Sanders misleads on Family healthcare

[bhsmte]

This is a good exercise for anyone. Figure out how much your employer takes out of your check each year for health insurance. Add to that, any out of pocket expenses; deductables, co pays etc for any care recieved and that will give you a good gauge of the costs.

 

[SimplyMe]

That would take our national budget:

The deficit occurs because the U.S. government spending of $4.75 trillion is higher than its revenue of $3.65 trillion.
​

Bernies plan (Just the Medical), would bring the spending from 4.75 Trillion to (4.75 + 3.3), 8.05 trillion with a yearly federal deficit of 4.05 Trillion. Where do we get that money from?

The evil top 1% make 718,000 and above. You can take 100% of all their income and it doesn't come close to 4.05 trillion dollars a year.

He would have to raise taxes on the middle class and it will be huge considering the 4.05 trillion deficit doesn't include free school, college debt forgiveness and the other programs he is proposing.

Yes, taxes would have to go up. My guess is they'd add a business tax that is roughly equal to what most businesses were paying to subsidize health insurance for their employees, increase the marginal rates for everyone else. No, all the money would not come from the rich but I do believe you'd see their tax rates increase more and likely an increase in capital gains taxes (which is much of the income of the wealthy).

For most Americans, take home pay likely wouldn't be much different than what it is today; if they do the above or something roughly similar, which is what I would expect. At the same time, medical costs would likely decrease and individuals would no longer have to worry about out of pocket medical costs (which would save some Americans, such as those on expensive prescriptions medications such as insulin, thousands of dollars a year).

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Bingo! In another word a massive tax hike for business and individual income! Everyone will pay to meet that 3.5 trillions and hope someday it will reduce the cost.

Who's paying for it now?

 

[Tiberius Lee]

Who's paying for it now?

Right now , I and my employer paying for it. if I don’t like what I am paying, I can go to different job. my employer has control over negotiation with insurance company. What you want is for Congress to decide what percentage of my tax goes to health insurance. That means I have to relies on voter in TX to chose the senator who might want lower tax on health insurance but voter in CA might chose a senator who wants higher tax, that means I will be waiting on our politics to get back in normal when republican and democrat will compromise and come to a sensible conclusion- in another word – NEVER!

 

[Hank77]

Current US law does not allow insurance to be declined for preexisting conditions which means that if you get cancer and don't have insurance you can get insurance. No one is dying from lack of health insurance. All health providers are required by law to treat patients regardless of their ability to pay. If you cannot afford insurance the government will put you on Medicaid and most peoplethat pay for their insurance will envy your coverage. Anyone on Medicare can purchase a Medicare Advantage program that covers prescriptions. Many of which, including the one I have, cost nothing extra than the monthly less than $ 150. 00 paid to the social security administration. Social Security hands the money over to the private insurer and removes the responsibility of handling claims from itself and the private insurer somehow can provide more with that money than the government administrative agency was going to provide.

Right now the Trump Admin. is in court trying to prove the ACA, Obamacare, is unconstitutional. The Republicans have been eliminating pre-existing conditions from every healthcare plan they come up with.

There are families who can't afford the high cost of insurance but make too much to be on Medicaid. Not all the states expanded their Medicaid programs which leaves some people with no insurance.
I know a young couple with two kids, one of the works full-time the other works two part-time jobs. He would like to take one full-time job but if he does they will make approx. $50 a month too much to be on Medicaid but he still won't make enough to buy insurance and pay the high deductable and co-pays that come along with it.
Right now they are on Medicaid and pay co-pays that are rated by income.

 

[Hank77]

No, all the money would not come from the rich but I do believe you'd see their tax rates increase more and likely an increase in capital gains taxes (which is much of the income of the wealthy).

I believe that capital gains should be taxed the same as earned income. If someone has an earned income at a rate of 16% their capital gains should be taxed at 16% if their rate is 35% their capital gains tax should be taxed at 35%.

 

[JIMINZ]

Denying the validity of another poster's Christian faith is a reportable offense in this forum.

Please accept my heart felt apology, I apparently was speaking of another poster
I was talking to at the same time and inadvertently got you and him mixed up, sorry if I offended you.

 

[carl_b_me]

Sen. Bernie Sanders continues to make the misleading claim that “the average family of four spends $28,000 a year on health care.” That’s the projected average cost for employer-sponsored health insurance for “typical” families of that size, but the employee paid about 44% of that total amount in 2018, while the employer paid the other 56%.
​

I listened as Mr. Sanders also said that the drug industry made 100,000,000,000 in profits and they should not.

Let's look at some numbers:

Congressional Republicans seized on a new study Monday estimating that a universal health-care plan by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) would cost the federal government $33 trillion by 2031, arguing that it proves Democrats have moved too far left.
​

Let's knock nine zero's* off to help understand a little better.

Mr. Sanders does not like the pharma companies making 100 x 10 years = 1,000* while wanting to spend 33,000*.

