Oct 2019 #140
Societal savings are not tax revenues and cannot be used to pay for this program Gothmog Oct 2019 #143
I ask you again dpibel Oct 2019 #156
NYT-This Is the Strongest Argument Against Medicare for All- Gothmog Oct 2019 #161
Seriously? dpibel Oct 2019 #162
Read the Krugman article Gothmog Oct 2019 #163
This part? Or a different one? dpibel Oct 2019 #164
Still waiting, btw dpibel Oct 2019 #165
See post 167 Gothmog Oct 2019 #168
Again, read the material Gothmog Oct 2019 #166
Choices for Financing Medicare for All: A Preliminary Analysis Gothmog Oct 2019 #191
Thanks to none other than the the Koch brother we now know manintheback Oct 2019 #146
Actually, that Intercept claim is a little off, factually speaking ehrnst Oct 2019 #149
We still have NO concrete idea of how much "M4A" will cost overall. George II Oct 2019 #154
About 11% more than we currently spend dpibel Oct 2019 #158
my eyes popped. hope i can afford to get them fixed. haha. Kurt V. Oct 2019 #151
The discussion ends when you consider we are all human and should be better than this, meaning, yes rainy Oct 2019 #152
In 2017 total health care spending in the US was $3.5 trillion. mn9driver Oct 2019 #157
controling costs is the first step questionseverything Oct 2019 #159
Word of advice Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Oct 2019 #173
Honest question Skid Rogue Oct 2019 #170
I can prove MFA will save money for middle class at140 Oct 2019 #177
More boomer_wv Oct 2019 #178
Vs the eye poping cost of the current insurance system? Tiggeroshii Oct 2019 #179
It might be hard to quantify. Turbineguy Oct 2019 #180
A dose of reality for Medicare-for-all Gothmog Oct 2019 #187
Jennifer Rubin melman Oct 2019 #188
Choices for Financing Medicare for All: A Preliminary Analysis Gothmog Oct 2019 #189
lol melman Oct 2019 #192
Medicare for All's jobs problem Gothmog Nov 2019 #193
Nancy Pelosi is "not for doing away with Obamacare" and prefers to give people choices. Gothmog Dec 2019 #194
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Democratic Primaries»The eye-popping cost of M...»Reply #0