$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:
Thank you conservatives~
Crappy drawings united true. Kochs… the cause of and solution to all of life’s problems.
trippplefive you know Trump is really fucking over our country when even the Koch brothers think he has gone too far
Wish I was sleeping yes. fully aware that this little quarrel is between a bunch of evil people looking to advance their own agendas.
yeah, cause conservative were the one’s responsible for obamacare . . .
But Kyyyyyle, the corporation owners would have less money to buy our elections and control Congress!
Mighty Fighter You sound just like someone on Fox News trying to argue against left-wing policies but who ends up endorsing them instead. (Like Sean Hannity accidentally promoting Alexandria Cortez’s ideas as he tried to attack them)
peter krug I’m left wing lol
This made me laugh
this is the real problem
But Prooooooootoooooo
pfft, you’re thinking long term though, we all know these people can’t think that far ahead. Or maybe they do know it will save money, but still won’t do anything because that would require doing something to help people.
SubZeroGallant assuming your opponents are cunts is probably not the best way to bring them over to your side bud.
We already know they are or you wouldn’t be in the situation America is in. LOL
0okamino well that’s biased lol
At this point, anyone saying the USA shouldn’t have Medicare for all and that it should stay private is like saying we should send a mission to mine cheese from Mars to solve world hunger. It’s so ridiculous that no one I’ve read the age of four should even consider it as a possibility.
Tell that to whyamimrpink78 and Ant Man
Not Billions…. Trillions
– Billions of dollars isn’t cool, you know what’s cool?
– You?
– *Trillions* of dollars
Why make trillions when we can make billions?
The $2 Trillion savings is a massive understatement. It is more realistically closer to $17 Trillion because the Koch funded study didn’t take into account how much healthcare prices would rise every year and if you actually took into account how much the market will bubble over 10 years, the more correct estimate would be that our current system would cost somewhere around $48 Trillion, which is how people get the $17 Trillion in savings.
well its British Trillions, which is billions for the rest of the world. that makes 0 diference to this discussion but billions and trillions have different definitions in the british empire and the rest of the world.
with a B or a T?
I’m sure Dave Rubin is going to bring this up
C Wilson He’s caught between his two loves: the money he gets from his alt-lite (whoops, I mean “classical liberal”) audience for defending Trump, and the money he gets from sucking that meaty Koch.
+PugLife777
Ah. You’ve watched that cartoon too.
Jorge Zorros Xamaica
Sadly, he completely sold out.
“I have a strange urge to go off grid today.”
– rubin
I… ah-greee with you
“Waaaah! The word ‘socialism’ triggers me regardless of the type! How dare you save us trillions of dollars!”
– typical right wing behavior regarding democratic socialism
Teagan Moffatt that’s my point countries in Europe aren’t socialist there still capitalist but have a big welfare system. America isn’t fully capitalist as well.
Teagan Moffatt yes it does pretty much summed up what i was trying to say lol.
desterflan sweet thanks for the fresh eyes.
Greenest Hue – There are fewer on the left shouting “abolish profit” than there are on the right shouting “abolish government”, so… Good try. Maybe try harder.
So since Medicare for all saves money, can we classify it as capitalism?
Lisa Murphy Why is it an “evil”? Does that mean the Canadian system is more evil than out system? I marvel at the successful brainwashing.
kay jay Either they’re brainwashed or they genuinely believe giving health care insurance to poorer people by taxing the rich is evil. Making them Ayn Rand cultists who never grew up out of that 14 year old stage.
US is the biggest western country, so it’s not really surprising it’s number 1. Universities and farma does R&D.
if you consider the government coordinated contractors, sure. The main issues with a pure free-market healthcare system is that its disincentivized to treat the root cause to lose its customer base and Obamacare said: Just subsidize this mess and conservatives said that, Nixon’s HMOs, Emergency care which they refused to fund the mandate as originally proposed so basically they just past the bankrupting costs back to you; or just replace it austerity and just die in the sewer but if you want to make it quick, have a gun.
