The WP editorial board - How low will they go to the keep in place the status quo?
Pretty damn low based on their latest "journalistic" endeavor.
The Washington Post: Mr. Sanders needs to come clean about the funding for his health-care plan (hmmm... maybe you should take your own advice).
He would replace existing federal health programs, as well as employer-paid group plans and the individual insurance market just expanded by Obamacare, with one big program, at a 10-year cost of $41 trillion, or $13.8 trillion more than the government would have spent over the next decade under current law.
(Of course lets FORGET the fact that regular Americans will save money with this system and that overall money will be SAVED because people will no longer be required to pay premiums, etc. And with premiums going up and up I would say the Obama estimate is low. The insurance companies will always want to feed at the public trough. The LACK OF ETHICS demonstrated by this Editorial Board is disgusting ).
His plan contains two sentences on cost control; the gist is that government would have the power to “negotiate fair prices.” But what if those prices are not high enough to support the current level of infrastructure and services and some hospitals have to close? (The insurance companies have NEGOTIATED contracts for years with hospitals and have been able to make a PROFIT from these contracts without FORCING hospitals to close. So I am to believe that taking the profit out of the equation will lead to negotiated prices that will drive hospitals to close? Do you know how stupid this sounds? This is on par with the "the next thing you know humans will be marrying pigs" argument they used against gay marriage.)
Put aside Mr. Sanders’s lack of political realism, or his dubious choice to tap the rich for huge amounts of revenue and spend it all, with nothing left for deficit reduction (IF we CUT out corporate welfare and quit having the 1% and corporations feed at the public trough we would have money for debt reduction. The rich have made millions off of buying our politicians, raiding the public treasury and refusing to pay their fair share - for example the deferred taxes for hedge funds. But since they aren't required to pay until after 2017 will I be surprised that somehow the government determines they don't need that money for debt reduction - hell NO. The corporate hacks ALWAYS preach debt reduction EXCEPT when it comes to government giveaways to the corporations and 1% and HUGE tax giveaways to the rich. Since a HUGE amount of the debt is attributable to giveaways to the 1% and corporations and graft (I think the actual amount would be staggering), I damn well think they should belly up to pay it down.)
Health-care costs have been moderating in recent years, a fact the Sanders plan relies on to balance its books. However, a major reason for that cost containment has been the rise of high-deductible plans of precisely the kind Mr. Sanders wants to eliminate; cost-sharing encourages people to avoid unnecessary tests and other wasteful expenses. (High Deductible plans are CASH COWS for the insurance industry and discourage preventative testing which keeps healthcare costs down. Plus, with a new system checks and balances and controls can be put in place to have a more cost efficient system. This also beg the questions, if health care costs are moderating why do insurance premiums keep rising and rising? Of course, we don't want to clue the American people into the fact that the insurance companies have their own built in system of taxpayer bailouts.)
Health insurers watch profits soar as they dump small business customers. This is what this editorial is intended to protect.
And let’s be clear, these insurers aren’t suffering. UnitedHealth Group, the largest health insurer, reported last week that it made $10.3 billion in profits in 2014 on revenues of $130.5 billion. Both profits and revenues grew seven percent from 2013.
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/01/26/16658/health-insurers-watch-profits-soar-they-dump-small-business-customers
I suggest you look up the definition of integrity to familiarize yourself with what it is supposed to mean because obviously you have none.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mr-sanders-needs-to-come-clean-about-the-funding-for-his-health-care-plan/2016/01/19/efeed13a-bece-11e5-9443-7074c3645405_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-c%3Ahomepage%2Fstory