What Does "Medicare for All" Really Mean?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 10 มี.ค. 2019
- © 2021 Institute for Healthcare Improvement.
IHI Senior Fellow and President Emeritus Donald Berwick, MD, breaks down what "Medicare for All" is (and is NOT) and explains the pros and cons of the idea.
Subscribe to our channel! th-cam.com/users/ihivideo...
Visit our website: www.ihi.org
Check us out on Twitter! / theihi
Check us out on Facebook! / theihi
Check us out on LinkedIn! / ihi
Good discussion for people to consider from a trusted healthcare leader whose work I respect. Dr. Berwick has done so much for patient safety in America by working to improve our health systems. i'd like to add that I've seen administrative costs quoted as 1% in outpatient, 20% in medical offices, and 8% in hospitals. There is a lot of money to be saved for American families. People are dying out there without pharmacy benefits, and suffering without insurance because their needs are not covered or they cannot afford the co-pays for rehab after a stroke - they go without. Every new politician tries to grab any public money to lower taxes for rich people like the Koch brothers who want to dismantle government. Imagine a small government, without Medicare, social security, Medicaid (pays for nursing homes when you don't take your Mom home after her stroke paralyzes her) - this is a dismantled government. Make no mistake, we all use healthcare. The question is: do you want more public control and accountability or to keep a for-profit system of insurers that deny healthcare - look at Aetna and United Healthcare's recent scandals where they don't even follow their own rules & deny care. It's time for #medicareforall. - former hospital RN discharge planner/case manager.
The current for profit health care and for profit private health insurance that receives huge federal government subsidies is a scandal. The Patient and Affordable Care Act provided only the following benefits to consumers: individual access to health insurance without being denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, and the 80/20 rule which requires 80% of one’s insurance costs to cover medical care while no more than 20% allowed for administration costs. By contrast the administration cost for Medicare is 4%; this is because Medicare is non-profit. Insurance companies frequently violate the 80/20 and then send out rebates. In return for supporting the Patient and Affordable Care Act the insurance companies get massive federal and state subsidies along with no cap on the cost of premiums or deductibles for consumers. This was a very high price to pay for consumers and taxpayers in order to gain access to the system and for not being denied coverage based on pre-existing conditions. The individual mandate needed to be removed because consumers were forced to buy insurance they could not afford to use because of high premiums and deductibles but were forced to buy coverage or pay a tax penalty. For profit medical insurance and for profit health care services and pharmaceuticals will never cover the needs of the entire American population and there is no control over costs when profit is the motivation. The United States needs to pass Medicare for All just like all the advanced industrial civilised countries on earth.
Fix the health care industry first. Even if we go to Medicare for all it doesn't change some of the fundamental problems it faces.
Instead of paying premium, companies pay that part; citizens pay tax (in place of premium) for Medicare for all. Greedy guys & unpatriotic politicians always mislead the American opinion to get their way. We think the majority of American people don’t want to fatten those bad guys up…
@@nguyenadoclap the average family of 4 pays 26k in healthcare insurance per year. 20,000 of that is covered by employers, with 6000 coming from the employee. Under Medicare for all, a family earning anything less than a joint income of $174400 would save money with a 4% tax and an exemption for the first 29k. prnt.sc/rgji32
@@seanmcquade6838 That 4% increase in taxes has been debunked. That study made bold assumptions about paying health care providers considerably less than they now receive.
@@erth2man I agree. I've researched this for awhile since then. My guess is it's more likely to be around 6%.
@@seanmcquade6838
According to Kenneth Thorpe (health economist and the architect of numerous healthcare systems) the minimum tax on all income would be 11.8% if you want a Canadian style healthcare system.
Current Medicare only covers 80% of the medical expenses. You have to buy a supplement plan to cover the rest. So there’s a second premium not included in the discussion.
Yes.
Medicare For All doesn't have a deductible like today's Medicare. It is a big improvement for people on Medicare and everybody except multi-millionaires
Actually, you don’t. With exceptions, Medicare heavily restricts the amount that providers can charge patients to the point where they often end up losing money, hints why 1 in 5 aren’t accepting new Medicare patients.
