4 ms·

Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. Current tax collection collects about 1.5 trillion. If you tax millionaires at 100% you'd see maybe another

Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. Current tax collection collects about 1.5 trillion. If you tax millionaires at 100% you'd see maybe another trillion. Cut defense by 100% and you'd save 600 billion. With the high taxes required in order to implement your ideas I don't think businesses would grow and its possible a great many would fail.

IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago
But in an economy one side's costs are people's income. It's an economy, not a household. Money circulates and performs work when it does, like water. What kinds of mills should it drive? A good health care system seems to me like a good candidate, since it fulfills the most basic needs of humans after food, warmth and shelter. Also, you assume "all other things remaining equal", which is unlikely.
gnaritas 10y ago
> Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. Isn't that assuming current costs for care don't change? Seems a bad assumption since medicare for all would cost less than health insurance for all and be a much more efficient and thus less overhead process while simplifying the system across the board for doctors and hospitals greatly reducing the costs to them by virtually eliminating the huge hassle that is medical billing these days.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  Indeed it did. Study is here: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay...
rgbrenner 10y ago
2017 US tax revenue: 3.6 trillion http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-and-outlay-summary http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-an...
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  My mistake I was only counting funds that can be spent in a discretionary manner. If you wish to abolish social security and other programs like it you can certainly get more. The study is here[0], even accounting for Sanders proposed major tax increases on the wealthy and middle class he still fails to fund it by over 50 percent, and private expenditures would continue to climb. Then you have to consider the costs of "free" education and the multitude of other increased social programs. Sorry it's a fairy tale, him and people like him are lying to get your vote. [0]http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay...
  - rgbrenner 10y ago
    I think you're reading more into my post than I intended. I'm just saying current federal tax revenue is 3.6T.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
akiselev 10y ago
> Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. In 2016, Medicare cost a total of $588 billion [1], covering over 55 million people [2]. The vast majority of those people are over the age of 65 and on average, over 50% of a person's lifetime healthcare costs will be paid after the age of 65 [3]. It would cost over $3 trillion to have Medicare for all if every person alive in the United States was over 65 years old, which is obviously wrong. The real cost would be closer to $1.5 trillion if the US just paid private insurance companies to cover everybody. > Current tax collection collects about 1.5 trillion. No, 2016 tax collections for just the Federal government were $3.3 trillion [1]. The combined total of federal, state, and local is estimated to be at least twice that. > If you tax millionaires at 100% you'd see maybe another trillion. A 15-35% tax rate on millionaires yields at least $500 billion a year in income tax revenue [4]. Increasing capital gains taxes to 100% alone would net almost $2 trillion a year. [1] https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/graphic/52408-budgetoverall.pdf https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-... [2] https://blog.medicare.gov/2015/07/27/medicare-and-medicaid-50-year-anniversary/ https://blog.medicare.gov/2015/07/27/medicare-and-medicaid-5... [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/ [4] https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-Rates-and-Tax-Shares https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-...
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  >No, 2016 tax collections for just the Federal government were $3.3 trillion [1]. The combined total of federal, state, and local is estimated to be at least twice that. I was unclear. The 2016 budget had 1.1 trillion in discretionary spending and 2.4 trillion in mandatory spending.[1] If you stopped paying the national debt, skipped out on our UN and NATO obligations, and ended social security as well as many other social programs then you have the number you quoted. Still in 2016 we borrowed over 500 billion as we can't afford to meet our current obligations as is. State and local governments are cash strapped for the most part. For many existing taxes don't even cover their current expenditures. You can't simply divert all of those funds to healthcare, massive cuts to services would have to be included. >Increasing capital gains taxes to 100% alone would net almost $2 trillion a year. An increase of even half that would turn the United States into a third world nation overnight as huge amounts of capital flees our unreasonable tax system. As for the rest of it the economists and policy analysts at the Urban Institute disagree with your assessment: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay... [1]http://federal-budget.insidegov.com/l/119/2016 http://federal-budget.insidegov.com/l/119/2016
intrasight 10y ago
>Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year This is accurate I think. Canada spends $230 billion per year and has 1/10th the population. $6,299 per Canadian in 2016. BUT. You get to SUBTRACT our current healthcare spending $3 trillion - $3.35 trillion = $750 billion saved. That would have us closer to Canadian spend per person.

