The United States can not afford universal Healthcare

It is about spending. Changing the funding source will double the current level of federal spending. Spare us the misinformation.

 

Government intervention in it is bad enough. Making that intervention total is unconscionable.

 

Oh but it has. But since you prefer short retorts, I'll leave it at that. And please don't include your incorrect response within my post.

 

Are you having a hard time understanding it?

The overall cost would not increase. Instead of insurance companies collecting the money from individuals and businesses, it would be collected from VAT and taxes and spent in healthcare. Money in, - money out. The spending would be paid for.

You would pay the same, or likely less than now, and corporations would pay a heck of a lot less.

The conservative argument for UHC has always been about removing the burden of healthcare off of employers shoulders.

 

It would be no different then insurance intervention. Insurance does not govern medicine. Nor would the single payer.

 

When people count more than profits, sane healthcare will be in place.

 

"The United States can not afford universal Healthcare"

as long as the government pushes a high carb\low fat diet on it's people.... then this is true - but we also can't afford not to have universal Healthcare Insurance

this also effects for profit health care insurance companies too, as shown by what the right say

"Trump Official Says Diabetes a Preexisting Condition Not Worthy of Coverage"

https://insulinnation.com/living/tr...t-a-preexisting-condition-worthy-of-coverage/

time to change the US dietary recommendations

 

You have a naive view of govenment.

 

Government doesn't pay for it now. You want me to believe that having government pay for it wouldn't increase government spending. Knock it off.

 

Tax payers pay for it either day

I said what I said and I stand by it. What's the point trying to make it sound like I said something else? Or maybe its just sailing over your head.

Money in, - money out. The spending would be paid for.

Tax payers pay for it either way, and problem is that right now we pay A LOT.

Let it sink in.

I said I'd like to see a neutral study showing how much we pay now per person (its $12 500) vs how much we'd pay in UHC system (how much more in VAT and other taxes), and how much corporations would save if they didn't have to carry the cost of funding employee health plans.

 

Sorry, doubling the federal budget is not just money in, money out. You are destroying an entire industry just as one obvious example. Comparing private sector to government is just not a fair thing to do. And it would greatly increase health care costs. It is a disaster financially, just like Medicare, Obamacare and the VA. Government screws up everything it does.

 

Whatever you say. I'd like to see a neutral study showing how much we pay now per person (its $12 500) vs how much we'd pay in UHC system (how much more in VAT and other taxes), and how much corporations would save if they didn't have to carry the cost of funding employee health plans.

 

How much of a vat tax do you think would be sufficient to pay for UHC without doing what I suggested?

 

We pay more in military funding than the next top 10 countries. That's including China. China's navy is also designed for staying around their home while ours is designed to cross oceans with enough military might to conduct wars across the oceans. In fact our military is the ONLY military designed to conduct wars across the globe. Its the reason that in every war the US is in we are the major contributors. Even if we cut our spending down by half we would still be paying more for our military than China. That would still enable us to do what we need to do. We would have to do it differently yes. But we could still do it.

 

For the 3rd time: I'd like to see a neutral study comparing what we pay now per person (its $12 500) vs how much we'd pay in UHC system (how much more in VAT and other taxes), and how much corporations would save if they didn't have to carry the cost of funding employee health plans.

If one person costs $12 500 now, and with UHC its $9 000, then......well, there would be a saving. I remember a GOP lawmaker trying shock people by saying UHC would cost nearly $3 trillion, but he did not realize we are spending $4.1 trillion now.

 

Its our house, and we run it. I know where id rather my tax dollars go.
Why do you think insurance companies who only answer to investors do a better job as the payer? Insurance companies work better when its for gaps in universal coverage.

 

That poster has a naive view if insurance companies, big pharma, pharmacy benefit managers and such.

 

Universal healthcare in some fashion is achievable. It would take generations though. The first step would require that we have free college and medical school. Only by doing that could we start to have an equitable argument for get out of control healthcare wages under control. Doctors in the UK make about what a registered nurse does in the US.

 

If a poster says something you agree with acknowledge it. The post made sense.

 

That makes no damn sense at all. So you expect companies to make medicines for no profit? They would not make them then. We would be like Cuba and North Korea. What an ignorant and naïve view.

Your communism aside you are aware that every country on earth with universal healthcare pays for medications, devices and treatments that make a profit for the companies that make them?

Many of the largest Pharma companies on earth are in Europe.

 

That is a dumb slogan.

 

The freest economies on earth have universal healthcare for all.

All these European countries ranked higher on Heritage foundation's economic freedom index have universal health care. Why can't we have it? 1/3 of Americans do have it already. Medicare and Medicaid.

Sweden is ranked 11th and we are ranked 25th. Something not adding up there.

https://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

1 Singapore 84.4 -5.3
2 Switzerland 84.2 +2.3
3 Ireland 82.0 +0.6
4 New Zealand 80.6 -3.3
5 Luxembourg 80.6 +4.6
6 Taiwan 80.1 +1.5
7 Estonia 80.0 +1.8
Mostly Free
Rank Country Overall Change rank Country Overall Change
8 Netherlands 79.5 +2.7 22 Austria 73.8 -0.1
9 Finland 78.3 +2.2 23 Cyprus 72.9 +1.5
10 Denmark 78.0 +0.2 24 United Kingdom 72.7 -5.7
11 Sweden 77.9 +3.2 25 United States 72.1 -2.7
12 Australia 77.7 -4.7 26 Georgia 71.8 -5.4
13 Iceland 77.0 -0.4 27 Malta 71.5 +1.3
14 Norway 76.9 +3.5 28 Barbados 71.3 +6.3
15 Canada 76.6 -1.3 29 Bulgaria 71.0 +0.6
16 Germany

 

No matter how you slice it one way or the other Healthcare dollars are being spent and Universal Health Care is just redirecting Healthcare dollars already being spent into a more efficient Direction
Universal healthcare would not be an added expense it would be a net Savings 2 Society by eliminating the Insurance layer or a substantial part of it whereby the taxes would be less than the premiums

 

There is a difference between making some profit and outright robbery. I expect people, and corporations, to act with humanity and decency. Both are lacking in this world, and that needs to change.

 

If government is paying for health care they can pay whatever they think is fair. It is just revealing when people use cheap slogans like people over profits.

Are you accessing the internet from a non profit provider? Using a non profit device?