dagblog - Comments for "Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement"

No country has a public plan

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 23:02:11 +0000

In reply to Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement

No country has a public plan that covers everything. Hence you see private insurance in Canada, in England, in the Netherlands…

Thats a conscious policy choice you see, across the world, to make public coverage affordable.https://t.co/ZMmG79Vp9Q
— Sarah Kliff (@sarahkliff) February 12, 2019

FWIW, there is a

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 22:19:01 +0000

In reply to Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement

FWIW, there is a #HealthPolicyValentines movement starting up

If you are the sort of person who is into this, you probably already know, but many people are making #HealthPolicyValentines tweets now.
— Margot Sanger-Katz (@sangerkatz) February 12, 2019

A new name to add to your

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 20:54:40 +0000

In reply to Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement

A new name to add to your Democratic health proposal lexicon: “Medicare at 50.” pic.twitter.com/50kdCCp4MQ
— Margot Sanger-Katz (@sangerkatz) February 12, 2019

methinks you are right. Even

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 05:46:05 +0000

In reply to No it wouldn't. All that

methinks you are right. Even though I think much could be saved by one entity bargaining prices of providers down as opposed to the continual contract shifting going on now, robbing Peter for Paul's benefit and round and round, let's be honest about that too: when prices are pushed down overall, people lose jobs or profits, which reduces tax money coming in to the gummint.

Less "make work" and more efficiency and no doubt better health outcomes, but a much smaller market $ wise.

Silliness to get across what I am saying: if doctors all made less money, just think of the effect on the golf and sports car businesses....

The "where are all the paperpushers going to go?" I think that is overblown. I think they would be hired by the providers to continually fight the government bureaucracy and there will be plenty of supplemental insurers to work for along with managed care Advantage type plans willing to see if they can profit off pools by covering more and taking the Medicare dollars and putting them in limited networks.

That's without talking about the huge new market of businesses created just to allow you to claim that new scooter the government insurance just approved via the bribe to their congressman, even though a walker would be better for you...am I am cynic: yes I am. The more I learn, the more I learn no system is perfect. But I know we can do a little bit better than what is going on now.

No it wouldn't. All that

ocean-kat — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 03:58:35 +0000

In reply to To me, the most important

No it wouldn't. All that money that employers are currently paying for private insurance for their employees will have to in some way or another go into the government paid plan. Likely through much higher taxes. It's possible that the government plan will be able to make some savings that can be used to cover everyone and might even result in enough savings that the taxes might be slightly less than the costs for the current system. But in the end probably the best we can hope for is it being a wash.

.@JohnkDelaney's health plan,

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 03:27:03 +0000

In reply to Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement

.@JohnkDelaney's health plan, summarized. There's a lot of interesting stuff in @dylanlscott's interview with him, which you should read in full, but a few quick notes. https://t.co/8JbONfCk1T pic.twitter.com/R7Wr8XhwoL
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) February 12, 2019

That said, Delaney's plan is very ambitious — it looks like the French system — even though Delaney sets himself up as an opponent of Medicare-for-All in this interview.
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) February 12, 2019

That he is able to try and sell a plan this ambitious using conservative rhetoric — he frames himself as the moderate incrementalist, cautious of too much change, too fast — shows how much space Sanders has opened on health care.
— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) February 12, 2019

To me, the most important

artappraiser — Tue, 12 Feb 2019 03:14:09 +0000

In reply to Top Pelosi Aide Tells Insurance Industry Medicare for All Would Be Costly, Politically Perilous, & Difficult To Implement

To me, the most important lesson of these graphs is that replacing employer-based health insurance with government (or government-paid) health insurance would open up lots of space for cash wages to go up.
— Noah Smith (@Noahpinion) February 11, 2019