PDR member and biker May Wood had some important words for our conservative thinkers. They must reevaluate when taxes are not taxes but investments that pay dividends several times over.
Since we're talkin' expense vs investment (and return on that investment): a super-rough estimate says the feds could do a hostile takeover of the US health insurance industry for less than $3 trillion. That's the carrot -- the fair market value of corporate shares held by mostly-rich investors, or equivalent. The stick: eminent domain. So it's a forced sale, but at a fair price.
Where does the $3T financing come from? One possible idea: bonds issued by a federal Health Infrastructure Bank. Much of the money to retire these bonds will come from already-existing cash flow in the current system. More than a half trillion dollars a year will come from net cost savings across public and private parts of the current system.
The Congressional Budget Office found that a public single-payer system could save our nation $650 billion a year or more, much of it stemming from administrative cost savings. Tens of billions would come from shutting down the vast scam of Medicare Advantage, which lets insurers keep up to 40% of the money they collect from Uncle Sam. By contrast, traditional Medicare admin costs 2% or less. Additionally, physicians in private-practice groups need two billing clerks for every three doctors, a staggering cost, completely unnecessary under a single-payer system. Similarly, US companies spend billions managing healthcare insurance for employees. All that would go away too.
I could go on, but suffice to say, our entire broken system is hemorrhaging cash via such eye-popping inefficiencies while doing nothing to help heal a single patient.
By switching to single-payer and applying related reforms and efficiencies (such as "global budgeting" for hospitals), the proposed Health Infrastructure bonds could be paid off in as little as five or ten years. That's while fully covering all necessary medical costs for every man, woman and child in America, forever. Here's a partial view of positive impacts: https://medium.com/@idember/pigs-fly-cbo-admits-medicare-for-all-will-aid-people-businesses-economy-e32d72ce59a2.
Private insurers could still sell plans to cover optional care, such as cosmetic surgery, cosmetic dental work, and fancy eyeglasses that many people prefer. And pet insurance, a fast-growing field. But for the rest of us, single-payer would be a godsend and, in the long run, lots cheaper than our current system. How's that for an investment?
Why don't we have this commonsense solution already? Because a corrupt Congress is stalling the legislation — HR 3421 and its counterpart, S.1655. (Among well over a hundred co-signers so far, not one is a Republican.) Is your representative and senators on board? If not, why not? Demand it now!
Since we're talkin' expense vs investment (and return on that investment): a super-rough estimate says the feds could do a hostile takeover of the US health insurance industry for less than $3 trillion. That's the carrot -- the fair market value of corporate shares held by mostly-rich investors, or equivalent. The stick: eminent domain. So it's a forced sale, but at a fair price.
Where does the $3T financing come from? One possible idea: bonds issued by a federal Health Infrastructure Bank. Much of the money to retire these bonds will come from already-existing cash flow in the current system. More than a half trillion dollars a year will come from net cost savings across public and private parts of the current system.
The Congressional Budget Office found that a public single-payer system could save our nation $650 billion a year or more, much of it stemming from administrative cost savings. Tens of billions would come from shutting down the vast scam of Medicare Advantage, which lets insurers keep up to 40% of the money they collect from Uncle Sam. By contrast, traditional Medicare admin costs 2% or less. Additionally, physicians in private-practice groups need two billing clerks for every three doctors, a staggering cost, completely unnecessary under a single-payer system. Similarly, US companies spend billions managing healthcare insurance for employees. All that would go away too.
I could go on, but suffice to say, our entire broken system is hemorrhaging cash via such eye-popping inefficiencies while doing nothing to help heal a single patient.
By switching to single-payer and applying related reforms and efficiencies (such as "global budgeting" for hospitals), the proposed Health Infrastructure bonds could be paid off in as little as five or ten years. That's while fully covering all necessary medical costs for every man, woman and child in America, forever. Here's a partial view of positive impacts: https://medium.com/@idember/pigs-fly-cbo-admits-medicare-for-all-will-aid-people-businesses-economy-e32d72ce59a2.
Private insurers could still sell plans to cover optional care, such as cosmetic surgery, cosmetic dental work, and fancy eyeglasses that many people prefer. And pet insurance, a fast-growing field. But for the rest of us, single-payer would be a godsend and, in the long run, lots cheaper than our current system. How's that for an investment?
Why don't we have this commonsense solution already? Because a corrupt Congress is stalling the legislation — HR 3421 and its counterpart, S.1655. (Among well over a hundred co-signers so far, not one is a Republican.) Is your representative and senators on board? If not, why not? Demand it now!