253 Economists in Support of S. 1129 a Medicare for All Health Care System

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2
OK Mr duct tape, let's take your estimate at face value and accept it for the sake of argument. Total Healthcare costs in the US are 3.5 trillion a year and Bernie's plan would give us more coverage for 3.26 trillion a year. We'll remove a lot of nuance since it's too hard for you to wrap your head around. Let's get on the same page here, however long it takes. So we're in agreement that within a decade, costs would come down.

We're leaving out the part that it's averaged out for a decade and starts way above 3.26 trillion and ends below that much, but let's just agree to this, step one. We have both cited these numbers.

 

[abandonconflict]

Your argument is we can't afford to pay for a cheaper healthcare system than we do now

No, it's not. My argument is that the federal budget can't afford it without more revenue. Completely different, I'll slowly but surely get you to understand what it means though.

 

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2

@Padawanbater2
OK Mr duct tape, let's take your estimate at face value and accept it for the sake of argument. Total Healthcare costs in the US are 3.5 trillion a year and Bernie's plan would give us more coverage for 3.26 trillion a year. We'll remove a lot of nuance since it's too hard for you to wrap your head around. Let's get on the same page here, however long it takes. So we're in agreement that within a decade, costs would come down.

We're leaving out the part that it's averaged out for a decade and starts way above 3.26 trillion and ends below that much, but let's just agree to this, step one. We have both cited these numbers.

Building on this, I actually do agree, way to go, sport!

We must then mutually understand that Bernie's plan is single payer, meaning the healthcare would cost nothing to the user, the government would pay it. SOUNDS AMAZING!

 

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2

@Padawanbater2

Building on this, I actually do agree, way to go, sport!

We must then mutually understand that Bernie's plan is single payer, meaning the healthcare would cost nothing to the user, the government would pay it. SOUNDS AMAZING!

Still with me so far?

So that means that the federal government must then come up with 3.26 (give or take) trillion dollars per year, in addition to the current budget or maybe shift some stuff around, right, play with the numbers, reduce spending here, cut spending there...

Let me know if I have lost you.

 

[Padawanbater2]

No, it's not. My argument is that the federal budget can't afford it without more revenue. Completely different, I'll slowly but surely get you to understand what it means though.

How can we afford the current system without more revenue?

 

[Fogdog]

I was going to answer this double question response with two replies but I combined them.


Bernie's healthcare bill does contain enough to inform the estimates. 32.6 trillion is the lowest estimate for the full comprehensive coverage for all which his bill does include. Warren's proposal has lower estimates because it doesn't spend so much.

We could go with the Mercatus study if you prefer. That estimate is 49 trillion dollars for the first decade.

Bernie's economic agenda goes way beyond his healthcare bill and in other proposals you can fill in the missing pieces. When you include free tuition and his version of a green new deal, it starts to become clear why he proposed a top statutory federal tax of 77%.


The choice is what matters to us. I can take a plan with deductibles and copays and manage my health by eating right and exercising. That's where 'Medicare for all who want it' comes in as a clearly superior plan moving forward. It gets everyone covered while reducing costs AND reducing private premiums.

My understanding is that Medicare for all who want it is a path toward federal administration paying for the costs of private healthcare providers. Those under retirement age and can afford it pay into Medicare and the government pays the providers. Under that plan, reducing cost won't really happen to a meaningful degree.

 

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2

@Padawanbater2

Still with me so far?

So that means that the federal government must then come up with 3.26 (give or take) trillion dollars per year, in addition to the current budget or maybe shift some stuff around, right, play with the numbers, reduce spending here, cut spending there...

Let me know if I have lost you.

Bernie's bill even includes some great ideas for new taxation on the uber rich, because we have to pay for this TOTALLY FREE HEALTHCARE THAT NOBODY IS APPARENTLY GOING TO PAY FOR. These amazing ideas (no really, I like them) pay for about half of the cost we agreed earlier.

WOW, SUPER COOL FREE STUFF!

 

[abandonconflict]

My understanding is that Medicare for all who want it is a path toward socializing paying for the costs of private healthcare providers. Under that plan, reducing cost won't really happen to a meaningful degree.

Debatable. I could be convinced if you have a decent argument. I'm actually pro. Even if it doesn't, I'd take some tax hikes to get everyone covered, it's the right thing to do.

 

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2

Bernie's bill even includes some great ideas for new taxation on the uber rich, because we have to pay for this TOTALLY FREE HEALTHCARE THAT NOBODY IS APPARENTLY GOING TO PAY FOR. These amazing ideas (no really, I like them) pay for about half of the cost we agreed earlier.

WOW, SUPER COOL FREE STUFF!

Let me know if I have to repeat any of the premises in this over-simplification I'm making for your simple mind. It's no problem at all.

So Passing Bernie's bill, as is, at this time, would add 1.4 trillion to 1.7 trillion dollars to the deficit with the uber rich already being taxed in the anus.

Still with me so far?

 

[abandonconflict]

Taxes pada

fucking taxes.

big fucking tax hikes

no

 

[Padawanbater2]

Total Healthcare costs in the US are 3.5 trillion a year

Bernie's plan would give us more coverage for 3.26 trillion a year

the federal budget can't afford it without more revenue

the federal government must then come up with 3.26 (give or take) trillion dollars per year


The federal budget can't afford it without +.24 trillion more revenue (give or take) per year

 

[abandonconflict]

The federal budget can't afford it without +.24 trillion more revenue (give or take) per year

no

The federal budget does not pay for the healthcare that Sanders is proposing.

 

[abandonconflict]

@Padawanbater2

no

The federal budget does not pay for the healthcare that Sanders is proposing.

I knew you'd find a way to fail.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Let me know if I have to repeat any of the premises in this over-simplification I'm making for your simple mind. It's no problem at all.

You and I are on the same team regardless of how you feel about me personally. You need to remember that. There's no value to amplifying disagreements and making them personal to make a point on a pointless political forum.

 

[srh88]

You and I are on the same team regardless of how you feel about me personally. You need to remember that. There's no value to amplifying disagreements and making them personal to make a point on a pointless political forum.

So every democrat has your vote no matter who wins nomination?

 

[Padawanbater2]

no

The federal budget does not pay for the healthcare that Sanders is proposing.

M4A saves money. You don't even know what you're against. You're simply against the man because you don't like him and don't want him to become president. Everything else is just nonsense to serve that fact.

If Sanders lowered your taxes, gave you universal healthcare and ended all the wars abroad, you still wouldn't support him because you don't like him and hate his supporters. There is no reasoning with someone like you. I wish you the best, man. That's it for us tonight.

 

[abandonconflict]

You and I are on the same team regardless of how you feel about me personally. You need to remember that. There's no value to amplifying disagreements and making them personal to make a point on a pointless political forum.

Nah, you're not. I blame your kind for most of what is wrong in the country.

Back to the over-simplifications that were still not simple enough for you.

Bernie's healthcare plan would add 1.4 to 1.7 trillion to the deficit. Do you acknowledge this or no?

Do you see how this is extrapolated from numbers we have agreed upon?

 

[abandonconflict]

M4A saves money. You don't even know what you're against. You're simply against the man because you don't like him and don't want him to become president. Everything else is just nonsense to serve that fact.

If Sanders lowered your taxes, gave you universal healthcare and ended all the wars abroad, you still wouldn't support him because you don't like him and hate his supporters. There is no reasoning with someone like you. I wish you the best, man. That's it for us tonight.

No, read it again. You totally misunderstood all those hard and super difficult numbers.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Bernie's healthcare plan would add 1.4 to 1.7 trillion to the deficit. Do you acknowledge this or no?

How would Sanders healthcare plan add more to the deficit being cheaper than what we pay now?

Cheaper = more in your mind

How? Explain that

 

[Padawanbater2]

ABC math 3.5 < 3.2