Some 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are proposing a "Medicare-for-all" healthcare plan. CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta reports on what this plan entails and if it is actually feasible. #CNN #News
Bernie Sanders' 'Medicare-for-all' plan may have a $1 trillion problem
Why can’t our tax money go to something like Medicare for all instead of bombing innocent people in the Middle East?
+Karen Zeiger Unfortunately, we spend trillions of $ building up other nations thousands of miles away.
+Bill Brennan Wait, what? I’m talking about well before birth, not right after.
Bill Brennan Oh, wait, sorry, this is about late-term abortion. I sure as hell only support it for legitimate medical reasons (i.e. serious complications or severe fetal defects), and I hope most pro-choice advocates would as well. I don’t think that the vast majority of late-term abortions are truly evil, but either way, the really sad truth is that evil doesn’t prevent someone from being American; serial killers and even psychopaths can be real Americans, as awful as it sounds. America isn’t inherently good, you know.
Bill Brennan And since conservatives like to say things like “Liberals have declared war on American values”, it’s a lot more than that. And THAT is what’s so snobbish and condescending; if you don’t act like us, you aren’t a REAL American.
+Victor Ch like Canada….lol
I’ll rather pay $600 more on taxes per month than to pay a $1200 a month premium for my family.
@Gary M, that sounds like jew logic to me. Oh wait. That is Bernie logic. And Bernie is a jew. That explains it.
+Christopher Cornette The expenditures of single payer nations are HALF (see WaPo clip) in other wealthy nations. – so you do not necessarily have to raise taxes much on companies – after the mess and the backlog has been cleaned up, and the insurance company staff has been retrained (which will cost money and MfA proposals have budgets for that, 1 million people that will not be needed because of more reasonable streamlined admin).
these countries also give generous subsidies (like the U.S) but these fund delivery of care and a very streamlined, non-profit public insurance agency and non profit public hospitals. The subsidies do NOT fund dysfunction, red-tape, a treatment-denial bureaucraZy and the profits of shareholders.
So the U.S expenditures are 10,240 and those of France, Germany, Belgium, Netherlands, Japan, … are 48 – 56 % of that (approx. 50 % = USD 5,000). (see Wapo clip)
The subsidies per person cannot be higher than 5,000 then ??
And the U.S. governments pays already 65 % of expenditures (that includes Medicare – and care for the elderly IS COSTLY no matter how cost efficient the system is). In other words USD 6,500 for every person in the country per year.
The private insurers already do not have to cover the most costly age group – and even with that cherry picked pool they fleece the patients (and the very willing ! government).
There are plenty of possibilites to SAVE money (admin and pharma prices) cover everyone w/o hassle and STILL save money (after a transition phase).
BUT: that means that Big Pharma will not make more money in the U.S. than in Europe (for a market of 325 million people) For profit hospitals will have to accept lower rates and the insurance companies will lose MOST of the healthcare market.
(If they cannot prevent MfA it if is reasonably funded and well run, most people will not have additional insurance, Why would they pay extra).
+Big Red there is taxation in general. AND: there are expenditures per person ! which are HALF on average in the single payer nations and approx. 41 % of the U.S. expenditures in the U.K.
Whatever you think of the tax structure – healthcare is set up in a much more COST-EFFICIENT manner.
(in numbers the U.S. has on average 10,240 USD per person per year – for every child, man, woman – no matter if they even have insurance or not). see WaPO the lingering questions about medicare-fo-all, they they quote Keiser for 2017.
Or 5,000 on average in countries with a NON-PROFIT System. Still a lot of money – and it needs subsidies (which come from taxation etc.) but it goes into a streamlined system and not into funding PROFITS of SHAREHOLDERS.
+Xyz Same Yes, but that will likely come after some time. Single payer achieves lower costs by negotiating prices. If companies want to sell to the market, they have to sell at rates the single payer approves. There will also be significant upfront administrative costs associated with increasing the current structures to handle the full system. However, after the transition, yes, our costs will likely be significantly lower. There are multiple cost saving vectors a single payer system can use to benefit all.
+Xyz Same We also need to be careful how we brand this. It WOULD NOT be an increase in taxes on corporations. What they ALREADY pay to employee benefit packages would be redirected to the fed to fund the single payer entity. If additional revenue was needed after that (highly debatable), then either budgetary offsets could be found, or a nominal tax increase could be levied by closing a few loopholes such as those that allow massive companies like Amazon to pay zero taxes.
Did you guys at CNN say anything like that before the invasion of Iraq that has cost $1,000,000,000,000?
Percival Sweetwater yup an illegal war built on a fukin LIE
Percival Sweetwater Where are you on this specific topic? In other words, what is your fucking point?
Last month I was able to gather my first five figure income ever!!! I’ve been working for this company over the internet for 24 months now and I never been happier… They are paying me $95 per hour, and the most desirable thing regarding this is that I am not that tech-savvy, they only required standard awareness of internet and simple typing skill…Awesome thing about this gig is that I have more free time for my loved ones. I am in a position to devote quality time with my relatives and buddies and look after my children and also going on vacation with them very frequently. Don’t skip this chance and try to react fast. Check it out, what I do… *newsuperb71.com*
Percival Sweetwater – no they grabbed some drumsticks and started beating war drums. They are owned by defense contractors.
Corey Gray You thinks that’s a lot but not $30 trillion in first 10 years of medicare for all? lol
CNN. You do not even try to hide that you are corporate shills, do you?
+Owen Wong Oh yeah? And you’re a mentally challenged rube.
Top Weeb whatever you think I am is not gonna change their stupidity anyway…
+Owen Wong why do you write write this…………
+Top Weeb To point out progressive are stupid?? seriously are you blind or something?
+Owen Wong i meant to say *like* this………………
News Script written by the HEALTHCARE Insurance industry
This guy criticizing Bernie Sanders doesn’t know that the plural of analysis is NOT analysises but analyses 4:28 and yet he wants us to believe that he knows what he’s talking about ….Hey CNN the majority of people see through your corporate agenda ..#BERNIE2020
Sanders is too much of an independent thinker for them
Stacy Robinson If by independent thinker you mean a socialist who will destroy our economy and country as a whole then yes you’d be correct
+Kevin Cardoso I mean someone that stood up as a young man and protested against segregation when it didn’t even benefit nor affect him. The true test of character is what you do when the cameras are not on you. I mean someone that believes healthcare is a right not a privilege and has consistently stuck with this view . That’s who I mean, and Bernie Sanders embodies all of this.
No commie for president. “Breadlines are a good thing”
Socialists hate successful people. Socialists are full of hate and envy. Should be put down like a rabid dog.
It’s not that high. Everywhere healthcare is nationalized prices drop. The government’s negotiation power over prices causes them to drop massively.
Xyz Same Those countries on the top of the list are not multicultural like the US lol, you do know our country is made up differently then most countries right?
+The Community Fusion Network Germany got a basic form of universal healthcare in 1883 / 1884. – the UK implemented it in 1947 or 1948. They German system has more “private” components – for instance docotr practices are “private” they have a contract with the non-profit public agency. They are small and not allowed to incorporate. The revneue pays the costs, and the profit is the wage/income for the doctor. But it is not like the millions are coming in, they make a good upper middle class living.
So the only large and powerful for-profit player is Big Pharma (they have very standardazed, internationally comparable products – that helps the agencies with negotioations).
However: due to historical reasons the German, Austrian and many other systems are more fractured have more (small) for-profit players – they are less streamlined.
The NHS setup got it right – they have the most PUBLIC non-profit share. They even employ the “family doctors” – that is why the NHS beats almost every other system in the world.
The NHS is the MOST STREAMLINED system. So they use the potential for costs savings to the fullest.
Which means they still somehow stay afloat despite 10 years of defunding. (And that was from a level where they had lean but just sufficient funding – then beating most other nations. If a system has a lot of lard you can do some cuts – and they can rearrange and recover – but the NHS had no reserves of unused efficiency improvements to begin with. They could make do for a few years – but the strain now shows).
+Xyz Same ALL of the countries you mention pale in comparison to the population of the united states, and that’s not even considering the 10’s of millions of illegals injected into our society. It’s easier to pay for the health care of a few compared to many. It’s also countries with healthier diets then american. In fact we have one of the worst diets. For example, Monaco’s diet in the Mediterranean is considered the healthiest diet in the world. The most researched by far. What they also dont take into account is the 20 hour 4 day work week. I would be in favor of changing our work weeks to 20 hours…I just dont see how that could happen.
What your describing in childcare and free, free, free is basically a complete government take-over. The united states was established to never have government in control as “we the people” will always control our own lives. Also, most of those countries have people fleeing while the u.s. have people entering at a much higher rate. The u.s. has more jobs then people who want them. If we required people to work to contribute to our tax revenue then we could easily afford nationalized healthcare, but I would not be in favor of forcing people to work.
Look to Bernie Sanders’ website. He lays out EXACTLY how it will be paid for and it’s cheaper than what we pay now. I am lucky enough to have Union Insurance and I still pay $400 a month in premiums PLUS I have deductibles, copays, and coinsurance. My wife has RA and I have other issues from years of hard work. Single payer healthcare would save me thousands of dollars per year. But my concern is not us. My concern lies with all the people in this country who weren’t as lucky as me and can’t afford to see the doctor. And what would happen if I lose my job? Our lives and health should not be tied to our employers, especially at a time when employers are working overtime trying to figure out how to take more and more benefits from us.
The plan is on Google , they just refuse to see the good in Bernie’s ideas.
Can’t wait for The Young Turks to smash CNN’s missing facts. #TYT
Wait, you don’t know how to think for yourself? Its almost like you are blindly following a narrative instead of being independant! Fucking NPCs.
David Johnson ok walking meme
CNN handing out red pills on their bias like they’re big pharma.
CNN better wake up and stop towing the line of corporate for profit insurance companies and pharmaceutical industry. People know that the increase in tax far outweighs the cost of just having access that has no value and is controlled by companies with the greed motive of profit. There isn’t a shortfall because the savings of the inefficiencies in the private sector. This argument of paying for it doesn’t resonate with the people who see politicians and news who never ask how do we pay for a war, tax cut for the rich. Time to wake up!!
It’s CNN. They’re paid to keep their eyes closed. Notice how they’ll never have on representatives from Aetna to discuss the inferiority and infeasibility of our current system.
CNN has no incentive to report the facts on Medicare for all. All those greedy insurance companies would lose billions
Bernie Sander 2020!
Justice Democrats 2020!
Progressive Democrats 2020!
Uninformed republican voters are so worry these immigrants will be using welfare BUT the same republican voters are totally fine with ExxonMobil, Carrier, Amazon, Foxconn, etc all these rich corporations with millions on profit getting subside with our tax money (corporate welfare).
Corporate-corrupt Nancy Pelosi implemented “Pay-go rule” to stop universal healthcare.
32 trillion?! despite the fact that we currently spend 49 trillion… wait, we spend 49 trillion on healthcare in this country and bernie’s plan will cost 32 trillion…? doesnt that mean we save money?
it ADDS 32 trillion…
+bublitrubli nonsense – the U.S. currently spends 3,2 – 3,4 TRILLION on healthcare (all that is spent in the country no matter WHO pays for it, private insurance company, Medicare agency, government in form of other subsidies, or patients out of pocket). That would be roughly 34 trillion over 10 years
BUT – the public agencies in the U.S. are FORBIDDEN to negotiate, the hospitals are for-profit chains
Additionally to normal inflation, the for-profit industry can and will increase their prices in the current !! system. Plus the population is getting older.
* I think the number of 49 trillion that another commenter mentions might be the estimated costs in 10 years if the current system is allowed in go on.
More potent treatments are available – BUT they are also costly. (especially when there is no negotiation possible). So that might drive up costs as well.
Private insurance companies in theory would negotiate with Big Pharma. it is true that large companies often squeeze their suppliers down the chain.
Well in this case it would be a battle of the giants – two major industries both with excellent political connections. In such cases you will often observe that the (few remaining !) giants of the industries find a mode of peaceful co-existence.
They avoid the battle of giants – and rather take it out on the consumers. See internet/cable providers. In the case of healthcare it is for a service that decides over life and death and is costly anyway (even if deliverd by a cost-efficient system). – They not only exploit consumers, they also extract a lot of subsidies.
W/o the high subsidies the U.S. system would already have broken down – meaning the citizens would be on the streets, pitchforks and yellow vests and all.
+bublitrubli The single payer nations ALSO have to generously subsidize healthcare – else the mandated contributions (for workers and the company) would need to be much higher. But those subsidies and mandated contributions fund a cost-efficient system. They are accountable to ALL of the country (voters, workers, companies, all levels of govermentment – they all fund the system). The US. system is accountable to the shareholders.
costs are 48 – 56 % of the U.S. (see recent WaPo clip of March 11th 2019, they show a Keiser foundation study of per capita healthcare expenditures in the U.S.. That means ALL that is already spent ! divided by number of people. It is 10,240 USD per person (and that includes in the U.S. persons that do no even have coverage or are denied care).
Versus roughly HALF in other nations. We are talking of wealthy countries with GOOD medical care for everyone.
Now these approx. 5000 USD per person per year STILL contain a lot of subsidies – but I think you can see the potential. The subsidies are maximal !! 5000 per person …. (minus the wage related contributions of those who do have a wage – or a pension, they pay a contribution from retirement pensions as well).
The U.S. government already pays 65 % of all U.S. expenditures (that includes Medicare which is of course also funded by wage deductions. It does not meant that they do a bad job: the age group over 65 years of age will cause disproportiante costs.
The ratio in healthcare is that _10 % of the patients cause 90 % of the costs._ AGE is a major factor in that (and people that are already sick or have higher potential risks).
That also means that the private insurance companies already have cherrypicked pools. The most costly age group is already taken care of by the public agency.
The expenditures averaged per person were 10,240 USD in 2017 in the U.S. (and approx. 5,000 USD in wealthy single payer countries). and on average 65 % of that will be paid by the government (subsidies plus medicare wage related contributions that are funneled into the system … ).
In other words 6500 per person (for every child, man, woman in the U.S.) The subsidies per person in Germany, France, Belgium, Austria, Netherlands, Japan can impossibly be higher than approx USD 5,000 per person (that is what the total expenditures are per person)
Well that leaves lot of room for improvement. Should be a no brainer anyway – when other countries pay in total only half per person they can easily generously subsidize and INCLUDE EVERYONE * and STILL be ahead compared to the U.S.
* expenditures per capita means divided by ALL people (even those who do not have insurance and cannot pay their medical bills).
America’s new slogan: Other countries can do it, but we can’t.
The Law lmao that’s so unbelievably untrue. Not to mention that nato hasn’t been protecting anyone for most of the post Cold War era, it’s just been mindlessly advancing on russia
Besides that why the hell should we subsidize them at the expense of taking care of our people?! And do you really think there’s any way to change that without actually cutting them off and cutting our military spending? The people that say this almost always 1. Defend massive increase in defense spending that aren’t paid for and 2. Defend the US being the world police at the expense of the well-being of the US
@Scott Dickingdudes, let’s send other countries our 90 million hispanic invaders, and let’s see how they do.
+Willie Pierce The bar for intelligent comments on YouTube is already extremely low, but you’ve impressively managed to crawl underneath it. Well done.
+The Law other wealthy ! nations with GOOD healthcare services spend HALF of what the U.S. is spending PER PERSON (but that does not fund a lot of profits of course). They might have to spend more on the military or not. If so – good thing they at least do not waste money in the healthcare sector.
+Willie Pierce The hispanic “invaders” WORK. Now they may drive wages down (a development that is allowed to happen by politicians). The U.S. had 90 million people in the 1940s and now 325 million. A lot of immigration happened after WW2 until the 1970s – and it was NOT bad for the country not did it drive wages down THEN.
I am NOT suggesting immigration can go on at those rates. BUT: if wages are good and taxes are high (for the rich and profitable companies) as was the case until the 1980s – then moeny will be kept in ciruculation among regular people. Under such worker friendly conditions immigrants CAN be integrated into the economy w/o doing harm to the people that are longer in the country.
They are also a net win when they rent in poor areas (they are driving crime rates down, they live in areas where middle class Americans would not live. That is a win for the “landord class “. And they are often socially conservative, family oriented, Catholique, and try to work their way up, working hard. The crowd affin to crime will stay in Mexico etc. and let themselves be recruited by the cartels (they do not come to the U.S. to work).
The very same cartels that have the help of Western banks AND politicians and regulators to launder the money (we are talking of billions here and that volume of money is not carried around in bags). Western politicians and regulators will gladly look the other way. or give a slap on the wrist with repeated BRAZEN violations. HSBC 1,9 billion fine – and you bet they got off easy with those 1,9 bn. No manager was prosecuted, of course not).
Someone is profiting of that work or from that rent. And they should help to support these migrant workers (and the domestic workforce) !
That does not mean they should or should not be allowed in the country.
but currently they pick the crops, they work in landscaping and construction, as maids and nannies and in the food industry.
So right now someone makes profits or someone gets houses and services cheaper than otherwise possible.
Well, these migrants – if and as long as they are in the country will need healthcare. (When they have accidents or show up in the ER they will get treatment, or do you want to lie people die on the streets if you cannot determine their insurance and visa status right away ?
Other countries have service sector workers as well – and usually they do not earn as much. BUT: they do have the basics and good, reliable, low-cost healthcare is part of that.
Never mind that many of the migrants (or their children) enlist in the army. The army would run out of cannon fodder without them.
CNN already trying to shoot down Bernie.
Most other western countries manage to do it. I guess America isn’t that exceptional after all…
Lol
America has 90 million hispanic invaders, draining our resources. Let’s send them to other western countries, and then WE will be exceptional.
TRUMP just gave his buddies TWO trillion IN TAX CCUTS what’s the problem
Um… That’s the problem? Or, at least part of it…
No, Trumptard. 90 million hispanic invaders draining American resources. THAT is the problem.
Isn’t it interesting that medical care for all is a subject of intense debate and scrutiny concerning its cost. Yet the increase in defense spending hardly gets a mention and little controversy. On the face of it seems that killing people is more important than saving them.
Military spending only accounts for 4% of spending . The most spending is on social garbage.
Cnn doesn’t even have a picture of Tulsi Gabbard shows they’re corporate hawks
@CNN stop lying. medicare for all will save 5 trillion over a decade compared to what we are currently spending. even a koch funded study shows we will save 1 trillion.