Opinion: We can afford Medicare for All… - - PressFrom - US

Opinion We can afford Medicare for All…

18:30  25 november  2019
18:30  25 november  2019 Source:   politico.com

Warren pushes back on critics of her health care plan

  Warren pushes back on critics of her health care plan Elizabeth Warren pushed back against critics of her newly-released plan to phase in implementation of a single-payer health care system, insisting Saturday that she is “fully committed” to Medicare for All and that she plans to first build on existing health care programs because “people need help right now.” “My commitment to Medicare for All is all the way,” Warren told reporters, responding to critics who’ve questioned the timing behind the release of her implementation plan. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.

Let's destroy the myth that we can 't afford Universal Healthcare. #MedicareForAll - act.tv is a progressive media company specializing in next

You can change this preference below. Justice Dem Ro Khanna Runs Circles Around Fox Host On Medicare For All - Продолжительность: 13:00 Secular Talk 163 110 просмотров.

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

Berkley OpEd© Illustration by Peter Horvath Berkley OpEd

The current debate over "Medicare for All" anxiously asks “How are we going to afford paying for health care?” But of course, we’re already paying for health care. The true question should be: “Who should pay for health care?”

Our research shows that when you look at health care costs as a distribution problem, it becomes clear that not only can we afford Medicare for All, but a properly designed transition to Medicare for All could deliver the biggest pay raise in a generation to middle-class workers.

Economist: Democratic naysayers are wrong on Medicare for All

  Economist: Democratic naysayers are wrong on Medicare for All Media pundits and some faint-hearted Democrats are failing Americans with their reluctance to seize on Elizabeth Warren's and Bernie Sanders' plan to reform America's costly, unfair and inefficient health care system. The two are pointing the correct way, and this is a goal that most Americans support, writes Jeffrey Sachs.Let's be clear on the central point. Medicare for All, as first proposed by Bernie Sanders and endorsed by Elizabeth Warren, is affordable precisely because it is cheaper, much cheaper, than the current system.

There are some silly arguments against Medicare - for - All , but one that gains a lot of traction: Can we afford it? The short answer is: Yes.

Under Medicare for All , middle class families would pay far less for health care than they do today but get much better care.

To understand why, it’s worth reviewing how health care is currently funded in the United States. American workers who don’t qualify for Medicare or Medicaid almost always get their insurance through an employer. The average cost of employer-sponsored health insurance is $13,000 a year per covered worker and this cost is growing fast. That adds up to roughly $1 trillion a year.

Since the passage of the Affordable Care Act, it is mandatory for all employers with more than 50 full-time workers to provide health insurance to their full-time employees; employers that don’t provide insurance have to pay a fine. The government has in effect washed its hands of the responsibility of providing health insurance to workers, and instead forces employers to manage this growing cost.

Debate crowd erupts in laughs as Sanders chimes in 'I wrote the damn bill' on Medicare for All

  Debate crowd erupts in laughs as Sanders chimes in 'I wrote the damn bill' on Medicare for All Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) scored the first laugh of the fifth Democratic presidential debate on Wednesday by dredging up an old line: "I wrote the damn bill."Sanders first made the quip - a reference to his signature Medicare-for-All legislation - during the second Democratic primary debate in July after one of his rivals, Rep. Tim Ryan (D-Ohio), suggested that the Vermont senator was unaware of what the single-payer health care proposal actually entailed.Since then, Sanders has capitalized on that phrase, repeating it at times during public appearances and even selling campaign merchandise emblazoned with the slogan.

You're viewing YouTube in Russian. You can change this preference below.

Chris Spangle and Harry Price outline the contents of Bernie Sander's Medicare for All proposal, examine a recent Mercatus Study on it, and ask if America

Premiums depress wages

Formally, employers pay about 70 percent of insurance premiums and workers the remaining 30 percent. But in practice, workers are paying the whole thing. The costs might seem invisible to workers, but in fact their health benefits are reducing their take-home pay every week. Why? Because for an employer, what matters is the total cost of employing someone. This cost includes salary but also benefits such as health insurance. If an employer believes your work is worth $50,000 to the company but has to pay $13,000 for your health care, your salary is going to be no more than $37,000.

They also reduce wages in a particularly unfair way: Because health insurance premiums are fixed, the wage penalty is the same for a low-wage secretary as it is for a highly paid executive. This severely depresses wages for tens of millions of moderate-income workers. When you hear that average hourly earnings of (nonsupervisory) American workers have stagnated since the late 1970s in spite of a growing economy, keep in mind that’s in part because growing health care costs are devouring an increasing share of what workers would otherwise be paid. Given the fast growth of health care costs, this situation is not sustainable.

