Where do you stand on Healthcare?

[NorthDallas40]

Yep that’s exactly what I’m doing at your math skills Albert

Got any non partisan links? I gave you three estimates.

 

[hog88]

So it shifts to taxes instead of premiums out of pocket. What’s your point?

FACT CHECK: Medicare for All Would Save the U.S. Trillions; Public Option Would Leave Millions Uninsured, Not Garner Savings - Public Citizen

Overall, working families that make around $60,000 a year would pay up to 14% less on their annual health care costs.

What’s a “working family”?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Yeah.... right....

Facts suck don’t they.

 

[NorthDallas40]

What’s a “working family”?

Not the ones in his link.

 

[USMC-TNVOL]

Yep that’s exactly what I’m doing at your math skills Albert

Got any non partisan links? I gave you three estimates.

You’re going to ask me for non partisan links when there’s 22 different studies including the same group cites in your slant BS from earlier.

 

[NorthDallas40]

You’re going to ask me for non partisan links when there’s 22 different studies including the same group cites in your slant BS from earlier.

How about we just use the one you chest thumped over. They put the price tag at $3.3T a year to taxpayers. So we agree on that program cost then? Hey it’s the common study and the one you’ve chest thumped over.

BTW Albert federal tax revenues in 2019 total were $3.5T so how are you going to come up with twice that?

 

[NorthDallas40]

You’re going to ask me for non partisan links when there’s 22 different studies including the same group cites in your slant BS from earlier.

Hey Albert I’ll tell you what. I’ll assume that $3.3T program cost that we agreed to was for all program costs and included the current Medicare recipients. So let’s see the 2019 Medicare costs.

Ok so that is $644B, thus the delta cost would be $2.7T. Federal tax revenues of which around 90% are income tax related sources were $3.5T in 2019. Corporate taxes are only 7% payroll and income taxes are around 85% I think. Thus we would need to increase federal tax revenues which are most dominantly born by individuals by 77%.

So can you please explain to me how your “cost savings” of $2T is real when we are increasing tax revenues by 77% of current tax receipts?

 

[NorthDallas40]

Hey Albert I’ll tell you what. I’ll assume that $3.3T program cost that we agreed to was for all program costs and included the current Medicare recipients. So let’s see the 2019 Medicare costs.

Ok so that is $644B, thus the delta cost would be $2.7T. Federal tax revenues of which around 90% are income tax related sources were $3.5T in 2019. Corporate taxes are only 7% payroll and income taxes are around 85% I think. Thus we would need to increase federal tax revenues which are most dominantly born by individuals by 77%.

So can you please explain to me how your “cost savings” of $2T is real when we are increasing tax revenues by 77% of current tax receipts?

Hey what happened @USMC-TNVOL you were all mouthy touting a $2T savings that M4A would result in. So I’d really like you to show me how those savings manifest based on the report we both used as an example showing federal tax receipts would need to increase by at least 77% to fund the program.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

We do not have a problem with access. I was in the ER with my wife Tuesday night there was a woman in there due to a migraine with no insurance, she was seen. Overhearing her conversation with the admitting (or whatever you call the clerks) people she's a regular.

If people knew that a hospital ER had the option to deny service if they can't pay maybe they'd be more responsible and buy an insurance policy.

ACA was supposed to lower ER admit rates, but they've gone up. Expanded Medicaid means more people now have free insurance, so why not go to the ER when your stomach hurts or your leg feels funny? Maybe you get some pain pills if you're lucky. As for access the pandemic has proven the viability of telemedicine, if you have a phone you have access to a doctor. I've used it on our kids because they always get sick after the doctor's office closes, the CVS urgent care things are always full, and the ER is going to set me back a grand regardless of the issue. You call or video chat, doctor asks questions and send a scrip to your pharmacy, and it's $40. If you live in a rural area I don't know why you'd use anything else for the occasional illness.

 

[OHvol40]

ACA was supposed to lower ER admit rates, but they've gone up. Expanded Medicaid means more people now have free insurance, so why not go to the ER when your stomach hurts or your leg feels funny? Maybe you get some pain pills if you're lucky. As for access the pandemic has proven the viability of telemedicine, if you have a phone you have access to a doctor. I've used it on our kids because they always get sick after the doctor's office closes, the CVS urgent care things are always full, and the ER is going to set me back a grand regardless of the issue. You call or video chat, doctor asks questions and send a scrip to your pharmacy, and it's $40. If you live in a rural area I don't know why you'd use anything else for the occasional illness.

People use ERs in many cases because they are uninsured or underinsured and that is the place where they can’t be turned away. If you have more people entering the system the way they are supposed to (PCPs and subsequently specialists when needed) then you reduce undue ED utilization, if that’s what your major concern is. Not to mention people will be more apt to exercise preventative options.

I know, in the obstetrics world, often low income, drug addicted, or immigrant pregnant patients enter the healthcare system for the first time solely out of tremendous concern for their unborn child. Many times, it’s far along in their gestation where they haven’t received proper care/instruction well into their third trimester. Hence our relatively poor infant and maternal mortality rates. No matter how you cut it, this is an example of the inherent problems in our system.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

People use ERs in many cases because they are uninsured or underinsured and that is the place where they can’t be turned away. If you have more people entering the system the way they are supposed to (PCPs and subsequently specialists when needed) then you reduce undue ED utilization, if that’s what your major concern is. Not to mention people will be more apt to exercise preventative options.

I know, in the obstetrics world, often low income, drug addicted, or immigrant pregnant patients enter the healthcare system for the first time solely out of tremendous concern for their unborn child. Many times, it’s far along in their gestation where they haven’t received proper care/instruction well into their third trimester. Hence our relatively poor infant and maternal mortality rates. No matter how you cut it, this is an example of the inherent problems in our system.

IDK where you live but any pregnant woman of any immigration status gets free healthcare in TN. "Underinsured" is quite an interesting term, by the definition I'm underinsured.

 

[NorthDallas40]

IDK where you live but any pregnant woman of any immigration status gets free healthcare in TN. "Underinsured" is quite an interesting term, by the definition I'm underinsured.

Underinsured... LMAO another call to action requiring more money to be spent and more government interference.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Hey Albert I’ll tell you what. I’ll assume that $3.3T program cost that we agreed to was for all program costs and included the current Medicare recipients. So let’s see the 2019 Medicare costs.

Ok so that is $644B, thus the delta cost would be $2.7T. Federal tax revenues of which around 90% are income tax related sources were $3.5T in 2019. Corporate taxes are only 7% payroll and income taxes are around 85% I think. Thus we would need to increase federal tax revenues which are most dominantly born by individuals by 77%.

So can you please explain to me how your “cost savings” of $2T is real when we are increasing tax revenues by 77% of current tax receipts?

So since @USMC-TNVOL clearly has his tongue tied and can’t answer could somebody else please provide an answer on how we raise federal tax receipts by 77% to provide this vaunted healthcare plan without destroying our economy and overtly steal money from our citizens?

 

[LouderVol]

22 studies agree: 'Medicare for All' saves money

“All of the studies, regardless of ideological orientation, showed that long-term cost savings were likely. Even the Mercatus Center, a right-wing think tank, recently found about $2 trillion in net savings over 10 years from a single-payer Medicare for All system.”

The PLOS paper synopsis states that it doesnt account for the growth of the Medicare infrastructure. We are suddenly going to add +200 million more people and the government isnt going to have hire anyone else.

" Future research should refine estimates of the effects of coverage expansion on utilization, evaluate provider administrative costs in varied existing single-payer systems, analyze implementation options, and evaluate US-based single-payer programs, as available"

And how well does Medicare function? Not good.

Medicare is No Model of Administrative Simplicity or Efficiency

The cost per beneficiary of medicare admin is higher on a pure dollar figure. The savings argument comes from percentages but not dollars or number of beneficiaries.

And medicare still makes bad payments. 6% of their TOTAL budget goes to bad payments.

"In Fiscal Year 2017, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that improper Medicare payments totaled $52 billion, only $1.4 billion of which was recovered. Last fiscal year 2018, GAO estimated that Medicare racked up another $48.5 billion in improper payments."

 

[LouderVol]

Where's the negotiations? If it's single payer, who else can doctors and hospitals negotiate with? If there's no competition then there's no negotiation. It's whatever Nancy Pelosi and co say

I can get behind single payer if I had any confidence that our politicians could write a plan that would be somewhat workable. I'm sorry, I just don't

Does the government ever save money when it negotiates? In our contracts it is far more often that the feds round up on the numbers than down.

 

[LouderVol]

Are you serious? The article on the website didn’t do the studies themselves and has links to a couple including the right wing one.

Actually of the 62 referenced paper I didnt see the "right wing" source listed.

 

[MG1968]

All of you advocating for government healthcare need to spend a year in the VA medical system.

 

[vol445]

 

[NorthDallas40]

I remember that video somebody needs to pay for allllll my kids! LMFAO

 

[LouderVol]

Here you go.

How does the quality of the U.S. healthcare system compare to other countries? - Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker

Treatable and preventable deaths - Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker

Would those treatable and preventable diseases include fatassery? I wonder what the same chart just looking at BMI would compare to those of deaths.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Hey Albert I’ll tell you what. I’ll assume that $3.3T program cost that we agreed to was for all program costs and included the current Medicare recipients. So let’s see the 2019 Medicare costs.

Ok so that is $644B, thus the delta cost would be $2.7T. Federal tax revenues of which around 90% are income tax related sources were $3.5T in 2019. Corporate taxes are only 7% payroll and income taxes are around 85% I think. Thus we would need to increase federal tax revenues which are most dominantly born by individuals by 77%.

So can you please explain to me how your “cost savings” of $2T is real when we are increasing tax revenues by 77% of current tax receipts?

Hey @USMC-TNVOL we never finished our discussion. Could you explain how a $2T fee reduction to medical providers justifies a 77% increase in federal tax receipts? TIA!

 

[LouderVol]

Hey @USMC-TNVOL we never finished our discussion. Could you explain how a $2T fee reduction to medical providers justifies a 77% increase in federal tax receipts? TIA!

I wonder how much government waste these people add when doing their projections. All the extra packages and pork spending, cronyism etc.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I wonder how much government waste these people add when doing their projections. All the extra packages and pork spending, cronyism etc.

No idea but since three non partisan think tanks put pen to paper and were I think within $500B on their estimates I think that’s eye opening. And I think two I looked at said they were conservative giving Bernie credit that some of his pie in the sky ideas for revenue might work?

Government provided healthcare for 350M people... repeat that out loud to yourself three times.

 

[VolStrom]

No idea but since three non partisan think tanks put pen to paper and were I think within $500B on their estimates I think that’s eye opening. And I think two I looked at said they were conservative giving Bernie credit that some of his pie in the sky ideas for revenue might work?

Government provided healthcare for 350M people... repeat that out loud to yourself three times.

The gubment manages to tax everyone, why can't they provide healthcare to everyone? You guys are so narrow minded.

 

[NorthDallas40]

The gubment manages to tax everyone, why can't they provide healthcare to everyone? You guys are so narrow minded.

I’ll keep what I’ve got and not send another 40% of my income to these idiots to fund this TYVM