Fact Checking Jake Tapper’s Grossly Inaccurate ‘Fact Check’ On Medicare For All

$32 trillion. You may have seen this number in corporate media coverage and Republican propaganda. It’s the estimated cost of universal health care over a 10-year period.

It’s a big number—a big, scary number. So hacks like the editorial board at The Washington Post use it to scare people with titles like “Single-payer health care would have an astonishingly high price tag.”

Not just high—astonishingly high.

Of course what the editorial board of The Washington Post leaves out (though you think they’d know better) is any comparison to what we’re currently spending.

Compared to what we’re currently spending, universal health care or single-payer health care would save us $17 trillion over 10 years…

Read More At:

Support The Show On Patreon:

Here's Our Amazon Link:

Follow Kyle on Twitter:

Like the show on Facebook:

Clip from The Kyle Kulinski Show, which airs live on Blog Talk Radio and Secular Talk Radio Monday – Friday 11:00 AM – 12:30 PM Eastern time zone.

Listen to the Live Show or On Demand archive at:

Check out our website – and become a member – at:

Fact Checking Jake Tapper’s Grossly Inaccurate ‘Fact Check’ On Medicare For All

77 thoughts on “Fact Checking Jake Tapper’s Grossly Inaccurate ‘Fact Check’ On Medicare For All

    • R Fletcher That is 100% False. 401k is an investment. Medicare redistributes income which is fine. But it is a welfare system and disproportionately helps the poor.

    • JR 14 Civilian deaths around the world went up during Carter and wars broke out due to lack of threat from the U.S. to enforce international law.

      Yes, we can afford our military easily. It is necessary to have international law and human rights.

      I also believe that our original mistake was leaving Saddam Hussein in power in 1991.

      Also, in terms of GLOBAL civilian deaths from war, today is the most peaceful era of human civilization ever documented.

    • Yep, there’s always some excuse not to have what’s better for the common man. I will always stand by my belief that the US has way, way too many military bases around the world. The military industrial complex is a very dangerous issues. And going into wars under false pretenses doesn’t count as “freeing others”.

    • bryan s If you agree with combating ISIS then you agree with the Iraq War ideologically. ISIS IS largely Saddam’s Ba’ath Party. And he was forming an alliance with Islamists ever since the 93 Faith campaigns.

      600,000 Iraqis executed under Saddam versus 200,000 deaths in the entire Iraq war, which primarily was caused by our opposition in Iraq such as Saddam’s forces.

      We also had absolute right in terms of international law to intervene in Iraq. Bush gave four reasons for intervention, all of them being valid. Saddam refused to have U.N. inspections for WMDs.

      Reasons for removing Saddam Hussein
      1. Violation of the genocide convention
      Bombing of the marshes resulting in 180,000 deaths resulting in a U.S. no-fly zone during Bill Clinton’s administration.
      2. Non-proliferation treaty
      Iraq had used WMDs against Iran and its own people
      3. Giving aid and comfort to international terrorists
      4. Occupying and invading the territory of other nations
      Invasion of Kuwait, Saddam said that he wished he had acquired nuclear weapons beforehand so he could make an empire.

      It is a sacrifice that our soldiers made to free the people of Iraq. Just as we ended a genocide in Bosnia under Clinton.

      And Jesus Christ for you to say life was better under Saddam shows that you have NO fucking idea what life was like in Iraq. Life in Iraq under Saddam was worse than life in an ISIS occupied territory. Every single person was a captive victim. Saddam had a worse human rights record than in North Korea. He was a fascist ideologically and envied Hitler in his policies. Iraq is most accurately described as a concentration camp above ground and a mass grave below ground under Saddam. He tortured hundreds of thousands of innocent people to death for being the wrong ethnicity, religion, passing a written note, having a satellite, or just because he wanted to. He forced families to applaud as he submerged their children into vats of acid and put scolding hot rods into their orifices.

      I would suggest that you actually look at the success of Iraq today. Iraqi Kurdistan is a universal success and flourishing democracy and the rest of Iraq is heading in that direction.

      Also, Iraq was a failed state on the path to becoming a rogue state. A rogue Iraq would have imploded and caused a war between all middle eastern countries and their allies the likes of which we haven’t seen since World War II. It was essential that we help the Kurds and those who were fighting Saddam and move the country region into a post-Saddam era.

    • On Jake Tapper, like most of these MSM pundits, they don’t realize the number of people suffering without the kind of health insurance they (or their employers) afford. a huge disconnection between the middle class and these Ds and Rs desperately trying to debunk the viability of a single payer system. And to Jake Tapper: Dude, you and your rich pals aren’t going to lose your special private healthcare perks.

    • William Trotman, I am pretty sure Bernie was unable to implement Medicare for All considering the 14th amendment says
      “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”.

      Unless there is a federal precedent made for medicare for all it could be considered an established law that deprives peoples property rights unfairly(AKA due process), and as a result Bernie can’t really accomplish much until he becomes president.
      That’s why I think Bernie didn’t implement in a state. I may be wrong, but this seems likely.

    • Bernie Sanders as a senator can’t implement laws at a state level. If you mean the governor of Vermont, he actually said the vague notion of tax increases were his reason for not passing the Medicare for All bill. How is that section of the 14th Amendment relevant?

    • ICE man What do private insurance companies do when you get sick? They pour over your whole life hoping to find something you didn’t disclose, so they can deny coverage to save money. “Oh she didn’t tell us she had acne as a kid, COVERAGE DENIED! You say it was acne, we say it was precancerous lesions that you fail to disclose.” There is a reason it is illegal to purchase fire Insurance on your neighbor’s house, because then it is in your best interest for your neighbor’s house to burn down. Just as it is in the private insurance companies best interest to not pay for your treatment. Health care should never be tied to profit motives.

    • I think Medicare-for-all just might be a better system than what we have now, but that’s not saying much. With all the inflation, the drug war, drug scheduling, monopolistic regulation, the lobbied, inflated cost of medical professional’s labor, and the fact that insurance companies have to take more and more money out of Medicare as it is in order to pay for millions of people who cannot afford healthcare, it’s no wonder it costs so much.
      There’s this talking point you hear from the right that oftentimes makes people groan, like “why should I be forced to pay for people that don’t work.” I think this is a legitimate question, but a better one would be “why should the cost of my healthcare be affected by people whose health problems are self-caused?” A whopping 70% of medical crises are caused by poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, smoking, alcohol, etc, all of which are completely of your own volition.
      Why should healthy individuals be forced to pay for all of those cases? Why should insurance companies be forced to indemnify people who did not pay into the system, especially if the cause of their illness is their own fault?
      My last reason for skepticism is that I fear what happens when the State gains more and more control over our lives, even if it’s better than this mixed-market garbage we’ve got going now.

  1. His fact checking isn’t going and crunching the numbers no he goes to the institution that did the study and ask them hey what did you mean by this….that’s not fact checking.

    • Lola Hickey, I am not trying to shut down the conversation. In fact, people are trying to shut me down so I say the truth. Trump won because the political left does not want to have an intellectual conversation on the issues. Trump is no PC so he just spoke his mind and was elected.

    • Ok, so in the Mercatus study on table 2, line 6 it displays the costs of our current healthcare system, then on line 9 it gives its estimate on the cost of Medicare For All. Totalling line 6, then deducting the total of line 9 gives you just over 2 trillion dollars.

      Please note this doesn’t include cost savings to providers who will have to spend significantly less on administrative expenses (5.4 T) or negotiating brand-name drugs (1.7 T), and the Mercatus study assumes federal admin costs would only drop to 6% (Medicare currently has a 2% admin, which I understand to be fairly typical of a single payer system) for additional savings (2.9 T).

      So the Mercatus study is probably shortchanging Medicare For All savings by about 10 Trillion (according to Physicians for National Health Program).

  2. “Sure the Kochs have given millions to Mercatus and have control over the hiring and firing, but the authors say they weren’t influenced by the Kochs in any way.” – Is this guy for real???? That is breathtakingly stupid.

    • Isaac Kalik Good point. Funding comes from somewhere. At some point you have to realize that there are people out there with integrity. Not to mention, the person doing the study is not reporting to the Koch brothers. They report to their superior and so on. My company is national and is ran by a group of very wealthy men and owned by a billionaire. I have never met any of them. Every project I do is important. I am responsible for the time, accuracy, client relations, the operation and care of $100,000 in equipment(daily), detailed notes, and the overall product at my level, etc. I report to MY department manager. My main concern is my performance and keeping him as stress free as possible. I don’t even concern myself in the least with investors or people at the top. And, as far as integrity, there are shady practices out there. But, there are people who won’t accept it, as well. My mother quit two practices(Physical Therapist) in Florida, for ethical reasons and did confront management, as well. So, the dirt is there, but there’s also a balance and people that care about people. Assuming everything is total evil and always deception is inaccurate, grading on the soul and just spins us in circles.

    • Koch brothers simply hired the right guys, so they don’t need to tell them what to do – hence that claim being technically true but likely misleading.

    • Isaac Kalik:
      You are right, but it’s also in presentation. For example,​ table 2 looks like he is hiding the cost savings, as line 6 and 9 (which show the cost savings) are somewhat conspicuously left without totals.

    • To smear and discredit Bernie and AOC, obviously. Oh yeah, and to make their viewers feel okay about shaming progressives for supposedly wanting “free stuff”.

    • David Browne, they’re just here to give us the Straight Dope, man. Don’t you remember when Chris Cuomo said it was a illegal to possess the DNC WikiLeaks? Do you think they would lie to us to protect their corporate interests? Get for real, man. ; )
      Tapp-check 101: Protect Corporate Interests At All Costs

  3. This is just sad. Something that could help people, and they want to attack it with everything under the sun. But when it comes to military spending, not a damn peep.

    • BERNIE: Even this right wing funded study found that medicare for all saves trillions

      TAPPER: LET ME give you a misleading segment on how misleading & wrong that was that was

      DEMS: *overhwelmingly vote with republicans to give trump a $100 B (B) increase in military spending*


    • I thought Jake said the Medicare for all plan by Sanders MAY or may not cost more or less compared to now at the end of his segment, but may cost more IF providers dont take the low rates? he didnt say it costs more cause he is adding it on top of what we pay now so what is this host talking about?
      P.S. I think the Sanders Medicare plan maybe the lesser of 2 evils compared to our current model, but im open minded to the truth and am surprised this host and all comments i have read thus far get wrongfully defensive without considering what Jake or any1 actually points out. and he didnt even question if the Gov (might) waste money or give crappy customer service etc.
      it’s yet another reason the left and the right need to admit BOTH sides are flawed and need to learn true karma and Dharma.

  4. Should corporatists, elitists and oligarchs be considered ‘right-wing’ at this point? Everyone is against them – the social left, the social right, the economic left and the economic right

    • Not really. I don’t even see them on the spectrum. They belong in the mad house with their Republican and Corporate Democrat stooges.

    • Lol the economic and social right support an Oligarch/elite though. Most of Trump voters still support him, and hes an Oligarch elitist.

    • Matthew M
      Even though Trump is an elitist, he successfully conned his supporters into thinking that he was a populist. He still butters them up to this very day calling THEM the super-elite. He says all the things, bigoted and otherwise, that they want to hear and puts out inaccurate statistics.
      A lot of people on the right now admit that voting for Trump was a mistake. Some still say he is still a better option than corporate Hillary based on what he campaigned on.

    • Yes I think so, b/c it’s right wingers who push ideas that oligarchs agree w/, like “regulations stifle innovation” and “universal healthcare would lead to extreme care rationing”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *