Comment

Comment on Any politician who disagrees needs to go

FiniteBanjo@feddit.online ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

I mean

Yeah

But there are a couple issues with this statement from a logical standpoint grounded in reality:

It’s estimated that Universal Healthcare would be cheaper, actually. Letting hospitals and insurance companies set prices drives up the margins, and almost all of the insurance industry is just needless overhead. It would cost negative money to make the US Government the pricemaker for medical care, and the US Government would spend less money than it currently does to maintain it.
Even if that were not the case, HYPOTHETICALLY, if you just extrapolate the costs of Medicaid to cover everyone, you’re looking at between tens of billions to hundreds of billions, not 3.

source

Sort:hotnew top

HubertManne@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
ok but for 2 don’t forget about the trillion. thats a lot of billions

source
- FiniteBanjo@feddit.online ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  Yeah but you’re not going to convince people to slash defense budget by a full trillion. It would be madness while China and Russia are acting more aggressive than that have in over 50 years.
  
  source
  - HubertManne@piefed.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    yeah but it would not even be close to a trillion and china and russia don’t spend nearly what we do combined.
    
    source
    FiniteBanjo@feddit.online ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Well it’s already not a Trillion, so yes. The $1.5 number is Trump’s request for 2027. Even Republicans, as stupid as they are, are afraid of the banks letting them go default.
    
    source
  - Naich@piefed.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    If you cut 100 billion of it, you would still have 1.4 trillion to kill brown people with.
    
    source
    FiniteBanjo@feddit.online ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
    Well, no, you’d have about 890 Billion because the 1.5 Trillion is an imaginary figure that Trump made up.
    
    source
tburkhol@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago
The US currently spends about $5 trillion on healthcare. About $1T of that goes through Medicare, another $0.9T through Medicaid, which leaves about $3T. Non-government spending is $1.6T through private insurance, $0.6T out of pocket, and $0.5T charities.

The “universal healthcare would be cheaper argument,” which I believe, is based on shifting that $3T of private payments into government spending and bringing the ~85% efficiency of care by private insurers up to the 98% that Medicare claims. i.e.: eliminating roughly $400 B of insurance company profit. That still requires $2.5T revenue increase, which is about 50% of current revenue.

source
- FiniteBanjo@feddit.online ⁨55⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago
  You’re operating under the assumption that the US Government would pay the same prices that they currently pay via medicaid and medicare as well as the same prices that private pays. That’s not the case. Generally, the US Citizens pay double or more than what citizens in other developed nations pay.
  
  source
apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
To cover costs, we cannot compare the current system. The current, utterly bloated, most expensive system would not exist with universal healthcare.

source