4 ms·

“His heart is in the right place, but Sanders lives on a planet where if only the U.S. would cut its defense spending down to NATO levels (cutting about $250 bi

“His heart is in the right place, but Sanders lives on a planet where if only the U.S. would cut its defense spending down to NATO levels (cutting about $250 billion a year), we could afford to spend trillions more per year on free healthcare“ What these studies show is that the money necessary for free healthcare is already being spent by Americans on a far less efficient and inequitable healthcare system. It’s an allocation problem and a political problem. It’s not an economic problem.

cheez 8y ago
There are definitely benefits to scale, for example, negotiating drug discounts. Single payer creates a single customer that desires to survive politically. It becomes very easy to manipulate this desire to survive to achieve your own goals. For example, keeping salaries high by artificially restricting supply. Look at the two major components here: https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/reformcommission/chapters/ch5.html https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/reformcommission/chapters/ch5.h... These are the only two components that can very effectively manipulate the political entities at election time and not surprisingly, they have the most budget attached to it. The per-capita cost is about $2000 but the related taxes are much higher. Add onto that the debt attached to every healthcare dollar, which I last recall was about 30c and it is unsustainable.
rayiner 8y ago
Allocation is economics! To have universal healthcare, countries like Germany allocate the burden (to the middle class) and the benefit (rationing). That makes the economics work out. If Bernie ran on the platform of making the U.S. like Germany--i.e. doubling taxes on people making under $100k, tracking the majority of students (disproportionately minorities) off the college track at 16, in return for free healthcare and education--do you think he'd continue to be the most popular U.S. politician?

cheez 8y ago

There are definitely benefits to scale, for example, negotiating drug discounts. Single payer creates a single customer that desires to survive politically. It becomes very easy to manipulate this desire to survive to achieve your own goals. For example, keeping salaries high by artificially restricting supply. Look at the two major components here: https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/reformcommission/chapters/ch5.html https://www.fin.gov.on.ca/en/reformcommission/chapters/ch5.h... These are the only two components that can very effectively manipulate the political entities at election time and not surprisingly, they have the most budget attached to it. The per-capita cost is about $2000 but the related taxes are much higher. Add onto that the debt attached to every healthcare dollar, which I last recall was about 30c and it is unsustainable.

rayiner 8y ago

Allocation is economics! To have universal healthcare, countries like Germany allocate the burden (to the middle class) and the benefit (rationing). That makes the economics work out. If Bernie ran on the platform of making the U.S. like Germany--i.e. doubling taxes on people making under $100k, tracking the majority of students (disproportionately minorities) off the college track at 16, in return for free healthcare and education--do you think he'd continue to be the most popular U.S. politician?