Home | About | Donate

Medicare for All: A Prescription for What Ails Us


#1

Medicare for All: A Prescription for What Ails Us

Amy Goodman

President Donald Trump’s long-promised repeal of Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act, edges closer to reality, as the Senate releases its secretly written version of the House’s American Health Care Act—the very bill that Trump first championed, then recently reportedly called “mean.” The Republican majority in the Senate is intent on passing the bill before the July Fourth holiday. Obamacare has led to tens of millions of Americans getting at least some health insurance, but it has problems of its own. Since health care represents one-sixth of the U.S.


#2

Thank you to Amy Goodman for her contribution to human kind and unwavering belief in the truth and justice in life. You are my hero. Thank you to everyone at Democracy Now for everything you do in giving people a voice.


#3

Yes, thank you Ms Goodman. FSTV is the only TV my eyes can stand to watch for any short length of time. You are one of only a few journalists that I think are honest. Keep up the great work, and dedication to us commoners.


#4

Although I am a fan of Goodman, she needs to stop comparing US Medicare with Canadian single payer and making statements like "taxpayer funded Medicare" that imply that all beneficiaries get Medicare on the backs of taxpayers. Some do, but most don't. and Paul Ryan doesn't need any quotes from Goodman to add to his already bulging at the seams arsenal against earned benefits in general and Medicare in particular..

Murkins earning wages and salaries pay into Medicare with every paycheck and unless you have certain disabilities or are poor, once you qualify for Medicare you pay a monthly premium to the gubmit or have it deducted from your Socal Security check, and you pay out of pocket for the many things Medicare doesn't cover and/or you buy Medigap insurance, the costs and choices of which are different in each county in the US.

Yes, US Medicare for all would be far better than what Murkins up to age 64 not covered by an affordable employer sponsored plan currently have, but it would not be the same as Canadian single payer.


#5

It boggles one's mind that these supposedly intelligent idealogues that some people have elected to office can't see the simple solution to our healthcare problems. The answer, of course, is Medicare for all. It's been in operation for scores of years, is effective and if adopted for all, will have a broad enough base where premiums will be more affordable than profit driven private insurance companies can afford to furnish.

Right, Republicans wouldn't be caught dead voting for anything that resembles "socialized medicine", but some of them must have already done so because we already have Medicare. Most Republicans that are on Medicare would loudly complain if it were taken away, which it probably will be for many, if this monstrosity that Mitch and his "good ol boys" rammed through behind closed doors passes and becomes law

If Mitch and the boys had to be on the plan they would have certainly passed out a different plan. We buy them a much better plan that they don't have to pay a cent for..


#6

Murka HAS HAD a "socialized medicine" program (that is a carbon copy of the United Kingdom's model) at least since the Veterans Administration (VA) started proving health care in 1930. Note that GOP POTUS Hoover occupied the White House in 1930.

Like the British system, VA owns and operates the clinics and hospitals, employs the doctors, nurses and other staff. Its whats called a turnkey operation.

Like the British System, AND like Canadian single payer, AND like Medicare, the VA provides health care at a fraction of the cost that the current US medical extortion complex (MIC) does. with equal or better patient outcomes.

For many years serial fake news and Congressional dog and pony shows demonizing the British system, Canadian single payer, Medicare and the VA are designed to pervert Murkins' attitudes toward any changes that may threaten MIC profits.


#7

And may we all say, "Amen," and perhaps, one day soon, "Hallelujah!"


#8

PS: And let us all enlist in the "Draft Bernie" endeavor; he has
been promoting this+other humane programs while other "politicians"
have been doing their damndest to feather their own nests and to
hell w/any Americans other than their DC high-rolling pals.


#9

To realize the most savings government should take over medical care entirely. It should own all medical facilities and all health providers should be salaried government employees. Having private doctors bill the government for providing medical care means the doctor must code each procedure and have staff to use those codes to bill the government. The government then must employ people to review these bills and discern if any charges are unnecessary or fraudulent. Recently in my area a small family practice was found to be overcharging Medicaid one and a half million dollars a year for six years.

Take all profit out of medical care. Make it 100% government provided and you will get my vote. My wife recently got her nursing license. Her training was 100% paid for with government scholarships. She is employed doing home care for disabled children on Medicaid. This method could be used for all health-care providers, doctors and nurses.


#10

Kudos to your wife.

I tend to agree with your comment. There are a few problems with "Medicare for All." I live on Social Security alone. My Medicare would cost $120 per month, and I would need a supplemental plan as well....because most people could not afford the 80%:20% costs involved with getting sick. That would cost around $200 to $300 per month. These supplemental plans are purchased through regular insurance companies. My first issue is....long ago, Medicare was made "terrible" by a Republican Congress--forgot which year--because they changed the plan from being free and including prescription meds, to being not free. So now, seniors must pay a premium, and pay a fortune for prescription drugs. My second issue--Because I couldn't even afford standard Medicare, I purchased a "Medicare Advantage Plan." This is basically an HMO for the elderly. Private insurance companies provide these plans. Yes, they are much cheaper, and you don't need a supplemental, but they have restrictions and you pay over $6,000 out of pocket a year if you are hospitalized. There are co-pays and fees involved with these plans. So, even if we have Medicare for all, the private insurance companies will get in there and find their way to make money. The only way to get private insurance companies out of healthcare is to have a government run health system. This is single-payer (the government), not Medicare for all.

The problem with this program is...my son lives in Canada and has "free" health care. But this is what he says: "Taxes are horrendous!"

Yes, we have to pay for healthcare somehow. Do we want to pay higher taxes, or do we want to pay premiums to insurance companies? If the government runs healthcare, we will pay higher taxes--all of us! That's the bottom line.


#11

Absolutely, enlist our fellow men and women too. This is going to take a team. Thanks you made me smile.


#12

To be well versed in the multi benefits of a single payer system especially from a good business perspective watch and discuss the documentaries, FIX IT and BIG PHARMA. Both political parties would agree. Our government officials are wasting precious time and money but not bringing about needs change.


#13

Totally Cool, Amy.
Just a small point. Has to do with the difference between leaders and rulers. Leaders are looking ahead. They seldom look over their shoulder to see if anyone following. It is the strength, the Good which they pursue that that magnetically attracts those who follow them.. The Rulers on the other hand are always looking backwards to make sure the bootlickers and sheep are following them. You Amy are a Leader. You do not know this, but I have been following you for at least 20 years.


#14

I see some issues with Amy Goodman's article.

This is wrong. Much of the world actually has something that resembles Obamacare more than it resembles British or Canadian Single-payer. See

The US has 4 separate 'single-payer' health-care systems.
*) Indian Health Service - a single provider system. The hospitals/clinics are owned by the US govt. and the doctors are employed by the US govt.
*) The VA - another single provider system. Popular with many veterans, but we have seen scandals of veterans consigned to waiting queues to nowhere, and the administrators of those hospitals got promotions, not fired. I wonder what the veterans in those queues thought?
*) Medicare - Very popular with the voting public. Caution 1: My dad complained that it was hard to find a doctor. Caution 2: The trustees of Medicare tell us that Medicare is closer to going bust than Social Security is, that the payroll taxes aren't covering the required expenditures. - We will be revisiting this topic.
*) Medicaid - Popular with someone, since so many states adopted the Obamacare Medicaid expansion, but its problems are worse than Medicare's problems. Even fewer doctors are willing to see Medicaid patients, and it causes big budget problems for states.

French economist Frederic Bastiat said "The State is the great fiction by which everybody tries to live at the expense of everybody else." - Or in this particular instance, to obtain something 'free', at someone else's expense.

Years ago I exchanged emails with someone in Alberta province Canada. The starting point was the fact that when Alberta set up their Medicare, anyone could show up at a hospital or clinic and get treated, the province would pay for it. They were soon inundated with people from Montana coming up to get something for free. Alberta changed the law so that Albertans were issued insurance cards, which had to be presented to get treatment.

A day ago, concerning California's proposed single payer, I remarked that California progressives were having a hard time wrapping their heads around this concept: They can only have two of these three choices: 1) Universal coverage, 2) generous coverage of everything, 3) Affordable.
-- Although I suppose this forum is full of true believers who think that all three can be obtained. Look at Britain or France to see how well they are doing trying to make all three happen.