5 ms·

Is this Bernie's plan? I know there are subtle but important differences between all the different varieties of "universal healthcare" that exist in the world.

• secabeen 7y ago
  The fundamental challenge of any universal health care system is that to cut our spending on health care to the level of other western industrialized countries will take $1 Trillion of annual revenue out of the existing system. There's going to be a lot of disruption and people who need new jobs when that revenue goes to other things in our economy.
  • Loughla 7y ago
    Real question, not snarky: Why is this sort of downsizing always wrong for white-collar workers when blue-collar workers have been dealing with it for decades?
    • koolba 7y ago
      There’s a huge difference between downsizing caused by economic forces of the private sector and downsizing caused by outright elimination of an industry by elected officials.
      • herbstein 7y ago
        But that line is massively blurred when said downsizing of blue collar workers is a direct (and known) result of free trade agreements made by elected officials. You're adding one step to the chain, but the chain is still there.
      • ablekh 7y ago
        Healthcare (as some other sectors) is full of inefficiencies and removing or, at least, reducing them cannot be seriously labeled as "elimination of an industry". I don't see how job market restructuring in healthcare industry due to proposed transition to the single payer model is different in its essence from potential significant job market restructuring across various industry sectors due to automation trend.
      • asdff 7y ago
        Sometimes you need the public government to step in and shut down malignant private industries.
  • tropo 7y ago
    Roughly, that is 20 million jobs lost. (assume $50,000 each) Cutting $1 trillion is a change that affects 5% of GDP. This issue is part of why Obamacare kept the insurance companies. Killing jobs didn't go over well.
    • n9 7y ago
      Looks like 1.7m jobs, not 20. I guess some folks make a whole lot more than 50k.
  • burkaman 7y ago
    > There's going to be a lot of disruption and people who need new jobs when that revenue goes to other things in our economy. From the paper: "Improvements in system efficiency, such as reductions in billing tasks, will involve a contraction of the workforce. Although the country will benefit from lower costs, 936 000 administrative positions and 746 600 positions in the health-care insurance industry are estimated to become redundant. However, detailed transition plans have suggested either funding for early retirement options, extensive severance, retraining programmes, and relocation expenses for all workers in these sectors. Implementation of such a plan is estimated to cost $61·5 billion annually over 2 years, a sum which would be recouped within the first year by the health-care savings estimated here." https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)33019-3/fulltext#seccestitle90 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
• cagenut 7y ago
  Yes. The summary explicitly references the "Medicare for All Act", which is technically Pramila Jayapal's bill in the house[1]. That is the specific legislation Bernie is campaigning for when he says "our plan". It checks all four of those boxes in your linked tweet. The study also directly cites Sanders twice (to explain where they get their parameters). [1] - https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1384 https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/1384
• fernandotakai 7y ago
  i'm not american, so excuse me for the lack of knowledge, but i've heard that bernie plans to ban private insurance. is that right? i mean, that seems like a really bad idea -- if you have money, why wouldn't you get better health care? edit: btw i live in a country with the largest public health care system in the world https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistema_%C3%9Anico_de_Sa%C3%BAde https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistema_%C3%9Anico_de_Sa%C3%BA... and we never banned private health care because... well, even with the best public health care system, you will still have to wait a lot to get any procedure done. so if you can afford, you can pay for private health care and get stuff done faster. it doesn't mean that public health doesn't work -- it works quite well, it's just that you have to wait a lot sometimes for some procedures.
  • ameister14 7y ago
    I don't believe he'd ban supplemental insurance, just insurance that covers the same services the State option covers.
    • fernandotakai 7y ago
      but... why? i mean, if i can afford it, i would want private health care because it's usually less crowded and you can have stuff done a lot faster. for example: a friend of mine had to wait 6mo to do a vasectomy through our public health care system. another friend waited 2w to do his (through private health care) if you could afford it, wouldn't it be better to pay for it? for me (and maybe i'm completely in the wrong here) it's like public transportation vs cabs/uber. i know i can take public transportation everywhere, but sometimes i'm in a hurry so i just get an uber. it doesn't mean other people can't use public transportation, it's just that i'm in a hurry and i need to get somewhere faster.
      • ameister14 7y ago
        For the single payer system to work as Bernie has set it up, everyone must be within coverage.