Not necessarily. People always point to Denmark or X country with a population many times less then the US as example. Nothing is going to scale as easily or cheaply to 350 million people like people think.
Second Drâs or what have you are still going to get paid X. The savings if anything would come from eliminating insurance overhead and games.
The most likely outcome is more people on the bottom get more healthcare, not a bad thing. I just really donât think as whole we are going to really talk about saving much.
You really donât have to go to single payer to achieve some savings, congress just has to enact a few laws and clean up what we have.
Iâm not necessarily saying it wouldnât. But Iâm just saying it might not be as easy or savings like we think. You can point to a program like Denmark and say see they have this and save that. Itâs country of 6 million people in a different part of the world, to say that will scale perfectly to 350 million people just isnt logical.
One important thing to understand a lot of socialist countries and programs differ on how they fund their programs then we do. Other countries force everybody to pay in which gets buy in and a successful program, we like to charge people with money to fund programs so thatâs how the argument gets one sided all the time here
The other reality is I think you can either achieve savings or give people great healthcare you wonât get both.
Anyway, I still think it would be better to try it. The affordable care act doesnât have teeth because Republicans got rid of the mandate and the tax penalty.
This means we canât do a model like Japan or Germany.
I say we try Medicare for all. I doubt itâll cost more than what we already pay, which is the most of any developed country.
Iâm all for change. Itâs just a simp argument most people have. They need to look at the challenges we have now, especially ones that a single payer system wouldnât fix like access. Lots of places already have little access or long wait times, adding more people makes that worse, single payer doesnât fix that problem
Also we live by a border town and Canadians are here everyday paying out pocket, that has to tell you something.
Why would the location not matter. If you buy dinner in each one of these countries the price varies drastically. Thus the cost of healthcare would as well.
They have single payer in Canada and their cost-of-living is similar to ours. The problem isnât with vast geography or a large population. The problem is political opposition and people who benefit from the status quo.
Also, larger populations make for economies of scale, which can bring down administrative costs per person by spreading them across a larger pool.
I said even close to US population. The three examples you gave added together don't even reach half. India, China, and Indonesia are all compulsory insurance. I think this could be effective if it were relegated to the state level, but federally it is gonna be a hard pass. You seen the VA, they only serviced 5% of the population with a 400 billion dollar budget. Sure it's possible but let's be real here, we all know it's going to end up with a butt load of middle management, administrative, and just worthless jobs sending emails to each other for no reason.
But yeah, I can agree to single payer if it were state run
Ok, so what are your recommendations for the following 3 immediate problems with the transition.
1, health insurance companies generate 1.7 trillion dollars in revenue, how do we deal with the immediate deletion of 5% of our GDP
2, 700,000 people losing their jobs over night
3, doctors and nurses immediately having their earnings capped at roughly a fifth what they are used to and not being able to afford their existing life styles or debt
Most things get cheaper with scale, not more difficult... and if you think one big system is to much, you could literally just make a lot of smaller ones.
That number is probably going up after this year OBB (I refuse to call it OBBB because there's nothing pretty about it). I know Ohio alone is looking at possibly 450,000-500,000 people between ACA price increases and Medicaid coverage.
Edit: So far current losses of health insurance in Ohio sit in the 200,000s based on Google. This could still climb pretty hard considering the affordability crisis is getting worse.
One thing people seem to not talk about is the access. Iâm not talking from an insurance standpoint point but actual Doctors. In my area, itâs a 6 month waitlist for the local Endocrinologist, the next closest one is 45 miles away. Giving everyone insurance wonât fix all the problems, but it would help.
I'm on Medicare and it isn't free, I pay a premium along with premiums for my prescription drugs and supplemental insurance. The one's who don't pay are the people on medicade with is covered by their state in which we tax paying people pay for including myself.
8% of People donât have Health Insurance, your fighting to Lower Wages for Health Professionals and for shittier Service. Itâs not like poor people canât get healthcare we have Medicaid for a reason
My only sticking point, personally, is is EVERYONE going to contribute? I always hear it as tax the rich to pay for it but let's be honest that's infeasible and unsustainable. Every other country with a similar system EVERYONE pays in, no ifs ands or butts. If that were the situation then sure, I'm on board.... But I don't see that. What I see happening is the 60th to 95th percentile earners carrying a disproportionate share of the burden while those on the bottom skate on by for little to nothing and those at the tippy top are unbothered by their share. I am not rich, but I am a member of the "boned" tax bracket. Even with my business expenses pay over 60k a year and only keep about 250. I don't want to spend even more of my money for the government to waste it on stupid middle tier administrative positions that don't need to exist and thousands of staff that just pass papers between eachother before approving anything
I agree with single payer, but it would be nice for the federal government to prove to us they can control fraud in the Medicare/Medicaid we have now. 1 of of every 4 dollars now is stolen via fraud.
Old people have Medicare so they shouldn't die. My dad is 89 and is very strong and healthy. I wonder if many people who die don't exercise, eat garbage, and are obese? Just wondering
9/12 is now the day to commemorate and remember the tens of thousands of people that die every year due to health insurance industry greed. 49 health insurance billionaires exist while 92% of Americans skip necessary medical Care due to cost
It depends, can't make a blanket statement on that, though repeating talking points doesn't require any critical thinking. How about those without any health insurance at all? It would some how be worse for them? It is way more nuanced than you're silly talking pt. Let me know if you want to have a real, intelligent conversation about the topic. That isn't it.
5000 to everyone is communism and if Americans you don't want to help get 5000 then your tax dollars will be helping them.
You people are all good with spending one billion a day in Iran but would never want to see even one dollar going to help struggling Americans. We pay taxes for all those programs that DOGE canceled. trump is collecting that money as we pay for programs that don't exist as you cheer and celebrate.
9,400 have died and more than 50,000 have received a cancer diagnosis due to the collapse of the Towers. A fact the Giuliani Administration knew would happen and immediately conspired to bury.
to protect the city from immense financial liability, specifically the multi-billion-dollar health-related lawsuits over the post-9/11 air quality and public health advisories that were buried and hidden.
The US spends twice as much per Capita than Canada on healthcare and has 4 years less life expectancy with a 5 year worse health adjusted life expectancy.
11
u/theblueshots 1h ago
Theyâll say itâs too expensive despite the fact that we pay more than any other developed country for healthcare.
Single payer healthcare actually saves money because it gets rid of the âMechanic bargainâ element.