+20 20 0
Published 7 years ago by zritic with 3 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • NinjaKlaus
    +3

    What is the cost to implement such a system? Where is the peer reviewed confirmation of the findings? And we all know there is a study or two out there that contradicts this stories one finding.

    • SteveRoy (edited 7 years ago)
      +2

      Just look at your pay-stub to see what it means for you. Here is what it looks like on mine.

      So far this year I have paid $215.92 into Medicare, and $825.59 for my health insurance, totaling $1041.51.

      Medicare already covers our demographic with the highest medical expenses by a long shot, our elderly. For easy napkin math though, lets assume for Medicare to cover everyone it would cost twice as much as it does now. It won't, but it's an easy assumption.

      My Medicare tax doubles to $431.84. I don't have to pay for any health insurance, saving $825.59. The total out of my pay would just be the $431.84.

      $1041.51 - $431.84 = $609.67

      I save would $609.67 switching to Medicare for all, if it costs twice what Medicare currently does. Go look at you pay-stub. See what it will mean to you. Double your Medicare tax, eliminate your health insurance. Do you save money?

      • NinjaKlaus
        +3

        I know in the long run it would save us some in our own pockets, I just want to know the cost for the entire US healthcare system to be upended and replaced, it's not going to be ok we're doing this and it's done. It would be helpful to know the cost when England started the NHS in 1948 so that we could in theory figure it out.

        I'm guessing we are looking at billions and billions to implement because of the hundreds of lawsuits from varying insurance groups.

        What makes me sad about the US healthcare debate is that it's all about insurance and hospitals and forgets about dental, mental, and vision healthcare.

Here are some other snaps you may like...