121–130 of 569 posts
50% of health resources are used in the final 5 years of life. The young should not pay for the healthcare of the elderly. Society should be apportioned into different age categories, and funded separately, with a 'base' tier for all citizens and legal residents, and a higher tier for those with private or employer insurance.
With California and New York both exploring statewide single payer healthcare it looks like the Overton window is moving closer to legitimate discussion of a nationwide single payer plan in the US. It’ll be interesting to watch, since this is such a hot-button topic here on many levels.
Why would you want it nation wide? Even if you “support it”, I’d much rather watch the implications from the various experiments across states. Then we can select the best option. Personally, I’d like to see some states ban healthcare outright. Others have full coverage and everything in between. Then wait 10 years and we can see the results. I strongly suspect there would be states willing to do this.
With California and New York both exploring statewide single payer healthcare it looks like the Overton window is moving closer to legitimate discussion of a nationwide single payer plan in the US. It’ll be interesting to watch, since this is such a hot-button topic here on many levels.
With California and New York both exploring statewide single payer healthcare it looks like the Overton window is moving closer to legitimate discussion of a nationwide single payer plan in the US. It’ll be interesting to watch, since this is such a hot-button topic here on many levels.
Massachusetts may try it as well: https://masscare.org/ It'll be a very interesting experiment, if it works, other states will copy it. If it fails wealthy people will leave those states for places with lower taxes, and poorer people will move in to gain free health care. There's a reason the most populous states (CA, NY, MA) are the ones trying it first, and it's not because it's cheaper.
As they say, naming things is harder than you'd think
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my case the premium wouldn't even come close to the marketplace cost. I'd be losing overall.
https://www.peoplekeep.com/blog/which-health-insurance-costs... > Nationally, the analysis found that individual ACA Marketplace premiums are 10 percent lower than the average employer-sponsored insurance premium, after the adjustments. (Which makes sense; it's a very large risk group.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You really think people are going to flee NYC and the large cities in CA over this?
OP sounds to be arguing the opposite. One lives in a low tax state while earning money / paying taxes, then retires to a rural part of NY / CA to receive tax-payer-backed benefits without paying for them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
30% of the US federal budget is healthcare spending. https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function And that is only because a ton of people do not actually get healthcare, either because deductibles dissuade them or they do not pass the means testing to get enough subsidies to buy Medicaid or healthcare.gov insurance. And that is because Medicaid severely underpays doctors to the point that if you visit a US c…
Very broad strokes, doctors in the US are overpaid and conservatives legislated Medicare can't negotiate drug prices. Lots of room to drive down costs. Spending is high because of a dysfunctional system driven by profit instead of care. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2019/03/12/702500408/are-... https://www.healthaffairs.org/doi/full/10.1377/hlthaff.2010.... https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/10/25/opinion/let-medi…
If you don't want private companies to be involved in that coverage that's fine, but the whole Medicare can't negotiate prices is such a weak talking point, obfuscating the issue for cheap points.
it appears that this bill does not actually deal with the funding mechanisms for single payer, which will undoubtedly be contentious. From the Campaign for New York Health: > this legislation can be passed outside of the budget as a standalone bill - the #NYHealthAct is intentionally written to first pass on human rights principles - that care should be equitable and available to all. Then we pass the funding mechani…
Seems a bit pointless to pass a feel good bill that will cost billions and ignore the whole money situation hoping to solve it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Remember that this expense is also reducing the cost of employers. One of the best ways to finance this would be a payroll tax that is basically equal (in aggregate) to the insurance the company is (usually) already paying.
Yes! The private-insurance-mimicing payroll tax is by far the best path. Nobody is going to believe that there are savings to be had, so it's best to start by reducing friction.