3 ms·
AFAIK this distribution of expenses is why "Medicare for all" isn't that much more expensive than just "Medicare + Medicaid" (which is to say, public health car
by shantly 7y ago
AFAIK this distribution of expenses is why "Medicare for all" isn't that much more expensive than just "Medicare + Medicaid" (which is to say, public health care spending as it exists already). Consider also how many of the most expensive younger folks, being the ones with major chronic illnesses, are already unable to work and on Medicaid. Everyone else is relatively healthy, on average, and so pretty cheap to cover. I'd bet by far the largest remaining expenses among that mostly-healthy-and-not-already-covered-by-public-programs segment are pregnancy, births, and first month or two of care for sick or premature newborns.
- pcurve 7y agoYou are right. I did some digging. Cost of premature birth cost 26 billion per year. Last 6 month end of life care 170 billion. We are so desensitized to figures in billions because we regularly hear about companies market cap approaching 1 trillion and people with wealth of 100 billion. But entire tax revenue is only 3.3 tril.