Now, let's look at the famous 1%

In fact, the top one percent alone holds more wealth than the middle class. They owned 29 percent—or over $25 trillion

EX - Jeff Bezo has 127* - once you take it - he doesn't have it any longer.
​

That 25,000* is total wealth, all their cash, properties and belongings EVERYTHING. You can take everything only once. Take that and add it to the 1,000* of big pharma profits.

You can confiscate all the wealth of the top 1%, all the profits from the big pharma and you still run short of the costs by 7,000*

Thoughts?

Why can't we go with the tried and true "healthcare for those who have earned it" approach? Healthcare is no more a "right" than clean water, clean air and food. You have to earn it. If you don't pay for it you don't get it.

I wanted a new TV a month ago. Just wanted a new one, but I culdn't afford it. Do you see me out there marching and screaming for a TV I can afford ($45 is my current budget for new TV) just because I can't afford the MARKET VALUE of a new TV? It's ABSURD! Healthcare is exactly like buying a new TV.

 

[JIMINZ]

The US tax rate doesn’t include health insurance premiums. If you add another $10k+ to the average American’s expenses, that’ll more than eat up that 16% they didn’t pay in taxes. And then there are all sort of strings attached to it since it’s either provided through your employer or regulated by the state in which you live. So, who’s really more free?

We are.

 

[carl_b_me]

Right now the Trump Admin. is in court trying to prove the ACA, Obamacare, is unconstitutional. The Republicans have been eliminating pre-existing conditions from every healthcare plan they come up with.

that's the way it oughta be! The insurance companies need tools in their toolbox to control costs. How else can they make money???? Lifetime coverage caps are also great.

There are families who can't afford the high cost of insurance but make too much to be on Medicaid.

They should really go out and get a better job then. Seems pretty simple if you aks me.

Not all the states expanded their Medicaid programs which leaves some people with no insurance.
I know a young couple with two kids, one of the works full-time the other works two part-time jobs.

Well there's the problem! The other needs to work two FULL TIME jobs as well! Sheesh! I didn't go to Wharton School of Business and even _I_ know that!

Right now they are on Medicaid and pay co-pays that are rated by income.

I'm sorry for your friends but it doesn't look like there's any way to change the system. I mean Obamacare turned out to be a giant court case slowly peeling away the coverages, so clearly THAT didn't work. The GOP has plans. Lots of great plans. Plans that are better than the rest. We just need to clear out the mess of Obamacare and let the lions of the marketplace do what they do best: make things better.

 

[JIMINZ]

What makes you think it's a "free program?" Medicare isn't a free program, why should Medicare for all be free?

That was a sarcastic remark about what Bernie says, none of his programs are free. I'm sure Lenin said basically the same thing at some point as well.

 

[JIMINZ]

I do not have a direct comparison but I'm currently making 32k a year which is not that much but I have no problem buying things I want.

In thinking about this statement of yours, you are coming home with $16,000 a tear just as I did 23 yrs. ago when I retired, that don't sound so good to me, because I would be making more than $32,000 now if I was still working.

 

[Speedwell]

In thinking about this statement of yours, you are coming home with $16,000 a tear just as I did 23 yrs. ago when I retired, that don't sound so good to me, because I would be making more than $32,000 now if I was still working.

The comparison is more complex than that. Skreeper's wages have more purchasing power than yours and he has the advantage that his medical care is already paid for as well as his education, he lives in a country with more modern and efficient infrastructure and a better educational system than we have. If you'd rather have $16/hr that's fine, but not everyone agrees with you about it.

 

[JIMINZ]

The comparison is more complex than that. Skreeper's wages have more purchasing power than yours and he has the advantage that his medical care is already paid for as well as his education, he lives in a country with more modern and efficient infrastructure and a better educational system than we have. If you'd rather have $16/hr that's fine, but not everyone agrees with you about it.

I'm almost positive you don't, but not quite.

 

[Speedwell]

I'm almost positive you don't, but not quite.

One of the standout features of American Exceptionalism is that we can take good ideas from all over and make them work better. MAGA! (But not the way Trump is going about it.)

 

[Hank77]

I'd start by suggesting that the money come from where it comes from now - after all, we're ALREADY spending more than that on healthcare per year. If employers and individuals no longer have to give that money to the insurance companies, then they can send it to the government instead. I'll leave the actual structuring of the tax scheme to those who actually know how to do those things, but it stands to reason that if we can spend $3.5 trillion on healthcare right now, we can afford to REDUCE our spending to $3.3 trillion.

Not only that the 3.5 trillion includes billions of dollars that is pure profit to the insurance companies. Just United Healthcare had 2.6 billion in profits for the second quarter in 2019, Blue Cross/Blue Shield reported 1 billion as did several others.

 

[Hank77]

All health providers are required by law to treat patients regardless of their ability to pay.

That is not true. There are doctors, surgeons, etc. that won't even take Medicare patients let alone Medicaid patients.
Maybe your state has such a law.

 

[iluvatar5150]

We are.

Keep telling yourself that.