...to pay for his "Medicare for All."
No doubt.
Come on, Bernie, just admit that you have no idea how to pay for your plan, because you're not very bright. Your campaign slogan is no deeper than "Free Sh**!"
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bernie-says-hell-probably-raise-payroll-income-taxes-to-pay-for-medicare-for-all?fbclid=IwAR3FiOVAfnDUP4Rq3B9JCKTolmHk2tqYKbBqePl7qhNV9JHXT142M5yekJ8
Not American but from what I know American's already don't get paid much so increasing income tax sounds like a great idea there Bernie. Not to mention increasing payroll tax so companies start to lay off staff.
Wow.
Americans get screwed as do employers in health benefits and insurance premiums. Raising the taxes to pay for universal healthcare is a trade off with removing the current system that costs more, and covers less.
To figure out if it’s worth it, figure out what your tax would go up by a measure it against how much you pay in insurance. Then ask your employer how much more they could pay you, because they aren’t having to fund health benefits. That’s the sum that Americans need to look at.
It's amazing that people who think that it's too difficult to pay for doctors, hospitals & medication in a competitive private system somehow think that we can pay for doctors, hospitals & medication PLUS a government bureaucracy to administer it.
shareIt’s even more amazing that people think think the private health care system is competitive when US citizens pay far more than the “government bureaucracy” of other countries manages to negotiate on behave of its tax payers while providing a much better level of care.
10ml of Insulin for example has a US list piece of 450 USD. In Canada the same amount costs just 21 USD. It’s not a case of paying slightly more, it’s paying grossly more. Remove the private companies that price gouge their customers and insert a government body that regulates the health care industry and hey presto, you have a health care industry that’s profitable and affordable. It’s truly sicking(no pun) that the “greatest country in the world” treats its own citizens with such contempt. It’s even more sicking that some of those citizens will support that treatment.
Anything the government does, the private sector does better. It's in their vested interest to do so.
shareExactly
shareThen why is the US government paying less for pharmaceuticals than the private sector?
shareThat's not at all what I'm talking about. Private schools, private insurance, private industry, etc. A singular example of a better price isn't indicative of over all performance of any business/sector.
shareIn this case, it is. Private industry can also exist in an oligopoly. Insuring that costs vs performance don’t factor. Take the telecoms industry. Separate companies that should be competing but instead have by and large just carved up the US and they don’t have to do better. The vested interest you were talking about is competition. When there’s little or no competition, the vested interest is profit without the need to entice customers.
Take Facebook. In Europe they have what’s called the GDRP. It basically rules of conduct for companies to give more control to consumers in regard to their privacy. Facebook has a monopoly on what it is, so it able to get around the GDRP by forcing its users to agree to any and all terms and conditions. They are still abiding by the rule of the law, but they are able to force the customer to agree to give up thief privacy because they have no other choice. Facebook is where everyone they know is. There’s no vested interest to be better for the consumer. It’s agree, or you don’t get to share pictures of cats.
And that’s the main point. When you have your customer over a barrel, they aren’t going to do better. They’re going to do what companies do and that’s to make money. No competition, no reason to make the product better to make more money.
the vested interest argument only works when there’s competition. The health care system, doesn’t have that. If it did, the US wouldn’t be paying three times as much on average for treatments than anywhere else in the world. On top of that, you have vultures coming in and snapping up the patents on old generic drugs that cost nothing, and then hiking the prices by one thousand percent. As I said to some one else, an old anti parasite drug used mostly for toxoplasmosis in babies born from mothers who have hiv went from 13 bucks to 750, while in the UK that same drug costs 66 cents. So I guess my question is in what way is the private sector doing better than the government here?
Don't get me wrong. I am sure there is plenty that could be done but I don't think just instantly penalizing workers is the way to go. Australia has public health but we still have private healthcare as well.
Do you think though that employers would pay staff more if they no longer had to fund health care? Or do you think they would more than likely pocket the savings and the worker still gets taxed more?
more tax, but less insurance expense. For example current US government healthcare has made a deal for its costs in pharmaceuticals. They pay considerably less than the private firms. If those same negotiation skills were used for everyone then the private healthcare firms would be forced to lower their prices as well. The other thing is that medical companies would have to be regulated. No more of this free market nonsense that allows them to rip of the US customer.
There’s a trend in the US were older generic drugs are bought up by companies, and then the price gets increased. For example you may remember the thing with the guy who bought the anti paracite drug and increased the price from 13 USD up to 750 usd? Well that same drug in the UK is 0.66 USD. The uk, like pretty much everywhere else, has oversight. They have private health care as well, but it’s not about price gouging like it is in the US.
Then you factor in people with pre existing conditions, those people are screwed in the US. Imagine being 15 years old and getting MS. Interferon alone costs about 20 grand a year. There is currently no safety net for young people that get life long illnesses. But in the UK, you go to the doctor and get your treatments without any hassle.
People should be able to go the hospital and not have “how are paying for this?” Being the most important question. IMO.
Increasing taxes 6% so you don’t have to pay insurance premiums sounds like a good trade off to me.
shareThe sight of this POS's face and that stupid hand gesture he continuously does while he's scolding makes me want to puke.
share