• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Implications of Medicare for All

manofknowledge

manofknowledge

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
915
Reaction score
249
Location
Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
When people discuss single-payer health care systems they hear about the massive increase in taxes, but those discussions never think through the real implications of single-payer. Implications include:

  • Everyone has health insurance for life. No more changing plans because you changed jobs or your employer decides to change the plan.
  • Employers are no longer concerned about providing health care at all. They are relieved of that cost and responsibility (unless the single payer plan requires them to pay into it).
  • The cost of Medicare, Medicaid and the VA get rolled into paying for the single-payer system. States will no longer be required to spend on health care for the poor. All veterans will be covered instead of the percentage that are now covered. There is no transition for insurance at age 65.
  • There will be a massive increase in the market for health care. Millions of jobs will be created. Admittedly many jobs with insurance companies will be lost but in general those folks will benefit from the increase in the health care market.
  • Providers no longer have to make deals with dozens of insurance companies. They only need to deal with one payer vastly reducing overhead costs for them.
  • People will be relieved of the cost of health care insurance, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles. Their cost will be shifted from insurance to some sort of tax system.
  • Hospitals will reliably get paid.
  • A person's state of health will be irrelevant to the cost to them.
  • You can see any medical care provider you want. No more provider networks.
  • No more out of pocket costs for health care. (depending on the single-payer plan)
  • Overall health care costs will go down with reductions in administrative costs.
  • The country's general health will be better lowering the annual cost to the system.
Estimates place the annual cost of health care in the US at $3.2 trillion.

Estimates for the cost of single-payer are about $3-4 trillion annually. We already spend the money needed, we just have to figure out how we want to move the flow of dollars from insurance companies to the single-payer system.
 
A healthy America is a strong America, a more productive America.
 
manofknowledge said:
When people discuss single-payer health care systems they hear about the massive increase in taxes, but those discussions never think through the real implications of single-payer. Implications include:

  • Everyone has health insurance for life. No more changing plans because you changed jobs or your employer decides to change the plan.
  • Employers are no longer concerned about providing health care at all. They are relieved of that cost and responsibility (unless the single payer plan requires them to pay into it).
  • The cost of Medicare, Medicaid and the VA get rolled into paying for the single-payer system. States will no longer be required to spend on health care for the poor. All veterans will be covered instead of the percentage that are now covered. There is no transition for insurance at age 65.
  • There will be a massive increase in the market for health care. Millions of jobs will be created. Admittedly many jobs with insurance companies will be lost but in general those folks will benefit from the increase in the health care market.
  • Providers no longer have to make deals with dozens of insurance companies. They only need to deal with one payer vastly reducing overhead costs for them.
  • People will be relieved of the cost of health care insurance, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles. Their cost will be shifted from insurance to some sort of tax system.
  • Hospitals will reliably get paid.
  • A person's state of health will be irrelevant to the cost to them.
  • You can see any medical care provider you want. No more provider networks.
  • No more out of pocket costs for health care. (depending on the single-payer plan)
  • Overall health care costs will go down with reductions in administrative costs.
  • The country's general health will be better lowering the annual cost to the system.
Estimates place the annual cost of health care in the US at $3.2 trillion.

Estimates for the cost of single-payer are about $3-4 trillion annually. We already spend the money needed, we just have to figure out how we want to move the flow of dollars from insurance companies to the single-payer system.
Click to expand...

If it’s Medicare for all will ALL have to pay for it?
 
manofknowledge said:
When people discuss single-payer health care systems they hear about the massive increase in taxes, but those discussions never think through the real implications of single-payer. Implications include:

  • Everyone has health insurance for life. No more changing plans because you changed jobs or your employer decides to change the plan.
  • Employers are no longer concerned about providing health care at all. They are relieved of that cost and responsibility (unless the single payer plan requires them to pay into it).
  • The cost of Medicare, Medicaid and the VA get rolled into paying for the single-payer system. States will no longer be required to spend on health care for the poor. All veterans will be covered instead of the percentage that are now covered. There is no transition for insurance at age 65.
  • There will be a massive increase in the market for health care. Millions of jobs will be created. Admittedly many jobs with insurance companies will be lost but in general those folks will benefit from the increase in the health care market.
  • Providers no longer have to make deals with dozens of insurance companies. They only need to deal with one payer vastly reducing overhead costs for them.
  • People will be relieved of the cost of health care insurance, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles. Their cost will be shifted from insurance to some sort of tax system.
  • Hospitals will reliably get paid.
  • A person's state of health will be irrelevant to the cost to them.
  • You can see any medical care provider you want. No more provider networks.
  • No more out of pocket costs for health care. (depending on the single-payer plan)
  • Overall health care costs will go down with reductions in administrative costs.
  • The country's general health will be better lowering the annual cost to the system.
Estimates place the annual cost of health care in the US at $3.2 trillion.

Estimates for the cost of single-payer are about $3-4 trillion annually. We already spend the money needed, we just have to figure out how we want to move the flow of dollars from insurance companies to the single-payer system.
Click to expand...

Just one question. If Obama's plan that has skyrocketed in price can't be controlled, how are you going to control the price of this plan? How do you even know of the implementation cost. Who is going to control the pharmaceutical cost problems.
 
Crystal said:
If it’s Medicare for all will ALL have to pay for it?
Click to expand...

That hasn't been determined yet but probably not. Many people cannot afford it. That is part of the point of having it. Current Medicare is paid for by FICA taxes. I support a straight forward premium graduated based on income and collected as a payroll tax where appropriate or as part of a quarterly income tax payment.
 
I'm definately pro universal health care, but single payer does concern me. First let me just fully think through some of your points though.

manofknowledge said:
[*]Providers no longer have to make deals with dozens of insurance companies. They only need to deal with one payer vastly reducing overhead costs for them.
Click to expand...
Dealing with only one payer is a nice way of saying dealing with a monopoly. Take a look at what we're seeing in the education system where the government also has what is essentially a monopoly. Teachers need a union, and have had to strike just to get paid a fair wage. Good teachers can't really threaten to leave for better wages because there's really no where else to go.

manofknowledge said:
[*]Hospitals will reliably get paid.
Click to expand...
They may get reliably paid, but will they get paid a fair wage? Will medicare for all reduce costs by using it's monopoly to force Hospitals to take payments that are less than what the market would demand?

manofknowledge said:
[*]You can see any medical care provider you want. No more provider networks.
Click to expand...
It's possible however that some doctors won't be able to maintain their good level of service if medicare payments are too low. Some hospitals may be forced to shut down if profit margins are too low. They may try to get by with a smaller staff with fewer nurses which could lead to other issues.

manofknowledge said:
[*]No more out of pocket costs for health care. (depending on the single-payer plan)
Click to expand...
If there's no burden for going to the doctor we could potentially see people going more frequently when they don't really need to. I don't think this is a serious issue, but it also means no reason to shop around for a good deal.

manofknowledge said:
[*]Overall health care costs will go down with reductions in administrative costs.
Click to expand...
This may be true, but we'll still have an administrator...and only ONE administrator. What concerns me is that when people talk about medicare for all they assume some nice guy like Bernie Sanders will always be in charge of it. What happens if another **** head like Trump finds his way into office and puts Scott Pruit or Betsy DeVos in charge of our one and only health care system.

I again I point to teachers. Look at what some conservative states have done to teachers. Right now Republicans are fighting to prevent a single payer monopoly, but what will happen when their put in charge of administrating it?

Healthcare costs will inevitably be higher in major cities where real estate prices are higher. I could see this being used as justification to close more of them down particularly in lower income(black neighborhoods).

We definitely need further health care reform. I still think there are better things we could try before we go with a full blown single payer. I personally like the idea of a hybrid plan where medicare for all has a huge deductible. Let's say $20,000. Medicare would handle the worst case scenarios, but for more typical stuff most Americans would still want a private health insurance company. Since that company would only be required to cover up to $20k premiums and deductibles would be insanely cheap. If people wanted to try and get away with not having private insurance it would be significantly less risky.
 
Crystal said:
If it’s Medicare for all will ALL have to pay for it?
Click to expand...

We have a progressive tax system so inevitably the lion's share of the burden would be payed by the wealthy. Those who don't make enough money to pay taxes in the first place would be covered for free.
 
MrWonka said:
We have a progressive tax system so inevitably the lion's share of the burden would be payed by the wealthy. Those who don't make enough money to pay taxes in the first place would be covered for free.
Click to expand...

Then we shouldn’t have it.
 
Crystal said:
Then we shouldn’t have it.
Click to expand...

So you think people should just die if they're too poor to go to the doctor?