The MSM gets a TON of advertising money from Big Pharma and Health Insurance companies……they stand to LOSE money if the Medicare for all is accepted
The monopsony of Medicare has the power to tank costs and possibly save 17 trillion in 10 years. There’s so much for the for-profit health companies to lose and they’re now losing the argument.
@Kevin: you would think the usual idiots and degenerate lairs who prowl progressive chanels would see reason about that point but no they’re still jerking off to their shrine to donald trump
That’s right, that’s the core of the issue right there. It’s why politicians aren’t allowed to support single payer healthcare, lest they be cast out by the wayside and have their careers destroyed. It doesn’t give them or their donors profits.
the thing that people need to understand from this is that these people (the elites) know exactly what works for working people. they know good and well that they’re on the incorrect side. they have nothing else to do except lie and misrepresent their opponents and it works very successfully on the American public
Jeff T Well, when the government becomes the only insurer, that is, the only source of income for the health care industry, that means that price gouging could be a thing of the past. More or less. But price gouging is what Big Pharma is all about. Of course they don’t like it. Why should they? It is only natural for predatory capitalists to fight any kind o government program that meddles in their business.
Well, someone is getting fired.
The ~300 billion number is per year, which I think is the per year peak at the end of a decade. Range is 2-17 trillion in savings over the entire decade.
Isaak Mercado if it could be proven to your satisfaction that there was exactly zero savings, but everyone was covered without deductibles or copays, would you be for or against Medicare for all?
Steve Davis
But but communisms! Librul wunts your guns and is wuntin ta take us too feme camps.
No it doesn’t, it predicts that it would decrease, not that there would be none. You’re making a fallacious argument.
PLEASE stop calling it “free” healthcare. If you pay taxes, it’s owed. It’s taxation with representation.
“Medicare for all would save money”
We been knew
C’mon den now, even the hill folk in ‘bama know dat dem dere monay be saved with dat dere Medicare for All. (And indeed, polls show it is supported by a large portion of Republican voters.)
Medicare For All raises taxes. Don’t want Bernie taking my money.
I just read a “so called analysis” of Medicare for All and they were trying to debunk even The Koch brothers analysis calling it “overly optimistic”. For those of us who actually have an Economics and Finance background we realize that cutting out insurance company profits and negotiating medical and pharma prices (in addition to 30 million more citizens being covered) makes it virtually certain that Kyles ($17T/decade) is the better number. That and it takes health care out of the equation for companies which I guarantee you will make them very happy except for the evil companies like Walmart who hires 90%+ of their employees part time to avoid benefits.
Why do businesses pay with healthcare insurance to begin with? You need to ask that.
That’s not even considering the fact that they are *drastically* underestimating the current system’s future costs, and therefore underestimating the potential savings of Medicare for All. They set current system expenditures as fixed costs, when anyone looking at the unstable for-profit system we have knows that it will do anything but remain fixed–it couldn’t possibly get cheaper either due to incentives of the current system, so that means it will only get more and more expensive over the next decade. To prove this, we only have to observe overall health costs since the ACA was enacted in 2010, which would show steadily increasing costs year-over-year. This is obviously an oversimplification, as our system is by FAR the most complicated in the world, but it is true nonetheless.
whyamimrpink78 So people can have health insurance? They wouldn’t have to if they had universal healthcare…
Yep. People need to learn macro.
Yeah sure,but VENEZUELAAAAA!!!!!!
reductio ad venezuelam
Justsomeguy What a brilliant Argument!!!1!1!!11
And rats.
Justsomeguy Darn…you are right Venezuela. Lets keep things the way they are.
Venezuela’s issues went far beyond socialism; they also had problems with corruption from top to bottom, and an economy cripplingly reliant on one product (oil) with no fallbacks, as well as other stuff I don’t recall. If you want a better real-life precedent for the sort of policies people like Ocasio-Cortez are demanding, look at Scandinavia; they’re doing pretty well on these sorts of policies.
Ben Shapiro:America is founded on Christian values, Jesus was a fine example of a good man.
Jesus cured the ill, and never demanded any payment from it.
Ben Shapiro: HEALTHCARE IS NOT A RIGH! YOU HAVE NO RIGHT OVER MY WIFE’S WORK! YOU WANT TO ENSLAVE US ALL!!
I think you’re confusing socialized medicine and single payer. Vastly different systems
Saminul Haque I’ll repeat what I already asked before you got here buddy: if I didn’t acknowledge the need of money why would I want the government to fund them huh?
Jesus was a literal socialist bernie would be considerd to be to the right of him but facts lol
Marlon White I trust them to keep our servicemen and women in good health so I’d trust them to keep me in good health. Do you see battlefield medics wearing Blue Cross Blue Shield armbands? I don’t think so. If they can give our military the care they need with our taxpayer money they sure as hell can merely insure all of us. And let’s be real: Medicare for all isn’t about government workers providing care, it’s about government insurance covering everyone (more efficiently) at private hospitals.
Marlon White So I’m assuming that you grow all your own food? Because when you go to a grocery store, you are trusting the government with your health by buying FDA-inspected food. But of course Con-servatives like you don’t ever think about the specifics.
Guess what Kyle, Fox News did a poll of their own audience. The question was posed like this: “Medicare for All would cost $32 trillion. Is it worth the cost?” 73% of their own audience said YES!
Also, these are fox viewers, you don’t think the number 32trillion is scary enough to them. When they see that they probably think their taxes would have to increase but they still would rather everyone have healthcare. The question was “is it worth it” and they said yes.
whyamimrpink, lets say taxes did go up, lets say the average American pays $100 a year more. How many of them would get full coverage for that? Then add cheaper prescriptions, no more deductibles or co pays. Its this dumb logic that reduce your tax by $2 a week and ignore health insurance going up $20 a week.
The president in office when social healthcare is implemented will probably go down as the greatest president in modern US history. (Bernie)
Nick Angelos If Bernie is president in 2021 I am sure he will be the best president ever
Hey Dude 77 if the (((DNC))) rigs it for Hillary again he won’t, but it ain’t gonna slide this time
Ethan Paczkowski nah, they’ll rig it lol, just hopefully it won’t matter as much this time around.
Jordan Mercier true. He’s got momentum this time
Bernie brilliant mind need to lead America!!! Bernie 2020
I believe most studies are in that $2-3 trillion range for the savings. But when even the super-conservative, corporate-funded study can’t make it be more expensive than our current system, and it’s *still* not being implemented, you know that something’s fucked.
Right wingers hate the poor so much they probably still don’t want them to have healthcare.
John – Poor? No. They’re not poor. They’re just temporarily embarrassed millionaires. Once their lottery numbers win, it’ll all trickle down from there. They’re sure of it. They were told so by a vision of Saint Ronnie.
Squabble Bot – Bullshit. Pushing trickle down economics is not indicative of a desire for the poor to be successful. Neither is defunding and insidiously trying to privatize all education. It’s indicative of wanting to be able to piss on the heads of the poor and convince them that it’s raining. That racket is for the poor to thrive, but still be poor, so that they’ll never run out of labor peons to support an overworking and underpaying system. Properly taking care of them can provide more ready access to opportunities which would facilitate success. They can still “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” in that case. The difference is that more will actually even have bootstraps in the first place. Are you against that?
Squabble Bot – _”Every rich person used to be poor.”_
Wow, you’re a very determined bullshit artist. Evidently, your determination is aimed towards being wrong. Your statement is answered with this: There are many rich people who have never been less than very rich a day in their lives _because they were born into wealthy families._ People can and do inherit ridiculous wealth without any real working effort to earn it.