Well, that would be good, but people still need to remember: Somebody has to pay for this. Even old people pay premiums for medicare.
We all will by simply raising the tax we already pay but with NO co-pays, NO deductibles which means much cheaper for everyone while covering everyone.
For answers to Single-Payer/_Improved_Medicare For All go to the following:
Liz and Bernie:
Romneycare and Obamacare are not what the masses want but Improved Medicare For All. Period.
My note to Bernie which I'll also get to Liz:
Improved Medicare For All is what the people want NOT Romneycare, NOT Obamacare. Period. This is what many of us are organizing around and pushing. Medicare passed in one fell swoop so it CAN be done!!
It is "American" for an entire industry to be focused on profiting from speculating in profits from disease, reproduction and ageing the way that "The American Dream", having been hijacked by speculation for profits by the financial system & banksters, is now an opioid nightmare of epidemic proportions with speculation for profits with a hijacked parasitic pharmaceutical industry ... its a devolutionary rather than evolutionary process of predatory predators prey and when all else fails they slip right into lamprey mode on the way to unadulterated parasite mode.
The human mind and heart have been capable of stunning elegance as long as there has been language. Time to bring them back to the fore - cross all the ideologically imposed fracturing and GET IT DONE!
I cant help but notice the irony that this California single-payer bill has a good chance of passing this time because it won't be in the form of a ballot-measure like the badly trounced one in Colorado.
Another informative site is the Physicians for a National Health Program, and PNHP.org that has a run down on the single payer system that will take care of all Americans. Watch a video presentation on YouTube entitled, "Fix It" from PNHP.
Watch the trailer to a new documentary on Single Payer:
The film is good for the business community but for the general public these are great:
From their website:
Why is Now the Time?
We've seen enough to know that insurance-based healthcare is not effective for keeping costs down and giving everyone access to needed medical care. Advocates are totally committed to changing the healthcare system, and polls indicate that the general public supports the idea of universal healthcare. So it should be a no-brainer, right? Well, no. Some of the obstacles are obvious. Big money. Fear of government. But there seems to be something more, like a fog that keeps people from moving forward together. What is so difficult about the idea of looking after each other? This film intends to expose the fog, and will leave viewers examining what it means to be an American and what it takes to step into action.
NOW IS THE TIME is a feature length film, with a run time of 71 minutes.
There is also a condensed version, 35 minutes in length.
On December 2, 2015, we decided we wanted to make NOW IS THE TIME as a follow-up to our previous documentary, The Healthcare Movie (2011) which was two years in the making. Here we are, nine months later, giving “birth” to this new feature film with the goal of having it ready in time to influence the results of national and state level efforts to bring Single Payer healthcare to America! We thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your support.
She helped create Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
This is working to reign in predators in financial markets, thank you.
So true. If we did not spend trillions on wars of choice it would be easy to pay for.
Or a penny tax for every share bought on the stock market.
But the GOP swears to do away with it. And that way, the email scammers that stole 3 grand from my father (80's) do not have to worry about ripping people off in the future. (to say the least)
And almost every corporation today it seems, is kinda like that email scam. Selling us more nothingness of stuff with which we fill our McMansions with--while our billion dollar drone bombs find targets the world over to guarantee "peace" ---so that we cannot afford college educations or universal healthcare, because our stuff is too important.
Damned depressing. Words of wisdom from a comedic philosopher needed.
I'll withhold judgment on these 'promising signs.'
For example, my rush to hopefulness is tempered by the fact that the vast majority of House Democrats are not co-signers of HR 676. My 'liberal' rep in as safe a seat as gerrymandering can create is a conspicuous hold out.
Above all, my hopefulness is limited by the Democratic habit of making deals that reduce grand possibilities to 'pragmatic' corporate giveaways. When they can find a way to squirm out of doing anything that could stall their money grab, they most certainly will.
