It's not more; it's about $2T less than we would be spending otherwise.
Koch study: medicare for all saves money
- Thread starter evince
- Start date
It's not more; it's about $2T less than we would be spending otherwise.
It's not $33T more, it's $2T less. We'd be spending $35T instead of $33T if we stayed in our current system.
And where was all this debt concern 9 months ago when Conservatives added at least $1.5T to the debt thanks to the Russia Tax Cut?
How does opposing payroll taxes mean someone hates America?
I ran the numbers. Two hypothetical people, one paying 1/4 the amount of the other in payroll taxes over a 40 year working lifetime. All the other factors such as date of birth, retirement date, etc. were identical. Why doesn't the person putting in 4x as much get 4x the distribution? Why shouldn't people be able to take the percentage the government wants them to put into a Ponzi scheme and invest it how they see fit?
Life is Golden
Saint
That's what you say because someone you agree with claimed it.
Where was all the debt concern when the incompetent black boy was doubling it from $10T to $20T?
I don't have a problem with programs like SS and Medicare being in place for those that want them and want to fund them. However, for those that have the ability and desire to do better, why can't an opt out be on the table? Perhaps those that support such programs as mandatory know those that truly fund the system would opt out and they government would have less control.
They're the one that you left wingers have chastised when they said things you didn't like.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
I have lost my buddy. He has run away
The problem is the person paying in 4x as much in payroll taxes as another over a working lifetime doesn't get 4x the distribution.
Why shouldn't people be able to opt out and invest as they see fit instead of a mandatory system so the low end people can get more than their fair share?
It doesn't save money. That is the claim.
Typical change like the weather left winger. You idiots chastised John McCain during the 2008 campaign and afterwards until he decided if couldn't be a nigger he would bend over and take on up the ass from him on healthcare.
Yet those paying 4x as much in payroll taxes don't get 4x the distribution when they start getting them.
It's easy to tell those of you that have nothing. You support redistribution of wealth programs.
You didn't give a damn when the nigger President was doubling it. Now, you expect us to believe you have a real concern.
WTF are you babbling about?
Right now, you pay 1.45% toward Medicare while also paying at least $3,500 in premiums for insurance on the individual market, and $5,000 in premiums for insurance through your employer.
If you make the median household income of $59,000, right now you're paying between $4,300 and $5,900 just on Medicare and premiums. That's not counting other OOPE.
Under Sanders' plan, you would be paying 2.9% toward Medicare, and no other charges.
If you make the median household income of $59,000, you'd pay about $1,700 for health care.
Now put your thinking cap on:
Is $1,700 > or < $4,300?
Is $1,700 > or < $5,900?
Be honest.
Because that's not how insurance works, idiot.
In order to get the lowest possible premiums, you need the largest possible pool. Your premium cost is directly related to the size of your shared pool. So if you are in a small pool of exclusively one type of patients, you're going to be paying more than if you're in a large pool of all types of patients.
Trying to explain the fundamental concept of health insurance to a Conservative is like trying to explain the plot of Avengers: Infinity War to my cat.