Even under our old system people who couldn't afford health care generally got it, and it was paid for by increasing the costs for the rest of us. Under a single payer system we could actually reduce the number of people who were not contributing thereby lowering the costs overall.
 
manofknowledge said:
When people discuss single-payer health care systems they hear about the massive increase in taxes, but those discussions never think through the real implications of single-payer. Implications include:

  • Everyone has health insurance for life. No more changing plans because you changed jobs or your employer decides to change the plan.
  • Employers are no longer concerned about providing health care at all. They are relieved of that cost and responsibility (unless the single payer plan requires them to pay into it).
  • The cost of Medicare, Medicaid and the VA get rolled into paying for the single-payer system. States will no longer be required to spend on health care for the poor. All veterans will be covered instead of the percentage that are now covered. There is no transition for insurance at age 65.
  • There will be a massive increase in the market for health care. Millions of jobs will be created. Admittedly many jobs with insurance companies will be lost but in general those folks will benefit from the increase in the health care market.
  • Providers no longer have to make deals with dozens of insurance companies. They only need to deal with one payer vastly reducing overhead costs for them.
  • People will be relieved of the cost of health care insurance, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles. Their cost will be shifted from insurance to some sort of tax system.
  • Hospitals will reliably get paid.
  • A person's state of health will be irrelevant to the cost to them.
  • You can see any medical care provider you want. No more provider networks.
  • No more out of pocket costs for health care. (depending on the single-payer plan)
  • Overall health care costs will go down with reductions in administrative costs.
  • The country's general health will be better lowering the annual cost to the system.
Estimates place the annual cost of health care in the US at $3.2 trillion.

Estimates for the cost of single-payer are about $3-4 trillion annually. We already spend the money needed, we just have to figure out how we want to move the flow of dollars from insurance companies to the single-payer system.
Click to expand...

I would think employers will have to contribute in taxes as well to pay for healthcare, but it wouldn't be like what they have to pay now, which can be up to 30K per employee. So employees can possibly make more money since so much has to go towards health benefits
 
Crystal said:
Then we shouldn’t have it.
Click to expand...

What shouldn't we have; sickly, unproductive, tax draining poor? I agree we shouldn't have that. Or a progressive tax system, that was the deal when the FED and income Tax was passed, the more you make the higher you tax rate would be. Before the ACA 45,000 Americans died each year because the lacked health insurance; how much do you thing those deaths, lost production and welfare payments cost Americans because we aren't taking care of our poor; just because it's not on the books doesn't mean it's free. The Constitution guarantees Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Health is Life; I argue that health insurance and health care are guaranteed by the Constitution.
 
Crystal said:
If it’s Medicare for all will ALL have to pay for it?
Click to expand...

Nothing is free, without cost. The healthcare insurance business has an annual net profit of $1.2 trillion annually, above costs. Blood money, your blood. Costs are inclusive of multimillion dollar earnings by CEO's, CFO's, and so on. Diverting private healthcare premiums to a single payer plan will show a significant surplus within two years.

The objections are twofold. Political nonsense for unwarranted eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeefear of socialism and protection of those profits for those who benefit thereof. Nonsense because lobbying by the industry in opposition to destruction of their blood money profits is actually traitorous to the benefit of this nation as a whole. Additionally, removing the burden of benefits costs to employers would stoke the cash flow in the rest of the country's economy, in turn increasing productivity and overall wealth for all citizens.
 
OldFatGuy said:
Nothing is free, without cost. The healthcare insurance business has an annual net profit of $1.2 trillion annually, above costs. Blood money, your blood. Costs are inclusive of multimillion dollar earnings by CEO's, CFO's, and so on. Diverting private healthcare premiums to a single payer plan will show a significant surplus within two years.

The objections are twofold. Political nonsense for unwarranted eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeefear of socialism and protection of those profits for those who benefit thereof. Nonsense because lobbying by the industry in opposition to destruction of their blood money profits is actually traitorous to the benefit of this nation as a whole. Additionally, removing the burden of benefits costs to employers would stoke the cash flow in the rest of the country's economy, in turn increasing productivity and overall wealth for all citizens.
Click to expand...

I remember hearing this same bull**** when the left was peddling Obamacare! Fact is Medicare is paid for by the recipient about thirty years before the first care is rendered at age 65. Secondly the recepuent still pays for co pays, deductibles, and drugs! Medicare for all will include coverage for every illegal on the planet! So. What will the annual cost be? Do you know?




How Much Will Medicare for All Cost? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
 
Last edited:
Crystal said:
I remember hearing this same bull**** when the left was peddling Obamacare! Fact is Medicare is paid for by the recipient about thirty years before the first care is rendered at age 65. Secondly the recepuent still pays for co pays, deductibles, and drugs! Medicare for all will include coverage for every illegal on the planet! So. What will the annual cost be? Do you know?

First it will NOT include coverage for every illegal on the planet. And, there is no reason that Medicare for all wouldn't/couldn't include supplementary plans for dental and meds, paid for by the insured, as we have today; though I would propose that minor children should be included at whatever supplement their parents have at no additional cost.
Click to expand...
 