A quick history of single payer:
In 1932 half the country was out of work and people were still getting sick and dying. America turned into one giant blockade by 1934. To stop this blockade, Congress (led by a reluctant traitor to his filthy rich class, Franklin Roosevelt, who at least was a sharp politician) passed much of the New Deal, which barely worked.
Meanwhile, Germany, Italy and Japan had economic revolts which only put worse crooks in power, and the crooks declared war on every other country and 90% of their soldiers were killed. To prevent this from happening twice and to build up foes against the expanding Soviet Union, Roosevelt and Truman did the right thing. Germans and Japanese got real healthcare for all. Back home, the owners of America wouldn't let us get it.
Single payer was wildly popular the world over, especially the plans that let chiropractors and naturopaths in too. Decades ago, every other wealthy country on earth swung over to single payer with outcomes-based medicine.
President Obama and the Dems thought, can we harness this wildly popular system to a process of huge wealth extraction for our friends? They forced it through. Yep, it was at least 10% more popular than killing grandma, the Republican plan.
The Republicans violently fought back, insisting that killing grandma was patriotic, moral and Christian. The meme didn't sell!! So now the Republicans are looking for a new and improved meme that will sell better. The Dems, for their part, are still desperately trying to save as much superfluous wealth extraction as humanly possible. On the side, the MD community fights the chiropractors tooth and nail to keep them out of the gravy train.
Then there's the voters. Who are they?
A note about federations.
In Canada Health insurance is handled by individual provinces and territories with Federal government oversight. However moving to another province can result in waiting periods before health coverage will be granted. (This can vary, but cannot exceed three months as part of the Canada Health Act.)
In Australia the Constitution was amended to give the Federal government the power to make laws for the whole country in regard to health and welfare. Therefore the same government health coverage is available regardless of what state or territory you happen to be residing in (or visiting).
The U.S. Constitution has no specific provision for the Federal government to make laws for the whole nation regarding health and welfare.
There, fixed that for you.
Yes, someone has to pay. Of course! But they pay less. That's good isn't it??
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. The federal government obviously made laws for the entire nation regarding Social Security and Medicare; so, I don't see any reason why the House and Senate couldn't pass bills akin to Conyers' H.R. 676 - Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act; and, place single-payer healthcare before our new illustrious Fuehrer.for his signature.
Note such things as: "Medicaid expansion provision was deemed unconstitutional in 2012. As a result, each state was given the choice to participate in Medicaid expansion or not."
In Australia everyone is covered by the same govt. plan (its called 'Medicare') and those with a taxable income over a certain amount all pay the same 'Medicare levy' (an addition to income tax) to the Federal govt.
To expand on dahlia11's addition to the above sentence to make it read, "Somebody has to pay less for this.", it's fairly obvious to anyone who can do simple arithmetic that, since the U.S. currently spends significantly more per person on health care than any other developed country; and, all of these developed countries provide universal national health care systems for their citizens, it follows that the U.S. could provide universal national health care to its citizens for less than it is currently spending.
I'm not a big fan of Robert Reich; but, he explained the above, clearly, here on CommonDreams back in 2013 in the following article:
The Hoax of 'Entitlement' Reform -- Jan. 7, 2013 -- Robert Reich -- CommonDreams
Just the simple fact that the administrative overhead of Medicare is 3 percent, compared to the much higher administrative costs for all other types of insurance (anywhere from 11 percent to 40 percent), should give one a good idea of the savings attainable by changing from the current system to a national health care system.
Well, yes... it's not "free"... even in the modern industrial countries in which they have Single Payer... they are TAXED... that is what gets me so upset... that people do not even CONSIDER that there could be another way. Even a bit of a hefty tax would be okay to me if I did not have to pay ANYTHING ELSE. I met a woman about 7 years ago or so... who showed me her check from Switzerland.. or Sweden?.... She was taxed .... for her and her daughter... 300 dollars a month... she made about 12.00 an hour... but... they could go to the doctor.... ANY TIME... AND HAVE ANY THING DONE and not have a single bill ... not for anything.... her child had FREE DENTAL UNTIL 16 .....ALSO...