IIIIIIIIIIII 10y ago

But in an economy one side's costs are people's income. It's an economy, not a household. Money circulates and performs work when it does, like water. What kinds of mills should it drive? A good health care system seems to me like a good candidate, since it fulfills the most basic needs of humans after food, warmth and shelter. Also, you assume "all other things remaining equal", which is unlikely.

gnaritas 10y ago

> Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. Isn't that assuming current costs for care don't change? Seems a bad assumption since medicare for all would cost less than health insurance for all and be a much more efficient and thus less overhead process while simplifying the system across the board for doctors and hospitals greatly reducing the costs to them by virtually eliminating the huge hassle that is medical billing these days.

cmdrfred 10y ago
Indeed it did. Study is here: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay...

rgbrenner 10y ago

2017 US tax revenue: 3.6 trillion http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-and-outlay-summary http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/federal-receipt-an...

cmdrfred 10y ago
My mistake I was only counting funds that can be spent in a discretionary manner. If you wish to abolish social security and other programs like it you can certainly get more. The study is here[0], even accounting for Sanders proposed major tax increases on the wealthy and middle class he still fails to fund it by over 50 percent, and private expenditures would continue to climb. Then you have to consider the costs of "free" education and the multitude of other increased social programs. Sorry it's a fairy tale, him and people like him are lying to get your vote. [0]http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay...
- rgbrenner 10y ago
  I think you're reading more into my post than I intended. I'm just saying current federal tax revenue is 3.6T.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

akiselev 10y ago

> Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year. In 2016, Medicare cost a total of $588 billion [1], covering over 55 million people [2]. The vast majority of those people are over the age of 65 and on average, over 50% of a person's lifetime healthcare costs will be paid after the age of 65 [3]. It would cost over $3 trillion to have Medicare for all if every person alive in the United States was over 65 years old, which is obviously wrong. The real cost would be closer to $1.5 trillion if the US just paid private insurance companies to cover everybody. > Current tax collection collects about 1.5 trillion. No, 2016 tax collections for just the Federal government were $3.3 trillion [1]. The combined total of federal, state, and local is estimated to be at least twice that. > If you tax millionaires at 100% you'd see maybe another trillion. A 15-35% tax rate on millionaires yields at least $500 billion a year in income tax revenue [4]. Increasing capital gains taxes to 100% alone would net almost $2 trillion a year. [1] https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/graphic/52408-budgetoverall.pdf https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017-... [2] https://blog.medicare.gov/2015/07/27/medicare-and-medicaid-50-year-anniversary/ https://blog.medicare.gov/2015/07/27/medicare-and-medicaid-5... [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361028/ [4] https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-Rates-and-Tax-Shares https://www.irs.gov/uac/SOI-Tax-Stats-Individual-Income-Tax-...

cmdrfred 10y ago
>No, 2016 tax collections for just the Federal government were $3.3 trillion [1]. The combined total of federal, state, and local is estimated to be at least twice that. I was unclear. The 2016 budget had 1.1 trillion in discretionary spending and 2.4 trillion in mandatory spending.[1] If you stopped paying the national debt, skipped out on our UN and NATO obligations, and ended social security as well as many other social programs then you have the number you quoted. Still in 2016 we borrowed over 500 billion as we can't afford to meet our current obligations as is. State and local governments are cash strapped for the most part. For many existing taxes don't even cover their current expenditures. You can't simply divert all of those funds to healthcare, massive cuts to services would have to be included. >Increasing capital gains taxes to 100% alone would net almost $2 trillion a year. An increase of even half that would turn the United States into a third world nation overnight as huge amounts of capital flees our unreasonable tax system. As for the rest of it the economists and policy analysts at the Urban Institute disagree with your assessment: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-effect-national-health-expenditures-and-federal-and-private-spending http://www.urban.org/research/publication/sanders-single-pay... [1]http://federal-budget.insidegov.com/l/119/2016 http://federal-budget.insidegov.com/l/119/2016

intrasight 10y ago

>Medicare for all would cost 2.5 - 3 trillion a year This is accurate I think. Canada spends $230 billion per year and has 1/10th the population. $6,299 per Canadian in 2016. BUT. You get to SUBTRACT our current healthcare spending $3 trillion - $3.35 trillion = $750 billion saved. That would have us closer to Canadian spend per person.