Page 1 of 50 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 500
Thanks Tree341Thanks

Thread: Funding Single Payer

  1. #1
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    25,741
    Thanks
    9453

    From
    on the river

    Funding Single Payer

    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.
    Last edited by webrockk; 17th March 2017 at 05:35 PM.
    Thanks from Rorschach

  2. #2
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    151
    Thanks
    23

    From
    land, air, and sea
    There is no way to fund single payer except via enormous economy-killing tax hikes on the working middle class.
    Last edited by Zoom; 17th March 2017 at 05:46 PM.

  3. #3
    Veteran Member EnigmaO01's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    15,248
    Thanks
    7688

    From
    Indiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoom View Post
    There is no way to fund single payor except via enormous economy-killing tax hikes on the working middle class.
    But leave the rich alone right?

    Funny how they are able to do it in other countries like Canada.
    Last edited by EnigmaO01; 18th March 2017 at 08:34 AM.
    Thanks from Dragonfly5, RNG, Panzareta and 2 others

  4. #4
    Worst Person on the Site Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion boontito's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    78,653
    Thanks
    52099

    From
    out of nowhere!
    How will it be funded? How about make Mexico pay for it? LOL You guys don't really care about how something will be funded.

  5. #5
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    151
    Thanks
    23

    From
    land, air, and sea
    Quote Originally Posted by EnigmaO01 View Post
    But leave the rich alone right?

    Funny how they do it in other countries like Canada.
    Oh no, the rich will get hit, too. Many will flee or hide income, a thing the average middle class worker doesn't have the connections and capital to do.

  6. #6
    Bizarroland Observer Thx1138's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18,987
    Thanks
    10700

    From
    aMEEErica
    Let's not forget to factor-in the savings from cutting out the middle-men: the insurance companies, how much will that save, half?

    Thx
    Thanks from Babba and nic

  7. #7
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    151
    Thanks
    23

    From
    land, air, and sea
    Quote Originally Posted by Thx1138 View Post
    Let's not forget to factor-in the savings from cutting out the middle-men: the insurance companies, how much will that save, half?

    Thx
    Single payer inserts history's most bloated and inefficient middleman, the US Government, directly between the provider and the patient.

  8. #8
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    26,260
    Thanks
    20998

    From
    Behind the Redwood Curtain
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoom View Post
    There is no way to fund single payor except via enormous economy-killing tax hikes on the working middle class.
    Not so.

    …the sub rosa character of much tax-financed health spending in the United States obscures its
    regressivity. Public spending for care of the poor, elderly, and disabled is hotly debated and
    intensely scrutinized. But tax subsidies that accrue mostly to the affluent and health benefits
    for middle-class government workers are mostly below the radar screen. National
    health insurance would require smaller tax increases than most people imagine and would
    make government’s role in financing care more visible and explicit.

    snip

    Money that individuals or private employers pay directly to insurers
    or health care providers would be classified as “private”—with one important
    caveat: that many of these “private” payments are subsidized by taxes. For instance,
    if Jones earns $50,000 in salary plus $6,000 in employer-paid health
    benefits, she pays no taxes on the $6,000 (and the employer deducts it as a business
    expense).3 In contrast, if Jones were to receive a $6,000 pay increase, she
    would pay an additional $2,779 in taxes: $1,551 in federal income tax, $310 in state
    income tax, and $918 in payroll taxes.
    When government grants Jones a $2,779 tax preference, these funds must be
    made up from elsewhere…

    http://www.pnhp.org/publications/payingnotgetting.pdf
    Youse guys just don't want to give up your tax subsidized health insurance.
    Thanks from Panzareta

  9. #9
    Moderator libertariat720's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    5,040
    Thanks
    1652

    From
    ohio
    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.
    One thing is for sure, the quality of the product and service will drastically decrease under a federal single-payer system.

    If anything, it should be a state's issue.

  10. #10
    Bizarroland Observer Thx1138's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18,987
    Thanks
    10700

    From
    aMEEErica
    Quote Originally Posted by Zoom View Post
    Single payer inserts history's most bloated and inefficient middleman, the US Government, directly between the provider and the patient.
    They are there now...

    But with insurance companies on top of that.

    This would be Medicare for all, and it seems to be doing fairly well in other countries...

    Insurance companies are "for profit" the govt isn't.

    Should we abolish Medicare...?

    Thx
    Thanks from EnigmaO01

Page 1 of 50 12311 ... 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, 04:01 PM
  4. Obama wants single payer insurance.
    By THOR in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 18th October 2009, 05:03 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed