Hey Matt B ... How the hell o are you ??? :)

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: Medicare for All - Yale Study
Topic Summary: 450 BILLION Savings
Created On: 02/20/2020 05:14 AM
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 02/20/2020 05:14 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


wtf

Posts: 6945
Joined Forum: 11/23/2005

Let's here the dotard expert response to a Yale study - you know, a place where very smart people go to school Yale Studay

More now than ever, we cannot afford to NOT change the current system. Like I said, our health system is designed to bleed money our of your pocket.

-------------------------
QOP = Terrorists
FK = Gay
 02/20/2020 05:41 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


SlimyBritches

Posts: 6455
Joined Forum: 01/08/2016

they should know. of course most of those that go there can afford any and all insurances.

Edited: 02/20/2020 at 05:44 AM by SlimyBritches
 02/20/2020 06:57 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 43764
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

I'm afraid I will have to leave the dotard response to you and your fellow progs. If, however, you want an intelligent response, let me know. If I am in the mood, I might provide one.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 02/20/2020 07:04 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 71439
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Whopper Alert: 'Study' Finds Medicare for All Would Save $450 Billion a Year and 68,000 Lives
By Rick Moran February 19, 2020

A study by researchers at the Yale School of Public Health shows that contrary to just about every other study published on the subject of Medicare for All, the program would actually save $450 billion a year and 68,000 lives.

Now really, who could ever vote against that? Will this study elect Bernie Sanders president?

How did they come to those conclusions? Smoke and mirrors, of course.

The Fiscal Times:

Previous estimates of the cost of Medicare for All have reached significantly different conclusions, ranging from a roughly 16% increase over current national health-care spending levels to a 27% decrease. This latest study relies on a new analytical tool to measure the impact of different provisions within Medicare for All as applied to real-world data (you can review and adjust the parameters of the analysis in the Single-Payer Healthcare Interactive Financing Tool).

A "new analytical tool"? "Real-world data"? Sounds impressive. Sounds like they actually know what they're talking about. Is M4A the Holy Grail we've been praying for?

Not exactly. One of the most widely quoted studies on the true costs of M4A tells quite a different story.

The leading current bill to establish single-payer health insurance, the Medicare for All Act (M4A), would, under conservative estimates, increase federal budget commitments by approximately $32.6 trillion during its first 10 years of full implementation (2022 - 2031), assuming enactment in 2018. This projected increase in federal healthcare commitments would equal approximately 10.7 percent of GDP in 2022, rising to nearly 12.7 percent of GDP in 2031 and further thereafter. Doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan. It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than these estimates, which assume significant administrative and drug cost savings under the plan, and also assume that healthcare providers operating under M4A will be reimbursed at rates more than 40 percent lower than those currently paid by private health insurance.

The Yale study proceeds from some very different assumptions that don't sound very "real-world" to me.

The researchers found that the proposed system would reduce total health-care expenditures by about 13% based on 2017 spending levels. Savings would come from a variety of sources. Here are some of the major savings the researchers found with Medicare for All, based on the 2017 total health care expenditure of nearly $3.5 trillion:
Reducing pharmaceutical prices via negotiation: $219 billion

Improving fraud detection: $191 billion

Reducing reimbursement rates for hospitals, physician, and clinical services: $188 billion

Reducing overhead: $102 billion

Eliminating uncompensated hospitalization fees: $78 billion in savings.

Get this now: Healthcare expenditures are rising at about 6 percent a year. And yet, M4A will reduce costs by 13 percent?

How did they figure 68,000 lives saved? Easy. Everybody knows that if everyone has health insurance, no one will die. Well, that may be a slight exaggeration. But perhaps the most bogus stat in this entire debate is that insurance coverage leads to treating disease early, thus "preventing" deaths. The problem with that? In order to be treated early, a disease has to be diagnosed. And for that to happen, people actually have to go to the doctor when they're feeling bad. Even with insurance, most of us don't.

Radicals like Sanders will continue to try and sell this snake oil. But even if Democrats win the White House, the House, and the Senate, Medicare for All will never become the law of the land.

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.
 02/20/2020 07:06 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 71439
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Soooooo...in 10 words or less...

The Yale Study is FULL OF SHIT!

FACT!

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.
 02/20/2020 07:34 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68111
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

I'm afraid I will have to leave the dotard response to you and your fellow progs. If, however, you want an intelligent response, let me know. If I am in the mood, I might provide one.



T-fish loves trump. He's happy to pay top price for a low wrung product. lol


-------------------------
I was right.
 02/20/2020 07:52 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Fish Killer

Posts: 71439
Joined Forum: 10/09/2005

Originally posted by: Cole

Originally posted by: tpapablo



I'm afraid I will have to leave the dotard response to you and your fellow progs. If, however, you want an intelligent response, let me know. If I am in the mood, I might provide one.






T-fish loves trump. He's happy to pay top price for a low wrung product. lol


No...thats what we did with ObummerCare.

-------------------------
The REAL truth is....both of the forum idiots are OWNED.
-BOTH of them have no clue who their owner is.
-They are both card carrying narcissists.
^These are PROVED facts.
 02/20/2020 07:54 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 43764
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: Cole
Originally posted by: tpapablo I'm afraid I will have to leave the dotard response to you and your fellow progs. If, however, you want an intelligent response, let me know. If I am in the mood, I might provide one.
T-fish loves trump. He's happy to pay top price for a low wrung product. lol
Um, we have Clown Care in place at the moment. You know it is bad when even progs are trashing it. Of course,.it took them a decade for that to penetrate their thick skulls and see that I was right all along. But progs serve their purpose. Even imbeciles can feel smart when next to progs.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 02/20/2020 09:17 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


wtf

Posts: 6945
Joined Forum: 11/23/2005

Hmmm, seems dotards don't like:

- Coverage for preexisting conditions
- Removal of caps on insurance
- The slow down in rate increases
- More widespread competition in the Insurance marketplace

Sounds about right. Dotards always argue against that which is for their own good.

-------------------------
QOP = Terrorists
FK = Gay
 02/20/2020 04:19 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68111
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

Originally posted by: Cole

Originally posted by: tpapablo



I'm afraid I will have to leave the dotard response to you and your fellow progs. If, however, you want an intelligent response, let me know. If I am in the mood, I might provide one.






T-fish loves trump. He's happy to pay top price for a low wrung product. lol


Um, we have Clown Care in place at the moment. You know it is bad when even progs are trashing it. Of course,.it took them a decade for that to penetrate their thick skulls and see that I was right all along. But progs serve their purpose. Even imbeciles can feel smart when next to progs.


Just a few days ago, you said you had great insurance. Have you been out bass fishing with drunkie50 or is your memory slipping? lol



-------------------------
I was right.
 02/20/2020 05:01 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 33242
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Sturgil Simpson was on the Trillbillies podcast the other day. He's not political, but he said he was holiday in Belgium when his child got sick. No insurance, not a citizen, nothing; went to ER, saw a doctor in like 5 minutes, got treatment, and paid like 17 euro. National healthcare systems work when the people want them to work. Even ACA exchange is still popular even after years of Pugs trying to actively destroy it.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".
 02/21/2020 04:33 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68111
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Shop the ACA, then shop for the private concierge stuff. lol

Just imagine if every state went with the Medicaid expansion and every state set up exchanges. Medicare has had hundreds of changes since it's inception, it has evolved with the times. The reverse was done to the Affordable Care Act. Why are Republicans so dead set against affordable insurance? They need it too. I'll never understand voting against your own best interests.

-------------------------
I was right.
 02/21/2020 04:52 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


dingpatch

Posts: 19015
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Well, , , , , OK, Medicare For All seems to be a fine idea. But, let's assume that it would have the same constraints as it currently has. Does it not currently "pay" only 80%? I don't know. To talk about "supposed" savings is one thing but, where is Joe Blow supposed to get the money to "pay the balance" in the first place?

So, I've had a medical "issue" and the hospital bill is $100K. Medicare pays $80K and, as such, who is going to pay the remaining $20K? Me? OK. How much is a monthly Part B, C, D, etc. premium?

But, that seems to be a bit to much to expect, being that I really don't make that much money, I smoke, drink beer 24/7, have a $200 cable bill, a $200 cell bill, drive a $50K F250 and have a wife who collects Loius Vuitton etc, , , ,.

Let's dicuss this rationally in regard to, given current circumstances; where are the "common folk" going to get their "co-pay" amounts from?

-------------------------
Dora Hates You

Edited: 02/21/2020 at 04:54 AM by dingpatch
 02/21/2020 06:36 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 43764
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: Cole Shop the ACA, then shop for the private concierge stuff. lol Just imagine if every state went with the Medicaid expansion and every state set up exchanges. Medicare has had hundreds of changes since it's inception, it has evolved with the times. The reverse was done to the Affordable Care Act. Why are Republicans so dead set against affordable insurance? They need it too. I'll never understand voting against your own best interests.
Because some people, you being a good example, have no idea where their best interest lies. I voted to reduce my taxes, reduce regulation and reduce the flow of criminals into our country. Only the worst of fools or progs could think that isn't in my interest. Yet, you voted to pay more of your money to the gov't, be harrassed more by the gov't, and to bring more criminals to your community. Is any of that in your best interest? Nope. Do you know that? Nope. Your question has been answered

-------------------------
I :heart; Q
 02/21/2020 07:14 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


wtf

Posts: 6945
Joined Forum: 11/23/2005

Except reducing regulation i.e. allowing industry to shit in our waters, actually raises you taxes. Again dotard logic is befuddling...

-------------------------
QOP = Terrorists
FK = Gay
 02/21/2020 05:39 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


cheaterfiveo

Posts: 5092
Joined Forum: 08/29/2013

why is it that they dont say free medicare for all? Yeah because it wouldnt be free. Another head fake by the commies to take over.
 02/21/2020 06:55 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68111
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: cheaterfiveo

why is it that they dont say free medicare for all? Yeah because it wouldnt be free. Another head fake by the commies to take over.


Really? lol





-------------------------
I was right.
 02/21/2020 06:58 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


Cole

Posts: 68111
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

Originally posted by: Cole

Shop the ACA, then shop for the private concierge stuff. lol



Just imagine if every state went with the Medicaid expansion and every state set up exchanges. Medicare has had hundreds of changes since it's inception, it has evolved with the times. The reverse was done to the Affordable Care Act. Why are Republicans so dead set against affordable insurance? They need it too. I'll never understand voting against your own best interests.


Because some people, you being a good example, have no idea where their best interest lies. I voted to reduce my taxes, reduce regulation and reduce the flow of criminals into our country. Only the worst of fools or progs could think that isn't in my interest. Yet, you voted to pay more of your money to the gov't, be harrassed more by the gov't, and to bring more criminals to your community. Is any of that in your best interest? Nope. Do you know that? Nope.
Your question has been answered


Cut taxes and reduced regulation have ended in economic failure, so no, they aren't in our best interest. Do you really think Trump has any clue as to what he is doing? LOL, of course you don't.



-------------------------
I was right.
Statistics
146493 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 0 users logged in to the forum.

FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2024 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

First there was Air Jordan .