Beware of leftists bearing socialism.
 
Crystal said:
I remember hearing this same bull**** when the left was peddling Obamacare! Fact is Medicare is paid for by the recipient about thirty years before the first care is rendered at age 65. Secondly the recepuent still pays for co pays, deductibles, and drugs! Medicare for all will include coverage for every illegal on the planet! So. What will the annual cost be? Do you know?




How Much Will Medicare for All Cost? | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget
Click to expand...

There is no truth in the claim that a single payer healthcare system will benefit illegal aliens. Political hay from those looking to protect their blood money income streams.

The ACA was insufficient because it left the insurers in business sucking blood. A single payer plan does not mean those covered will not have copays, deductibles, and coverage for optional procedures like cosmetic surgery, liposuction and so on, except for extreme cases resulting from accidents or presenting imminent death.

I always provided the best possible and available healthcare insurance for myself and family, the same for my employees. With deductibles and copays, outright refusals of treatment with no excuses, and battles to obtain the coverage I paid for. Now I am on Medicare, I pay a premium for one plan, and another for supplemental, and a third for pharmaceutical coverage. I would be paying an additional $1,200 per month for the same coverage in private insurance premiums if I could find an insurer at my age, and then I would have to trust a claims adjuster, 2-3 years on the job to initially refuse all coverage. I had a good friend who died this year because of the denial of coverage he paid for from a private insurer. He was not eligible for medicare, or social security, having never paid into the system, having worked his entire adult life outside this country as a government contractor. He was subject to local taxation wherever he worked, not American Federal or State taxes. He wasn't poor, but the one HIP plan he could find that would insure him is now facing lawsuits from his estate, and fraud charges from the State of NY. Doesn't do him much good six feet under.

Since being on Medicare, I've had one claim denied, from a doctor who never treated me, fraudulently billed Medicare, taking my info from patient listings at a clinic I use.

None of this is important. If we are to truly benefit the people of this nation we have to drastically alter our entire health care system. Move away from procedural remuneration toward prevention. Staring with prenatal care and education, gaining a better understanding of nutrition, forcing our education system to emphasize physical activity, and shift our life styles from sedentary to active physical action. This will never happen with our current insurance system. It is the most reasonable path for reducing healthcare costs and recovery costs. Being concerned about who pays what, when and where begs the real questions of altering behavior for better health care.

This is not a political issue, it is an issue of a better life for all Americans. A healthy America is a strong America, a productive America, with not only better physical health, but resulting better mental and emotional health. To continue denying the need for comprehensive changes for American healthcare is unpatriotic, to say the least.
 
OldFatGuy said:
There is no truth in the claim that a single payer healthcare system will benefit illegal aliens. Political hay from those looking to protect their blood money income streams.

The ACA was insufficient because it left the insurers in business sucking blood. A single payer plan does not mean those covered will not have copays, deductibles, and coverage for optional procedures like cosmetic surgery, liposuction and so on, except for extreme cases resulting from accidents or presenting imminent death.

I always provided the best possible and available healthcare insurance for myself and family, the same for my employees. With deductibles and copays, outright refusals of treatment with no excuses, and battles to obtain the coverage I paid for. Now I am on Medicare, I pay a premium for one plan, and another for supplemental, and a third for pharmaceutical coverage. I would be paying an additional $1,200 per month for the same coverage in private insurance premiums if I could find an insurer at my age, and then I would have to trust a claims adjuster, 2-3 years on the job to initially refuse all coverage. I had a good friend who died this year because of the denial of coverage he paid for from a private insurer. He was not eligible for medicare, or social security, having never paid into the system, having worked his entire adult life outside this country as a government contractor. He was subject to local taxation wherever he worked, not American Federal or State taxes. He wasn't poor, but the one HIP plan he could find that would insure him is now facing lawsuits from his estate, and fraud charges from the State of NY. Doesn't do him much good six feet under.

Since being on Medicare, I've had one claim denied, from a doctor who never treated me, fraudulently billed Medicare, taking my info from patient listings at a clinic I use.



.
None of this is important. If we are to truly benefit the people of this nation we have to drastically alter our entire health care system. Move away from procedural remuneration toward prevention. Staring with prenatal care and education, gaining a better understanding of nutrition, forcing our education system to emphasize physical activity, and shift our life styles from sedentary to active physical action. This will never happen with our current insurance system. It is the most reasonable path for reducing healthcare costs and recovery costs. Being concerned about who pays what, when and where begs the real questions of altering behavior for better health care.

This is not a political issue, it is an issue of a better life for all Americans. A healthy America is a strong America, a productive America, with not only better physical health, but resulting better mental and emotional health. To continue denying the need for comprehensive changes for American healthcare is unpatriotic, to say the least.
Click to expand...

Stop with the bs! If you watched the democrat debates every single one of them promised to give free healthcare to every single illegal alien
 
Crystal said:
Stop with the bs! If you watched the democrat debates every single one of them promised to give free healthcare to every single illegal alien
Click to expand...

The Democrats aren't in office. Not likely to beat Trump. Even if they do gain office later, politicians make empty promises all the time.

This isn't about politics. It is about the best possible healthcare and well being for every American. I don't have a crystal ball and won't make predictions, but the cost of healthcare insurance keeps rising in this nation, and the return on investment keeps reducing. Life spans are shortening, obesity is epidemic, associated health care costs keep rising, far greater than inflation for both insurance and provider care. Do you have a better solution? I'm willing to listen. My concern is for the well being of those who follow me after I pass. My family. I can afford the best possible healthcare, there is no guaranty they will be in a similar financial position. There is no reason why they can not benefit from the best possible healthcare and the best quality of a healthy life as all Americans should.
 
OldFatGuy said:
The Democrats aren't in office. Not likely to beat Trump. Even if they do gain office later, politicians make empty promises all the time.

This isn't about politics. It is about the best possible healthcare and well being for every American. I don't have a crystal ball and won't make predictions, but the cost of healthcare insurance keeps rising in this nation, and the return on investment keeps reducing. Life spans are shortening, obesity is epidemic, associated health care costs keep rising, far greater than inflation for both insurance and provider care. Do you have a better solution? I'm willing to listen. My concern is for the well being of those who follow me after I pass. My family. I can afford the best possible healthcare, there is no guaranty they will be in a similar financial position. There is no reason why they can not benefit from the best possible healthcare and the best quality of a healthy life as all Americans should.
Click to expand...

Check with countries that have it. Everyone pays taxes. Everyone waits in line!
 
Crystal said:
Check with countries that have it. Everyone pays taxes. Everyone waits in line!
Click to expand...

Here, one way or another, we all pay premiums. This is the United States. We are a can do nation, and we can conquer waiting lines. With a shift toward preventative care as them focus of our healthcare system, we might even be able to eliminate the need for any lines.



Last night, I had the strangest dream, a dream of spending no more on war and all that money for healthcare. We need to make this dream a reality.
 
OldFatGuy said:
Nothing is free, without cost. The healthcare insurance business has an annual net profit of $1.2 trillion annually, above costs. Blood money, your blood.
Click to expand...

In the most recent year for which we have data (2017), the total amount of money flowing through private health insurance from private premiums was $1.2 trillion. Most of that is passed through and gets paid out to health care providers. The total net cost of private health insurance (of which profit is a subset) was about $230 billion, or a little over 6.5% of our national health spending.

If you need a visual of where the money is coming from and who it's flowing through and where it's ultimately going:

Capture.png
 
Condor060 said:
Just one question. If Obama's plan that has skyrocketed in price can't be controlled, how are you going to control the price of this plan? How do you even know of the implementation cost. Who is going to control the pharmaceutical cost problems.
Click to expand...

The problem with Obama's plan is that is still had a 'profit' interface (i.e. the insurance companies), and let the 'free market' control drug prices. Due ot the patents , that makes a monopoly, and there was also price fixing/gouging by the pharmaceutical companies. Cut out the 'for profit' middle man insurance companies, , and regulate the max price as drug based on the development/production costs, as well as getting rid of the price gouging and fixing that a number of the 'generic drug' companies did, and costs can be contained.
 
RAMOSS said:
The problem with Obama's plan is that is still had a 'profit' interface (i.e. the insurance companies), and let the 'free market' control drug prices. Due ot the patents , that makes a monopoly, and there was also price fixing/gouging by the pharmaceutical companies. Cut out the 'for profit' middle man insurance companies, , and regulate the max price as drug based on the development/production costs, as well as getting rid of the price gouging and fixing that a number of the 'generic drug' companies did, and costs can be contained.
Click to expand...

Oh I don't doubt how to fix it, thats common sense. What I am saying is it will never happen under a government controlled program on a scale this elaborate. Not even possible. I love how Bernie fluffs this idea up with how other countries are so gifted to have incorporated these programs but when you dig just a bit deeper you find out the tax result of such a program.

I don't want my government telling me if I qualify for a certain surgery or medications I need. No thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom