Page 4 of 53 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 526
Thanks Tree349Thanks

Thread: Funding Single Payer

  1. #31
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    47,096
    Thanks
    28051

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by syrenn View Post
    more like the 49% who dont pay a cent into federal taxes would go for it.....
    Well, you would need some sort of exemption for the poor. It'd be counterproductive to extract tax on welfare benefits.
    Thanks from labrea, Babba and Panzareta

  2. #32
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    47,096
    Thanks
    28051

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by pragmatic View Post
    Healthcare really is complex.

    For the sake of honest debate. Does anyone proposing Single Payer see any downside to that option??


    Is it all really that "simple"....?
    Sure, there are downfalls. You are replacing private, for-profit businesses with government bureaucracy. There will be less coverage, overall, for most people who are insured today. Etc.

    But....the benefits massively outweigh the pitfalls.
    Thanks from namvet69, labrea and Babba

  3. #33
    Inside Your Heads syrenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    12,699
    Thanks
    6350

    From
    the sadness of my soul
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Well, you would need some sort of exemption for the poor. It'd be counterproductive to extract tax on welfare benefits.
    no exemptions for anyone.... if you make a dollar, you pay up 25% just like everyone else does. If you dont want to tax "the poor" ... then cut ALL social services by 30% to cover their share of the costs.

  4. #34
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,310
    Thanks
    10184

    From
    on the river
    So, will doubling payroll taxes do it? Americans spend about $2.5 trillion on healthcare. Current payroll taxes generate about $1.13 trillion. Medicare/Medicaid's roughly $940 billion price tag would presumably be rolled into Single Payer. Social Security's annual price tag is almost $890 billion.

    A quick calculation reveals a current payroll tax shortfall of $700 billion every year. Subtracting Medicare/Medicaid's $940 billion price tag from the $2.5 trillion spent on healthcare would leave an additional $1.56 trillion shortfall if we went to a Single Payer system without hiking payroll taxes.

    So, to "break even", payroll taxes would need to generate $890 billion for Social Security (currently severely underfunded) and $2.26 trillion for Single Payer, for a grand total of $3.15 trillion. Again, current payroll taxes generate roughly $1.13 trillion. Which looks to me like they'd basically need to be almost tripled.

    Now, let's say Single Payer eliminates the insurance "middle man"...which is reported to account for about $500 billion of the $2.5 trillion. Taking that off of the $3.15 trillion leaves $2.65 trillion...which would require payroll taxes to increase by roughly 2.5 times, or to just over 19% for you and 19% for your employer.

    are you boys and girls up for that?
    Last edited by webrockk; 17th March 2017 at 07:54 PM.

  5. #35
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    26,991
    Thanks
    16165

    From
    At the Copa, Copacabana...
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Sure, there are downfalls. You are replacing private, for-profit businesses with government bureaucracy. There will be less coverage, overall, for most people who are insured today. Etc.

    But....the benefits massively outweigh the pitfalls.
    Maybe. Dunno.

    But when one googles the topic we see countries who have the systems have an amount of discontent.

    Switzerland is a country that comes to mind.

  6. #36
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    47,096
    Thanks
    28051

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by syrenn View Post
    no exemptions for anyone.... if you make a dollar, you pay up 25% just like everyone else does. If you dont want to tax "the poor" ... then cut ALL social services by 30% to cover their share of the costs.
    Government spending is not a function of tax policy. That's apples and oranges.

    Point is, if you did pass a flat tax, you'd tax every item of income. Increases in value of property. Life insurance proceeds. Municipal bond interest. Everything -- including all public support for the poor, who needed the support because they are poor. The exemption for a subsistence level income is necessary to prevent starvation, etc.
    Thanks from labrea and Panzareta

  7. #37
    the "good" prag pragmatic's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    26,991
    Thanks
    16165

    From
    At the Copa, Copacabana...
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    Government spending is not a function of tax policy. That's apples and oranges.

    Point is, if you did pass a flat tax, you'd tax every item of income. Increases in value of property. Life insurance proceeds. Municipal bond interest. Everything -- including all public support for the poor, who needed the support because they are poor. The exemption for a subsistence level income is necessary to prevent starvation, etc.

    Not accurate. Property taxes are a prime example.

  8. #38
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    47,096
    Thanks
    28051

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    That's a dedicated tax, yes, but it's not a rational way to measure the best funding level for local schools.

  9. #39
    The Republican Agenda HadEnough2's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    11,953
    Thanks
    8467

    From
    Washington State
    Quote Originally Posted by webrockk View Post
    How will it be funded? A hike in payroll taxes is my understanding. How much of a hike? Will half the hike be pawned off on employers? What might that increase do to wages and employment opportunities? What about lower wage earners? ("regressive"?).

    An individual's (and their employers') contribution to the Medicare system is accrued over their working lifetime, typically accessible only upon reaching the age of 65, and typically utilized for about 10 years for males and 17 years for females (and it's still deeply underwater)....Single Payer would make communal healthcare dollars available to an individual for their entire lives.

    What sort of cost control measures could we expect? Would...or should... individuals who engage in risky behavior be assessed a surcharge? how about the ridiculously high percentage of people who can't put down their fork? drug addicts and alcoholics? unsafe sex fetishists?

    Let's discuss it. Let's do some basic math.
    Why should we profit off of sick people? Take the profit out of it and healthcare would be manageable. There's some math for you.

    Medicare for all.

    Cost control? It's called preventive care.

    I know a guy that had no vices and died at the age of 50 from cancer.

    If Trumpcare becomes law a millionaire will save $36,000 a year in taxes. Did you feel that?

    Trump promised everyone would be covered. Trump promised his healthcare plan would be cheaper. Trump said it would be easy.

    When are you people going to realize that the Carnival Barker scammed you and the Used Car Salesman sold you a car that would breakdown the minute it left the lot.

    Trump isn't just screwing the left he's screwing those that voted for him too.

    ....and Obamacare is not going to implode. That's just another lie. Trump's takes the cake on lies. If you hadn't noticed.
    Last edited by HadEnough2; 17th March 2017 at 07:53 PM.
    Thanks from Madeline, namvet69, labrea and 2 others

  10. #40
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    28,310
    Thanks
    10184

    From
    on the river
    Quote Originally Posted by HadEnough2 View Post
    Why should we profit off of sick people? Take the profit out of it and healthcare would be manageable. There's some math for you.

    Medicare for all.

    Cost control? It's called preventive care.

    I know a guy that had no vices and died at the age of 50 from cancer.

    If Trumpcare becomes law a millionaire will save $36,000 a year in taxes. Did you feel that?

    Trump promised everyone would be covered. Trump promised his healthcare plan would be cheaper. Trump said it would be easy.

    When are you people going to realize that the Carnival Barker scammed you and the Used Car Salesman sold you a car that would breakdown the minute it left the lot.

    Trump isn't just screwing the left he's screwing those that voted for him too.

    ....and Obamacare is not going to implode. That's just another lie. Trump's takes the cake on lies. If you hadn't noticed.
    Transferring the bills to the federal government (taxpayers) would not incentivize the healthcare provider industry to cut prices...it would do just the opposite. It would act similarly to what the taxpayer backed student loan system is doing to the price of a university education.

Page 4 of 53 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The ACA and Single Payer
    By Meursault in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 2nd September 2014, 05:52 AM
  2. How About Single Payer Instead Of ObamaCare?
    By SleeperCell in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 13th August 2013, 07:25 AM
  3. Vermont Passes Single-Payer Healthcare
    By Morgan in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 13th January 2012, 05:01 PM
  4. Obama wants single payer insurance.
    By THOR in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 18th October 2009, 05:03 AM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed