Home | About | Donate

'Easy to Pay for Something That Costs Less': New Study Shows Medicare for All Would Save US $5.1 Trillion Over Ten Years


'Easy to Pay for Something That Costs Less': New Study Shows Medicare for All Would Save US $5.1 Trillion Over Ten Years

Jake Johnson, staff writer

Confronting the question most commonly asked of the growing number of Americans who support replacing America's uniquely inefficient and immoral for-profit healthcare system with Medicare for All—"How do we pay for it?"—a new paper released Friday by researchers at the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) shows that financing a single-payer system would


So…tell us again why you will not support not-for profit single payer HR 676 - expanded and improved Medicare for all, Nancy Pelosi?..and all the other sold-out entrenched establishment DINO’s serving the for-profit health “care” industry for campaign-contribution bribes - selling themselves (and US) cheap!

The “leadership” of the entrenched neo-liberal “centrist” wing is selling progressives and our issues down the freakin river yet again! Pelosi and schumer both serve self-serving interests that are at odds with progressive issues and defeating the criminal trump regime! All thru the Clinton and Obama years the “strategy” (so-called) of those two failed craven “leaders” and all the other “centrist” DINO Dems was a lesson on how to lose elections - losing seats and party base every damn mid-term election…they still cling to that sellout losing “strategy”, even after clinging to the loathed and despised red queen instead of Bernie Sanders, just selling us a different bag-o-shite to justify their failure, entrenched stupidity, and self-interested complicity with R’Con corporate servitude! I call BS!


Don’t worry, KC will be here any minute to explain it to you.


That was my first reaction …You LISTENING Nancy “Deaf” Pelosi.

But of course, regardless of ‘ALL THE EVIDENCE AND CONVICTIONS’
Impeachment is not even on the table.

One Hopes that Mueller uncovers her and Schumer’s Complicity Payoffs as well.


When there’s no more Trump to sow fear about and they lose seats the next time around, rest assured:

They’ll blame liberals!


How long before progressives realize they need to leave the Democratic Party?


And Ralph Nader.
And Jimmy Dore.
And Julian Assange.
And Jill Stein.
And Susan Sarandon.
And Russian hackers.
And sunspots.


Only the liberal sunspots.


Why should Congress Give us what we need when their plan is to de- populate? The Media never reports on how many people die from not being able to afford to see a doctor and have to stop taking their Meds! These entitled a- holes need to be stripped of their expensive health plans … because it costs too much!


It would be useful to develop an plan for finding ways to transition and effectively use the skills of the many administrators who would not longer be needed in the health industry.


It’s important to understand the difference between the House Bill (considered the Gold Standard) and the Senate Bill. Best described here: http://healthoverprofit.org/2018/11/29/importance-of-aligning-house-and-senate-single-payer-bills-the-right-way/


Congressional committee hearings are needed on this. It has been discussed over and over in the media but it finally needs to be discussed in a congressional committee setting. Then those for and against can have their say and legislators could decide what to do. Certainly it seems to make a lot of sense given the desire to expand healthcare coverage to everyone and control costs but can it overcome the objections of conservatives fighting big government and high taxes and be politically viable?


Am I just foggy or is it everyone else. Even if they pass something in the house will it pass in the senate and the committee? And will Trump sign such a poison pill?


How much money health care for all would save the country really needs to be a front-and-center part of the discussion on how much a single payer health care system would cost. For example: employers like their employees to be productive but employees can’t be productive when they can’t pay for health care. Everyone has a vested interest in a Single Payer system; they just need it explained to them. However, the health INSURANCE industry has a vested interest in NOT understanding all this.


Nuff said. Let’s do it.+++


The first thing ANTI single payer advocates are going to say is “higher taxes.” This has to be addressed head on and completely gone over enough times so that people get it or nothing else will get through. Just the words higher taxes can put republicans in a never, never, never, mood.


Sorry - we checked with our corporate sponsors and they said this can’t be true and we must believe them. - Chuck & Nancy.

P.S. - have a nice holiday. we will too thanks to our corporate sponsors and good old American capitalism. Sorry about that little match stick girl. She didn’t fit into the plan.

1 Like

The obvious drawback of this test study is the it will never reach mainstream Americans. Instead corporate media has already ‘covered’ this story with a previous statement that said that Sander’s proposal “could end up costing the federal government at least $32 trillion over 10 years.” This false statement, delivered earlier by Bloomberg, got major airtime across the U.S. and as a result has sowed doubt among many Americans. Even though the opportunity to set the record straight now is available to corporate media, the vast majority of Americans will never even catch wind of this study simply because corporate media’s sponsors won’t allow it.
This is the real danger of “faux news” as our most pressing concerns are dealt with through a quick and unsubstantiated flurry of ‘expert opinions’ with no debate, no counter arguments offered and a short follow up explaining what other courses of action are reasonable in “light of this shocking news!” The fact that the media lies is almost besides the point. The method of assassination should be the focus of the collective because if we’re able to instinctively recognize the flawed forms of delivery and meet all corporate news with skepticism, then corporate media will finally watch its ability to persuade most Americans diminish until media loses all of its credibility in the news and education aspects of its empire.

1 Like

Indeed, the message has to be “yeah maybe higher taxes but not necessarily but DEFINITELY cost savings for EVERYONE which would more than offset potential higher taxes.” Conservatives do like a good deal now don’t they? A little investment here = a lot of savings every where else. Their concern with higher taxes boils down to saving money yes? The best way to do that is with a single payer system. Surely they can understand that only if someone would communicate it that way.


I’m afraid their idea of a good deal is different than ours. Their idea is to suck as much wealth out of others as possible so as to concentrate as much wealth among themselves as possible.

I think we have a different idea as to what is a good deal.