Single-Payer Health Care: $570 Billion Cheaper

[xchrom]

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/single-payer_healthcare_570_billion_cheaper_20120414/


Economist Gerald Friedman has what looks to be the silver bullet against the claim that single-payer health care is infeasible on economic grounds, showing how “Medicare for all” could save billions of dollars while improving millions of lives.

Study his easy-to-grasp charts and figures explaining how to fund the plan and how much it would save in the two-page document linked below. —ARK

Gerald Friedman at Dollars & Sense:

'The Expanded & Improved Medicare for all act” (HR 676) would establish a single authority responsible for paying for health care for all Americans. Providing universal coverage with a “single-payer” system would change many aspects of American health care. While it would raise some costs by providing access to care for those currently uninsured or under-insured, it would save much larger sums by eliminating insurance middlemen and radically simplifying payment to doctors and hospitals. While providing superior health care, a single-payer system would save as much as $570 billion now wasted on administrative overhead and monopoly profits. A single-payer system would also make health-care financing dramatically more progressive by replacing fixed, income-invariant health-care expenditures with progressive taxes. This series of charts and graphs shows why we need a single-payer system and how it could be funded.'

http://www.dollarsandsense.org/archives/2012/0312friedman.pdf

[gratuitous]

1. We can't have single payer

Because some mythical, low-information voter in Dubuque or Pine Bluff might think it means pulling the plug on grandma, even though she's been dead for 15 years, and SOSHULIZM!

Also, long waits at the emergency room. Or someplace.

[xchrom]

3. the emergency room thing always 'kills me' -- you can't go to the emergency room

w/out waiting forever any more.

and it's the WORST place to be if you're really sick and or in pain.

i always try to get my doctor to see me forst if at all possible.

[PA Democrat]

5. Volunteer ambulance services are hurting too

because of the numbers of uninsured people they transport to hospitals combined with low reimbursement rates from insurance companies and Medicare. Several local volunteer companies are talking about dissolving. If that happens, people will have to wait longer for an ambulance, a wait that could mean the difference between life and death.

The nonprofit ambulance service struggles because of the high number of uninsured people living in its Munhall-Homestead-West Homestead service area, but also because of low reimbursements from Medicare and the discounted rates it must accept from Highmark Inc. if it is to get direct payments from the insurer, McClean says.

Several ambulance services say they are hurting -- and might need to cut services or dissolve -- because of a complicated insurance reimbursement system that pays them far below their rising costs. People needing ambulances might have fewer outfits serving them, leading to longer wait times, said Knox Walk, the EMS director for Allegheny County.


Read more: Ambulance squads hurt by reimbursements that don't meet costs - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_791396.html#ixzz1s7i6MvPM

When my right wing acquaintances and family members complain about not wanting to pay for other people's health care, I remind them that they already do, and that the price could be their own lives if they cannot get to and receive care in an emergency room in time.

[annabanana]

29. insuance companies are killers..

death panels for sure

[naaman fletcher]

10. The big fear

Is that what we will get this, but with the insurance companies as contractors to the federal government to operate it. Just like "Obamacare" was a big hand out to the insurance companies, so will this be, I am afraid.

[bonzotex]

2. Yes...sign me up k/r nt

[Octafish]

4. That's the point.

Someone's gotta get paid. Make HC just and soon, who knows?, rich people might have to find a job. Can't have that.

[Fumesucker]

6. Which is exactly why it was whisked off the table before negotiations ever began..

[xchrom]

7. the thought does cross my mind...nt

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Sorry, I'm calling Bullshit

This kind of talk is unrealistic and, frankly, socialistic.

Let's look to history: remember how LBJ was unable to pass a strong single-payer system for Seniors? I believe that he wanted to call it "Medicare" or some such thing, and it would cover virtually all Seniors with minimal overhead and paperwork.

Of course it was totally impractical, too far left, and Johnson failed miserably. If he'd just been more pragmatic, all Seniors would be guaranteed crappy, overpriced health care today.

[xchrom]

9. ...

[Dragonfli]

11. LBJ was a sensible centrist, he did the right thing and forced them to enter a high risk pool

for elderly with the pre-existing condition of not being young.

Luckily many died from lack of care due to the extremely high co-pays, freeing up cash from the system to give back to the job creators via a lower corporate tax rate funded by the SS trust fund.

LBJ was a great progressive that helped business first so that our country may someday be a great and profitable place for the hierarchy of Corporate citizens.

He was my hero and the reason President Aetna became the first historic corporate president of the United States ending the notion that we would never grow beyond the bigots and hate groups that claimed our corporate citizens were not equal to biological people.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. Good points, all

Well done!

[jeff47]

35. You do realize the plan was single-payer, and then it was cut down to just seniors, right?

Even the legislative giant LBJ couldn't get single-payer through and had to compromise. And Obama's no LBJ.

[DeeDeeNY]

13. Not fair to the poor health care company CEO's

How would these poor guys manage???
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/business/2012/01/health-care-ceos-lavish-pay-package-shows-how-1-get-paid/46881/

[kenny blankenship]

14. We could start a land war in Asia with dough like that!

And fund the next generation of orbital reentry strategic bombers at the same time.

[Uncle Joe]

15. Hell no! This make entirely too much sense,

and it would actually be promoting the "general welfare" and stuff, we can't have that.


Thanks for the thread, xchrom.

[kentuck]

16. I fear we have blown the one opportunity...

..and there will likely not be another time when the argument could be made as clearly as it could have been in January, 2009...

[AndyTiedye]

38. The Opportunity Never Really Existed

No Republican would ever vote for it, nor would any "blue dog", and especially not Joe LIEberman (?, Aetna).
There is nothing Obama could have done to change that.

[kentuck]

44. They never even tried...

The Republicans were not holding a strong hand in January of 2009...

[AndyTiedye]

45. Obama Can Count. So Can You

Where do you get 60 votes for single payer in the 2009 Senate?

All the Republicans have sworn unbreakable oaths to [font color=gray]Voldemort[/font] Grover Norquist, so they never break ranks.
LIEberman would never vote for it because the insurance companies own his ass.

Obama never had any leverage over these Republicans. What can he do? Threaten to cut off Federal funding for some project? The Repig governors are doing that to their own states anyway, so what do they care? Their strategy from day one has been to sandbag the economy to try to make Obama lose.

The votes weren't there.

[Cleita]

17. Yes, this has been proved over and over again even before Hillarycare came on the

scene to be shot down and Obamacare to be watered down. Yet, the health insurance and PfRMA industries propaganda machine grinds away trying to disprove it and lie about it relentlessly.

[Overseas]

18. K&R. Yes please!

[underpants]

19. Sounds like a better mousetrap

well hey! it is!!!

Isn't that was CAPITALISM is supposed to be all about?

[Gregorian]

20. In other words, $570 Billion less for the corporations.

Which is why it will be a huge fight. They have a direct line to Congress, and we don't.

If you turn the perspective around it makes it easy to see why this is such a difficult fight.

But the key to winning this fight is that this would be a far better country with healthy people. Once people realize how nice life could be, they'll do this.

I see things so clearly now. I can no longer watch commercial tv or listen to commercial radio. It's utterly vile and offensive to hear the yacking of product noise. Most people aren't even conscious that it's a nuisance. I live a life free of invasion. The same thing goes for health care, etc. If you don't know there's a better life, one never tries to acquire it.

[closeupready]

49. Yes. Inefficiency is where they make their profits.

In fact, inefficiencies are where most profits are, for most corporations.

[FightForChange]

21. We don't have single payer because of Republican propaganda

The Republicans who spread lies about single-payer are the same people who get government insured health care already. They don't understand the economics behind it and cling to the idea that socialized medicine is a socialist takeover. Capitalism and democracy are not the same thing and it says nothing about a pure free market in the constitution. The only reason they truly oppose single-payer is because the big insurance companies control them and they don't want single-payer. Not to say that there aren't democrats controlled by the insurance companies as well. This is a typical example of corporations continuing policy.

[NorthCarolina]

39. Only the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) members support single-payer.

They have one Senate member (Bernie Sanders), and some 70 members in the House. The remaining Dems are far more likely to side with the GOP on the issue of single-payer, that they are to ever side with CPC members. The issue of single payer is not being solely squashed by the GOP, you may recall that Obama himself prevented it from even being a discussion topic during health care reform debates.

[SunSeeker]

22. This will spur capitalism by freeing entrepreneurs.

The only reason my husband started his own business is because I have a steady (so far) government job with medical benefits that cover him and our child. No responsible entrepreneur is going to risk the health (indeed, life) of his or her family by going out on their own and then being forced to try to buy overpriced individual healthcare coverage--assuming someone will even sell it to them if there are pre-existing conditions.

Also, this will increase mobility of talent to where it is best utilized. People will no longer stay at a job they hate that wastes their talent just so they can have good health benefits.

Anyone who truly believes in the free market--and no market is free if its workers are not free to move from job to job or start their own business--must support single payer.

In short, single payer means freedom.

[Festivito]

23. More like 1,500-billion dollars cheaper.

The problem is that no one could get rid of the trillion-dollar armies of unnecessary coders all at once.

[indepat]

24. But the bidness of America is bidness so in no way will the $570 billion wasted

annually on administrative overhead and monopoly profits ever be eliminated as long as this is a chillingly RW society.

[Egalitarian Thug]

25. Yep, 30 pages that can be understood by anyone with an 8th grade education, is

actually universal, and even buys out the companies while providing for the employees and "investors" hurt in the transition.

Can't have any of that sanity stuff, no sir.

[Quantess]

26. Single Payer is the best!

I live in europe and have needed to go to the doctor for a few times, and the hospital once. It's pretty great.

[thesquanderer]

27. What does gov't do about the health insurance companies?

Single Payer sounds great, but I can't imagine that the federal government would wipe out a whole industry by fiat. What happens to all those employees? To all the people who have health insurance stocks in their retirement funds? etc. It seems like there would have to be some plan to transition things somehow...

[xchrom]

30. They are bought out & reimbursed.

Standard part of the plan for a long time.

Nobody was ever going to leave them high & dry.

[thesquanderer]

31. Is the cost of doing that reflected in the estimated savings? (nt)

[xchrom]

32. It's all in there as part of the HR resolution.

How much the companies & shareholders would get.

There's no plan to jus bankrupt the insurance companies.

[jeff47]

36. Somebody's got to process the paperwork

"Regular" insurance company employees should be able to find work in the new, expanded Medicare.

As for the executives, fuck 'em.

[bvar22]

43. "insurance companies"

*Manufacture NOTHING

*Produce NO Wealth (Value Added)

*Provide NO Service

*Add NOTHING to The Commons

The better question is,
Why the F**K should the American Taxpayer be forced to subsidize this parasitic industry with BILLIONS of dollars that could be better spent on actual Health CARE.

Subsidizing the "private" "For Profit" Health Insurance Industry costs THOUSANDS of Lives and produces untold misery and pain for Americans every single year.

Let them fine REAL jobs somewhere else,
and spend their time & sweat doing something that actually makes America a Better Place,
or adds to the Wealth of our nation,
or provides a helpful service,
or adds to our Commons.
Many of the agents and administrators will be able to secure good jobs with the government as Medicare is expanded.
Those "1% executives" will just have to find another way to pay for their new Summer Homes in Aspen.


You will know them by their WORKS.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Wind Dancer]

48. Beautifully stated!

[slipslidingaway]

28. Sorry, this will not be allowed to enter into the discussion ...

the votes are not there.

First you magically get the votes and then it can be discussed ... something like that.

[KG]

33. it could never happen, so why even try...

i mean, see how that worked for black folks and the civil rights movement?

[marmar]

34. K/R with attitude.

[Better Believe It]

37. K & R

[MineralMan]

40. It absolutely is cheaper. It's pure politics that keep it from

happening. Yet another reason that we must act politically to correct that. It is an election year. It is the time when we can act as individuals to influence the direction of the country. If every Democrat in the United States turned out to vote, there would be no question about what would happen. That should be our goal through the rest of the year. Get every Democrat to the polls. We can do it, if we have the will to do it.

[Daniel537]

42. +1

[bvar22]

51. Point of Order, sir.

It was the Right Wing Democrats and poor Party Leadership that torpedoed the Public Option,
NOT the Republicans.
It is going to take MORE than just turning out and voting for the guys with a "D" after their name.
We did THAT in 2006 and 2008.

We must find a way to out pressure on those we vote into office
to actually represent our interests.

[MineralMan]

53. That's going to take longer than the time before the election.

I agree with you, in principle. However, many things did get done in the first three years of Obama's term. The time is past now to select new candidates for legislative offices. The more Democrats who are elected, the better. Even the Blue Dogs often vote for good things. Single Payer is an enormous shift from where we are, and it couldn't have happened in this term. There simply wasn't a way to get it passed. What did pass is a far cry from what's needed, but it did help a bunch of people, and will help more when it's fully implemented.

We cannot, in 2012, elect enough real progressives as legislators to get Single Payer enacted. What we can do, though, is take back the House and increase the majority in the Senate. Stuff will get done. Good stuff. In 2014, we'll have another opportunity to elect progressives. In 2016, we'll have yet another opportunity. Political in the United States does not happen overnight.

My congress member is in favor of single payer. She and I had a long conversation about that. We need more like her. In 2012, we'll have a chance to elect a few more like her. But, if we lose the actual majorities, it won't matter worth a damn.

I know you think I'm some sort of conservative Democrat. Nothing could be farther from the truth. What I am, however, is a realist and someone who believes that steady progress in a direction is the only thing that is going to work in this country. You might disagree. If that's the case, I'll point to 2010, when we actually lost ground.

The candidates are pretty much set for 2012 in every race. That's the deal we have to work with. So, I'm encouraging people to vote for Democrats, and to work very hard to get everyone they can to go and do the same. The goal this year has to be to get Congress back in Democratic control. If we fail to do that, we'll have an ever tougher job in 2014 and 2016 and beyond.

Am I about realpolitik? I am, indeed, because it is the only politics that exist in this country. I'm frustrated by that, but see no option but to push forward as much as possible in any given election. 2012 is already set. What do you suggest we do? I suggest we elect the crap out of Democrats and regain control of Congress. I can't see any option to that.

And I'll be saying that again, and again, and again. Count on it. I won't let anyone dissuade me from that.

[Daniel537]

41. kick

Alan Grayson was right about everything he said regarding health care in America. Lets hope we get more people like him back in congress this year. Lives depend on it.

[riderinthestorm]

46. Making sure my name is added to this thread. Huge K&R! nt

[Vinca]

47. Medicare for all is also the answering to saving Medicare as it is now.

Throw some healthy, younger people into the mix and grandma won't have to worry.

[bvar22]

52. One National, Publicly Owned, Government Administered Health Insurnce Program.

Diluting the risk pool by "leaving it up to the states" is a recipe for failure.
A HUGE National Risk Pool,
Everybody IN/Nobody OUT,
with ONE Administrative Agency run by Public Employees
is the only way to make this thing work!

[Wind Dancer]

50. K & R!