Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/12/11/seems-good-policy-cbo-shows-medicare-all-could-cover-everyone-650-billion-less-year
4 Likes
we have known this information for --literally-over a decadeâthe reason we do not have single payer health care is that our so called leaders are in thrall to the insurance and health care corporations who bribe them at every turn and they then do the bidding of the corporationsâthatâs how capitalism worksâcapitalism is essentially an anti-democratic system --want real democracy??get rid of capitalismâas long as the corporations can buy politicians we will never be freeâonly the pawns of the corporations calling the tunes
32 Likes
As many of us have long been saying, as more advanced nations have that have universal healthcare have shown, as true leaders like Bernie & Elizabeth have tried to tell us. The only reason we donât already have it is because corporations control everything from our government to the media to the economy to society to both political parties, prioritizing the short-term greed of corporations like, in this case, the insurance & pharmaceutical companies.
14 Likes
âŚbut some people donât WANT to cover everybody. (Only the worthy.) This plan would interfere with our right to be superior to inferior people.
Canât they come up with a âWhites onlyâ or âCitizens Onlyâ version? That might get more votes.
(You know Iâm being sarcastic here, but not without a grain of truth.)
10 Likes
Of course single payer is the most economic, and the best in terms of outcomes, system of health care delivery. Iâm Canadian, from the province that pioneered it when I was a girlâŚits worked beautifully for my lifetime.
Unfortunately ,too many brainstems see good public policy as âsocialistâ and a threat to American democratic inequality. So learn from this pandemic, and get used to the idea there will be more shocks coming your wayâŚ
The free market needs what you haveâŚand medical bankruptsies are likely good for your ruling class. Sad.
12 Likes
Imagine what a decently funded national health system could do. Medicare still leaves open way too much rank profiteering as is. We could easily cut1-1.5 trillion off healthcare costs overall with a totally nationalized system.
Just another dream to try to make real, right?
11 Likes
Frustrating to see the obvious superiority of Medicare for All (Single Payer) here again shown by reputable sources and yet to know that it will not get a fair hearing. There certainly is the money of the for-profit health care companies that halts any progress. I see two other factors that are a little more subtle. First, incremental change, that some advocate, will create an ever larger numbers of people who are satisfied enough that they wonât take a chance on change. And secondly, the whole ever-growing set of advantage offerings takes the money, leaves the government out and makes it look cheaper for its subscribers.
1 Like
This isnât the first CBO study to show the cost savings of a National Improved Medicare All system. It isnât lack of knowledge that keeps us from having the most economical and most efficient payer system. It is rightwing nut jobs like Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer who serve insurance and pharma cartels rather than the interests of we the people. Remember in 2024 to vote blue no matter who so we can continue the slide into neoliberalism.
15 Likes
I know your joking, but I fear the 99% canât see it.
I canât help but remember something that Joe Biden said on the campaign trail.
Nothing will fundamentally change.
Thats how much of a chance single payer has in a Biden White House.
8 Likes
He/she is correct about one major point. We progressives have voted âblue no matter whoâ since 1988. Howâs that working out for us?
5 Likes
Yes, but the DREAM BECOMES A nightmare when Mitch says" " WE CANNOT AFFORD IT"!
For your further research, somebody has put this together on Wikipedia.
*ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_systems_by_country
You may note that in a number of countries, maintaining a capitalist economy may not be an âexcuseâ for not providing universal health care.
3 Likes
You wonât realize that without a Constitutional amendment which specifically gives the Federal Government the power to operate such a system.
Without such an amendment, health care will be far from âuniversalâ or equal.
+ttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4194651/
I would expect the DNC to ignore the CBO while the GOP does what it does bestâŚincite their cult to send death threats to the CBO.
2 Likes
I have supported Green ever since Nader ran for POTUS, but that is not working out well either.
3 Likes
MEDICARE FOR ALL IS THE ANSWER!!
A comprehensive study, the meta-analysis, reviewed nearly three decades of existing analyses, and the study showed implementation of a single-payer healthcare system like âMedicare for Allâ would âdramatically reduce costsâ in the United States, with savings likely experienced in the first year and definitely over the longer term.
Dr. Adam Gaffney, PHNP said, "At this point, the most expensive health care plan is the status quo.
**The meta-analysis reviewed 22 existing studies of state and national single-payer healthcare proposals.
7 Likes
MItch can eat a bag of d**ks.
And looking at him, heâs heading to the 9th circle sooner rather than later anyway.
I think a national system would almost have to result from full on revolt.
3 Likes
The real reason we cant have it is that we already decided, during the period between 1986 and 1998 to have for profit healthcare all the way, internationally. As it stands currently, this locks in permanently, but we could still buy our freedom at a cost related to the profits anticipated from the sector. Unfortunately, the healthcare sectors profits are potentially astronomical so unless we are eager to have to give up even more of our jobs than are already in danger from the visas situation or some ridiculous other concessions, we should have already done this long ago. Its nuts that we havenât. This should be a major issue of concern, instead we are just pretending nothing is at stake. Please donât repeat the misinformation that we can just vote for (presumably Democrats) and get it. We would have to divorce the current system so to speak, to marry a new one, or even to have the freedom to decide what we do. So the various healthcare debates have all been shams because the real choices - nomatter what they claim, have been committed away. The idea of giving the right to regulate away was to make larger profits by using cheaper labor, and give corporations more profits, It wasnt helping poor countries catch up with us, by giving them jobs, as some claim. Their rich people know that its their part of the deal to assert their rights against any potential vters so if we tried to back out, weâd be hit with more international disputes, I suspect. I am not a lawyer, there are some university professors and international activists, but theylikely want to see the poor countries richest people get what they claim to have been promised from the US for a change.
Iâm afraid we just voted for this too. thank you all for being so generous, they likely would say.
2 Likes
At least you vote for your own interest not wall streetâs.