Convicted Miami healthcare mogul must pay $44 million to Medicare, U.S. government

  Convicted Miami healthcare mogul must pay $44 million to Medicare, U.S. government Philip Esformes, the Miami Beach healthcare mogul sentenced to 20 years in a massive Medicare fraud case, must pay more than $44 million to the taxpayer-funded program and U.S. government, a federal judge decided Thursday. © Rob Latour/Invision/AP, File FILE - In this Aug. 7, 2015 file photo, Philip Esformes arrives at the 15th Annual Harold and Carole Pump Foundation Gala held at the Hyatt Regency Century Plaza, in Los Angeles. The Florida health care executive is facing sentencing following his conviction on 20 criminal charges in what prosecutors described as a $1 billion Medicare fraud scheme.

When it comes to Medicare for All , the answer is yes provided Medicare for All is correctly designed. The Hillary-leaning economists featured in the NY Times article who 3. All who can pay for their health plans should do so through a combination of existing tax payments and health plan co-payments.

Yes, we can afford it. Consolidating healthcare management and making it universally available will allow us to (1) help people before their untreated Medicare for all works in the following countries. Portugal, Spain, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany (their plan was started in 1913!), Denmark

The system is opaque enough that workers can’t see such costs clearly, but they aren’t completely hidden. Health care costs are sometimes visible on your pay slip as the “employer contribution to medical insurance.” The full cost of employer and employee premiums is also usually reported on the W-2 form that you use to file your income taxes. Take a look at box 12, code DD, and see how staggering the amounts are—typically the amount exceeds $10,000 in a year, and it can exceed $20,000 if your insurance covers family members. This is compensation for your work that you never see in your bank account, and you don’t have much choice, let alone the option to take the money as wages rather than health insurance.

Economically, insurance premiums are effectively the same as a tax on labor—a tax administered by employers. What makes this tax stand out is that it’s a so-called head tax, unrelated to ability to pay. It’s the most unfair type of tax: A huge burden for low-wage workers and almost meaningless for the rich. Head taxes (sometimes called poll taxes) used to be popular centuries ago but have long fallen out of fashion. (When Margaret Thatcher tried to impose a head tax in 1988 to replace real estate property taxes in the United Kingdom, she faced an unprecedented revolt and was ousted from office in 1990.)

The Day in Sports: Thursday, November 21, 2019

  The Day in Sports: Thursday, November 21, 2019 The Day in Sports: Thursday, November 21, 2019

On the Marc Steiner Show, Marc talks to Ben Jealous about how he would impact Baltimore as governor of Maryland and asks how he would finance his policy

All we 'd have to do is give up the war addiction. One month's war spending would solve this problem nationwide. Something else no other nation, developed or @snoopydawg We can afford anything we want. Congress' ability to spend is not limited. They don't want us to have healthcare of adequate

No government would out-of-the-blue impose a head tax to fund health care; it would be a crushing burden on the working and middle classes. And yet in essence that’s what the U.S. government does today by mandating that employers manage a huge head tax to fund health insurance for workers.

Middle class bearing the burden

If you see the health system this way, it changes how you understand the entire U.S. tax system. Many people believe that the United States has what’s known as a progressive tax system, in which you pay more, as a fraction of your income, as you earn more. It’s true that income taxes are for the most part designed that way, but when you add all the various tax burdens together, the reality is different. And if you add mandatory private health insurance premiums to the official tax take, the U.S. tax system turns out to be highly regressive. Once private health insurance is factored in, the average tax rate rises from a bit less than 30 percent at the bottom of the income distribution, reaches close to 40 percent for the middle class, and collapses to 23 percent for billionaires.

When politicians urgently debate the tax burden on the middle class, they rarely point out that the system is already unfairly built on the backs of the middle class — and it’s our health care premiums that make it that way.

More millennials plan to rent forever, can't afford to buy a home

  More millennials plan to rent forever, can't afford to buy a home Millennials said they can't afford to buy a home — housing costs have increased, and it's hard to save when money is going toward student-loan debt.Just over 12% of millennial renters plan to "always rent" -- more than the 10.7% that said the same last year, a new Apartment List survey found. The survey polled more than 10,000 millennial renters in the U.S.

Does that mean “ Medicare For All ” will end deaths? How many people are dying because “they can’t afford access to health care?” This isn’t the Congo. There are numerous options for people who struggle to get the care they need. But Ocasio-Cortez expertly dodges the question entirely.

Medicare for all . Astronomical health care costs and lack of access continue to drive individuals, families, and businesses past their breaking point Medicare for All can only be achieved through a broad based grassroots campaign. Join us to replace this broken profit driven system with a health

The solution to this mess is simple: The head tax currently paid by workers in the form of mandatory premiums should be replaced by actual, normal taxes based on ability to pay. If employer-sponsored health insurance premiums were transformed into wages, that’s a $13,000 pay increase that each covered worker would get on average, the biggest pay raise in a generation, and one that is long overdue.

Of course, taxes would then have to increase to fund Medicare for All. But they could, and should, look very different than the hidden tax they’re replacing. It would be possible to structure the new taxes so that all workers below a high wage threshold would pay less in taxes than what they would get in extra wages once those were returned to their paychecks – and the government could still raise the same $1 trillion in revenue. Any form of taxation (be it a payroll tax, an individual income tax, a corporate tax, a wealth tax, or a mix of these) would do, since all these taxes are much less regressive than the current health insurance premiums.

Will employers pocket the savings?

One crucial aspect of the transition to Medicare for All has not received enough attention so far: Once employers no longer have to pay for health benefits, how do we make sure they don’t abuse the system, keeping wages the same and pocketing the difference?

To address this problem, the government should legislate the conversion of employer health care premiums into a permanent wage increase at the time of the transition to Medicare for All. From the point of view of employers, this conversion would be neutral: for them, the cost of each worker would not change. Because health insurance premiums are already reported on W-2 forms and pay slips, this wage increase would be easy to enforce and monitor. Firms that try to pocket the premiums instead of boosting wages could be fined.

Sally Pipes: 'Medicare-for-all' is still Dems' goal – don't be fooled by candidates' dodges

  Sally Pipes: 'Medicare-for-all' is still Dems' goal – don't be fooled by candidates' dodges When candidates claim their public option plans are alternatives to "Medicare-for-all," they're not being honest. In time, the public option would turn into “Medicare-for-all.” Former Vice President Joe Biden is wrong to claim that his public option would "allow people to choose" the coverage that best suits them.At least South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg has admitted that his public option plan would "create a natural glide-path" to "Medicare-for-all." Give him points for honesty.So far the Democratic presidential hopefuls have managed to paper over the differences between their health care plans.

In this video, we break down the numbers and show how a Medicare - For - All system would SAVE money overall compared to our current “crazy quilt” system

Would Medicare for All drive up my taxes? How can we afford to cover everyone/won’t it be too expensive? Won’t Medicare for All just be another bureaucracy? The fight for Medicare for All also affords our members an opportunity to build their practical organizing capacities and skills by having

Even in the case of a slower transition to universal health insurance (such as the creation of a public option) it is essential to legislate that workers who migrate to the public option can take their current health insurance premiums as extra wages. If not, the transition will either never happen (as workers won’t see any upside to migrate), or it will be a boon for employers who will pocket the health care premiums. But if a law mandates that all premiums be added to wages, “Medicare for all who want it” will become “Medicare for All” faster that anyone believes (and the funding equation for both programs will become the same).

The current funding of health care in the U.S., which imposes a mammoth burden on moderate-income workers, is not sustainable. There is broad agreement that everybody should have access to health care—just like all children should have access to education. Given the enormous costs—there’s no cheap way to treat heart attacks, cure cancers, or give birth—low-income families cannot afford health care on their own. The U.S. spends approximately $10,000 on health care per person per year; it is impossible for workers with low salaries to spend $10,000 per family member. Other wealthy countries have understood this basic truth long ago and fund universal health insurance through taxes that are based on ability to pay.

The key question, in the U.S. context, is how to conduct a successful transition to universal public health insurance that redistributes the burden of paying for health care. Do it fast or do it slow, the big picture is this: Fixing the injustice of our current health care funding system is possible and in fact straightforward. And if it came with a law mandating the conversion of premiums into wages, it would deliver the biggest pay raise in a generation to American workers.

Biden says Buttigieg 'stole' his healthcare plan .
U.S. Democratic presidential contender Joe Biden said on Monday that his fast-rising rival Pete Buttigieg "stole" the former vice president's healthcare policy proposals, as the two battle for support in the early nominating state of Iowa. require(["medianetNativeAdOnArticle"], function (medianetNativeAdOnArticle) { medianetNativeAdOnArticle.getMedianetNativeAds(true); }); Biden, among the leaders in the 16-member Democratic field for the right to take on Republican President Donald Trump in next year's election, is proposing expanding the Affordable Care Act.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 4
This is interesting!