3 ms·
Even if that scenario happens (which I would argue wouldn't happen) then American citizens would STILL be far better off. They would retain that health care cov
by checktheorder 7y ago
Even if that scenario happens (which I would argue wouldn't happen) then American citizens would STILL be far better off. They would retain that health care coverage during periods of unemployment or while working for employers who don't offer health insurance coverage, and they would never be kicked off their insurance plan due to pre-existing conditions.
- HillaryBriss 7y agoi think those conditions also hold true under the ACA plans right now (unless Trump dismantled those conditions.) anyway, a major selling point for Medicare-for-all I'm hearing is that overall it will result in a big savings. if that system-wide savings does not materialize, if we still have to pay the same amount we're paying now through higher taxes that amount to the same thing, then I would think Medicare-for-all didn't actually deliver on the promises. the other thing I wonder about is: look at prescription drug prices now: the FDA has been captured by Big Pharma. drug prices are way higher than they need to be. Medicare-for-all needs some real safeguards, something really strong, to prevent that sort of price inflation. and since single payer would eliminate competition, it has to be some other mechanism.
- checktheorder 7y agoI think it's safe to say that the savings would definitely arise if (if...) M4A is implemented in good faith. Decades of hard data from basically every other developed nation with universal health care demonstrates this. All it will take is the political willpower which is now starting to emerge on the federal level. One also needs to carefully consider what constitutes a "tax" when it comes to health care funding. Premium payments, co-pays, and deductibles all need to be factored in to an apples-to-apples comparison of individual taxpayers' contributions to any M4A system. There's also a simple mechanism to fix drug pricing: repeal the laws passed in 2003 that ban most US federal agencies from negotiating for bulk medical product pricing, and pass new laws requiring it of all agencies. Currently, I believe that only the Department of Veterans Affairs is legally allowed to negotiate bulk drug pricing. They take full advantage of that, and enable active and retired service members to significantly cut their prescription costs. They're a perfect example of the power of bulk pricing. And again, revising the law in this way is a political-willpower problem, not an economic one.
- HillaryBriss 7y ago> a political-willpower problem right. and, though it may be simple, it's non-trivial. politics and moneyed interests will be the next battle to fight after M4A becomes law under president Warren and Democratic majorities in House and Senate. and i will venture to guess that the very next day a strange and unexpected coalition of stakeholders will join forces to create exceptions to that new single payer system. the political alliances will probably be fascinating. we might even see a division so stark that one of the two political parties emerges as a shill for hospitals and doctors, while the other party becomes their enemy.
- checktheorder 7y agoQuite likely. I think Americans in support of single-payer ought to look to Canada, not just as a model of how to run a fair and cost-effective single-payer system, but how to implement it against massive political opposition from incumbent groups that financially benefit from a for-profit system. Americans might not be familiar with the name Tommy Douglas, but to many in Canada he's considered a hero.