@@cbl6520 New Medicare is not old Medicare.
@@SandfordSmythe
New Medicare PATIENTS. 🙄
Jeepers Americans are slow on the uptake. How is any part of this confusing?
You're drastically underestimating how powerful and how deliberate American predatory capitalist propaganda has been enslaving the minds of our people for the last 50 years.
Medicare for all really means bankrupting the country
@@LiMitZplus why? every study done has shown that m4A would cost trillions less than our current system. And also insure everyone and get people the preventive care that they need. Yeah it's going to be a rocky start. But what country has gone back from having some form of single payer healthcare?
@@froggy2therescue0266 There is no failure when government runs something because they simply make or change the rules on the whims of politicians. More people dying because of an over extended service isn't considered a failure and would not result in less government management no matter what.
Here are the issues with MFA in America. 1. Sales tax: Most countries that have it have high sales tax. Denmark and Sweden pay 25%. Germany and England pay 20%. Here in America the average sales tax is 7%. With some states having none. So that is a lot of tax money not coming in to fund healthcare. 2. Income tax: Once again take Sweden for example. Anyone making over 16,000 krona ($2,000 USD) pays 30% income tax. And some pay up to 60% of their income. Here in America you don't even have to file taxes until you make 12,000 USD or more. Basically they are heavily taxed. IE everyone pays in. So everyone gets back. We could also go into what a huge mess it would be to dismantle publicly-traded private insurance companies. But this comment is already getting a little lengthy. :)
Actually it is 19.4% on 16000 k. se.neuvoo.com/tax-calculator/?iam=&uet_calculate=calculate&salary=16000&from=month®ion=Stockholm
He says it doesn't cover the delivery of services. How can it not be that? When you go to the doctor, who is going to decide what you need? The doctor who gets 50 billion dollars in fraud from Medicare or maybe it's the doctor who delays procedures like the VA. Maybe it's like the bureaucrats that let you have social security benefits because you don't qualify. If you like your doctor, you can keep him or her. Yeah, I heard that one before.
Doctors work with the resources they have. give them more resources, they provide for more patients. 'fraud' from medicare? do elaborate.
@@MisterTrotts ABC NEWS reports that Medicare fraud is 60 Billion dollars every year. That was a report in 2010 and again in 2015.
@@mikejohnson9606 and do me a favor and define what ABC considers 'fraud'. Cuz from where im sitting you cant defraud a system that isn't needlessly restricted. Perhaps you mean doctors overcharging services?
@@MisterTrotts ABC defines it as procedures that are paid for but not performed. Because Medicare doesn't check those procedures against what is performed unlike private insurance.
@@MisterTrotts if physicians are stealing from medicare they should be prosecuted for their criminality. And the penalty should not be a fine but real incarceration. The problem is that rich people seldom go to prison for their crimes unless the crime of fraud is committed against other wealthy people with good lawyers. Once physicians know that the federal government has accountability built into Medicare and the penalties are severe then the physicians will be less likely to commit Medicare fraud.
My son-in-law makes 35 dollars an hour they have three children still at home. He was laid off insurance was immediately canceled and they told him could be 6 months to a year before they call him back. My daughter has been sick can't go to the doctor to find out why she has vertigo dizziness when her father and aunt has Menieres disease. She is just praying her family is alright and he does return to work as was promised. Unemployment pays the bills but not enough for medical emergencies like this.
This is where they need to change back to emergency Medicaid they used to have back in the ‘70’s for exactly this type of situation
@@lisakreimes7048 Emergency Medicaid?? Can you to better define this?
We have just spent trillions of dollars for the Afghanistan war debacle to say nothing of the money lost in Iraq, so I am not convinced at all from the argument from scarcity. We have the money to provide low cost affordable health care to every American. Why is it then that congress never asks the question how are we going to pay for the increase of military spending? Are we going to raise taxes to pay for military expenditure? We never hear this discussion, except when discussing Medicare for all.
Reinvent the wheel is business medicine. Europe has been caring. look to them.
Another thing no body talks about is if suddenly 50 million more people are going to be accessing the healthcare system where are all the extra Doctors going to come from
Private insurance doesn't have a solution for that... well, yes, their solution is to rise the prices and leave people without insurance.
The Doctors are out there. They expect them to take a huge paycut
Great reason to deny healthcare.
@@SandfordSmythe it is a great reason to greatly increase the number of doctors, how about we stop being the world leader in producing lawyers and start producing more doctors
There has never been a competitive market in medical care and services.
That's why physicians, ministers and lawyers were termed "professionals". They don't function in a market system very well.
Can we all agree a homeless person should be able to get stitches without having to face jail time for an unpaid hospital bill?
jsbbhall they aren’t supposed to deny you, but they do. Los Angeles hospitals were busted for not treating homeless. I’ve also had personal experience. Cleveland Clinic said they’d take my father for an emergency heart surgery that the hospital he was at couldn’t preform, after the subsequent calls, when they found out he insurance, they put him on a 3 day hold. He died the next day. We sued. We won.
@@christinewood3473
This is fucking terrible. I'm sorry for your loss
@Curtis Ball People already get refused service (Even some ER's if they don't have insurance) and it is getting to be a more common practice. There are hundreds of stories out there that someone with a serious medical condition got turned away. IT isn't because the doctors or nurses don't want to treat them, there are hospitals that the admin policy prohibits treating someone without some kind of insurance.
They most likely qualify for Medicaid if they even bothered to apply for it. That program is expressly for indigent people and they will be covered.
That homeless person will pay nothing. The hospital with either claim the loss on their taxes or increase prices for people who actually do pay their bills.
it's math. Americans don't like to do the math. Here I'll do it for you
all. Right now my premium is $2244 a year. If Medicare for all is passed
it would a 4% tax on my 40k income coming to $1600 and I wouldn't pay
for anything else like prescriptions, co-pays etc. So does everyone now
see that it is a lot less? When you take away the profiteering from
private insurance and big pharma. All our costs will go down
Federal revenues: $3.4tn. Total health expenditure: $3.6tn, CMS accounts for $1.2tn. $2.4tn needed for a Medicare for All. 25% of CMS' total expenditures goes towards End of Life Care which accounts for 5% of beneficiaries and/or recipients. ~27% of the population earns $15 or higher. An additional ~$27,000 per earner is required without including lost revenues (50% reduction in reimbursements, higher administrative costs) or new costs (increased end of life care, patients in general).
The doctor does not include the long term costs of us patients who were not screened, diagnosed and treated because we are rushed through our appointments and the ED. He does not talk about how terrible the quality of care we receive, how they prioritize patient flow efficiency over patient safety and push cost cutting over meeting our unmet patient needs. What we need is to rid healthcare of profiteers and corrupt leadership- why should they bring home a $2M salary when the hospital lacks enough PPE for their nurses during a global pandemic, enough beds for patients suffering a psychotic episode, enough LTSS to prevent third stage bedsores... We who read the patient safety literature and who have experienced firsthand Healthcare in the USA, know EXACTLY what is going on. Expect to be called out.
th-cam.com/video/2xh45ml9NgQ/w-d-xo.html
No mention of paying workers comp injuries, commercial liability or pain and suffering
Excellent point
When has the US government ever controlled the cost of anything
This is a good place to start
when has corporate america controlled the cost of anything? other than by poisoning workers, of couse.
@@MisterTrotts SpaceX, IBM, Fed Ex/UPS are examples of corporations that can do things cheaper then the government without poisoning people
@@seanowens1006 spacex owes its existence to a $4b nasa contract.
@@MisterTrotts but SpaceX is able to take that money and allocate it more efficiently then would NASA.
HAVE YOU EVER BEEN TO A GOVERNMENT CLINIC VERSUS A PRIVATE MEDICAL FACILITY? I REST MY CASE
Medical for all isnt forcing people to get health care elsewhere...its not forcing private facilitys out .....
Mandatory Healthcare is forcing people who don't NEED IT.....FORCING US TO PAY FOR IT....
AND befor TRUMP FIXED IT.....i was being PENALIZED FOR EVERY MONTH I DIDNT HAVE COVERAGE FOR MY 3 KIDS AND MYSELF.....
Please, no one is talking government clinics.
Medicare for all eliminates private health insurance not private health delivery system.
Excellent video! Very informative and fair
Honesty I think the entire concept of insurance is absurd.
Why am I paying a subscription to 3rd party to pay for care?
Every other subscription based service I'm paying the person providing that service.
I pay my electric bill to my electric company, I pay my Internet service provider for internet, I pay a streaming service to provide me with shows to watch.
why I can't I pay a premium directly to the hospital providing care same as you would a gym membership?
Having funding coming directly from patients would save money to the facilities by being able to almost eliminate the entire billing department since a lot of coding and billing is done almost exclusively to satisfy insurance companies.
Another big perk is that consumers tend to be far more reliable sources of income than insurance companies.
Imagine having your doctor determine if your procedure is medically necessary instead of say a Medicare Administrative Contractor (who isn't a doctor) make that decision.
I agree with Dr. Berwick but as a nurse and someone over 60 the plan needs to expand as you mentioned, for OB etc. and it needs to include pharmaceuticals and dental and vision. Yes, taxes will increase but if people have coverage and get prophylactic yearly checkups and follow up care hopefully we won't see people come into our hospitals so sick. In addition, 80% coverage is not enough. If we do this we need to set this up as 100% coverage and include nursing homes for those elderly people and incapacitated people who cannot be cared for at home. I'd rather pay higher taxes and have one HUGE bargaining tool. We also need to eliminate ALL Lobbyists.
Your taxes will increase. Less take home pay for you. Less money for FOOD. THATS THE GOAL IS IT? THATS THE RESULT.
Funny how we had excellent coverage before Obama care.
@@dannysbookauthority7280 Premiums, copays, and deductibles are a PRIVATE TAX to a corporation whose profit motive is to deny you coverage. A single-payer system like Medicare For All is a PUBLIC TAX to a government entity which guarantees you coverage.
The public tax has been predicted by several conservative and libertarian studies to save at least $2 trillion over 10 years. That is actually a TAX CUT as it reduces the amount of total taxes you will pay.
"Maybe lower administrative costs" maybe
Instead of paying premium, companies pay that part; citizens pay tax (in place of premium) for Medicare for all. Greedy guys & unpatriotic politicians always mislead the American opinion to get their way. We think the majority of American people don’t want to fatten those bad guys up…
JFK view on the matter:
th-cam.com/video/MQQhr9BcaaA/w-d-xo.html
With comments from Kyle Kulinski:
th-cam.com/video/P6DDoH8LeXA/w-d-xo.html
@Institute for Healthcare Improvement - IHI ... Dr. Donald Berwick is ignorantly missing the most important prospect of Medicare for All! He is not even aware of it. Before that, he does not even mention waste and corruption. Dr. Donald Berwick does mention, "bureaucracy", but that is, IMO, disingenuous. Since the video was meant to be a basic analysis, I will not critique other subsequent lack of points.
Great video covering both sides of the argument. Love these type of stuff
"Direct Primary Care" there is your fix, no government, no insurance companies, just you and the Doctor of your choice
Out of pocket?
@@rajashashankgutta4334
Monthly fee of $120 a month (paid by you or your employer) you get all the care you want, including being able to call your doctor over the phone for minor issues and pay for any additional procedures out of pocket.
@@cbl6520 i think you are suggesting hospitals directly providing insurance?
@@rajashashankgutta4334
Nope, it’s a fee that goes directly to the physician (hints “direct” primary care) providing the service and it covers all of your primary care, so all check ups and physicals are free at the point of use. Insurance is taken out of the equation, except those who are low income.
@@cbl6520 ok so you mean we have to pay some amount of money every month to the doctor. That's similar to insurance.
I am calling out the BS , in what universe does any government run program lower administrative cost
Government doesn't need to add profit over the administrative costs, like private insurance need to do. Also, each private insurance need their own administration, so they duplicate positions.
@@edivimo Government *does* add profit, whether written or not. It's called corruption and it's an integral part of any government
You might be right about duplicate positions, but I doubt how much that matters.
@@edivimo true, but also what’s really distributing is the business model of private insurance. To be profitable, they need to pay out as little as possible - ie deny as much care as possible. That explains why their auditing wing is their lifeblood, as they operate as literal death panels deciding who does/doesn’t get care
Medicare has much better administrative cost ratio than private companies.
in what universe does any private company run programs with lower administrative fees (or profit)
Con: when medical companies make breakthroughs, there is only one customer(our government). That tough negotiation advantage benifits us now...but ends the incentive for more breakthroughs in the future. That is why every nation in the world (and future humans) depends on US inventions. MRI, Cat Scan, Chemo therapy, electrocardiogram, Defibrilator, DaVinci surgical robot...look around a hospital in sweden, canada, France and find one, non American piece of tech
Although the almighty buck is worshipped by the average American, it is not the only incentive. Some people want the recognition and credit. And believe it or not some people just want to help others.
How is the incentive lost when so many more Millions will be insured, or more insured, and not denied the use of these inventions. Which means a hell of a lot more customers. The billionaires May lose capital in negotiation per human, but volume will Skyrocket.
Everybody depends on these inventions, but not everybody can use them.
@@christmasanimals7119 invention requires expenditure, not just altruism. Scientists, equipment, lab space...these are investments with the goal of getting a return. The relationship between price and volume are inversely proportional. A company will try to set their prices to optimize their return. Our patent protection allows inventors the ability to have leverage/exclusivity over the market for a set period of time. Prices drop through market competition after that time ends. Help a million now...or save billions around the world, and future generations...in purpetuity.
How about two tier system? Government covers basic health care and other services are covered by private insurers.
Physicians for a National Health Program
Don’t forget you’ll have 30 million more patients to see if your worried about lower payments to the Dr.’s and Hospitals
and do the doctors appear out of thin air to treat that extra 30 million, no one talks about the current doctor shortage and how much worse it will be under your medicare for all.
@@denniss3980 So what you are saying is don't do Medicare For All. Let the poor 30 million currently not able to go to the doctor in time suffer or die.
How about free public college to train more physician assistants and nurses?
How about better funded public schools to get more people prepared for advanced education required for medical jobs?
mrfuzztone why is this so hard to understand, and you are not adding 30 million but 300 million, you will collapse the system, we need to double the number of doctors, if you want to give new doctors a free ride then do it, but if you start today it will take 12 years to have the needed doctors for your Medicare plan
Jacob Ray there is an non-government solution, it is called Direct Primary Care, you pay the doctor directly, no insurance companies, no government
Dennis S hole problem with direct primary care is that you dont have any power the hospital will charge you out of this world and there is no way for you to get that down to a level where it should be, a big powerful government agency will be able to do exactly that.
Health insurance companies should not exist. They are in direct opposition to the needs of a patient. When a patient needs care how can greedy shareholder profits be achieved. Again, directly opposed to one another.
it means every citizen is covered under the health care system just like every other civilized country on the planet. not rocket science.
Not a very through breakdown. Clearly a bias to prop up the believed "pros" while ignoring many of the "cons" or simply downplaying them.
oh no they're trying to give me heathcare. I can't have that!! (sarcasm)
Anytime government " gives " you something, they take away 10 times more.
Oh no! I claim to hate and distrust the government but want the government to control every aspect of my life!
There is so much talk out there about those who don't have coverage. But no talk about who's going to pay for it. Friedman's "There's no such thing as a free lunch" is most apropos here. After all, when taking about my share in all this, who's money is it anyway?
Whos money is it when we pay 750 billion dollars for the pentagon. Whos money is it when we waste trillions upon trillions on iraq afganistan yemen somalia etc. Did anyone ask how youre gonna pay for it. I want my tax money to help my fellow citizens when they are sick, when their kids need good schools, when they need their infrastructures in order. How about the tax cuts whos gonna pay for that? Who is gonna pay for the bailouts wall street recieved when obama, democrats and republicans screwed this country and let the crooks in wall street get away? Think about it if you are a parent in your household do you wanna spend your money educating your kids paying for their medicine and health or do you wanna spend your money anatagonizing neigbors starting wars? Its about aligning our priorities. Its time to wake tf up.
But when it's endless war, never a question on that. Funny how imperialism works.
Literally the only question Bernie Sanders ever gets is "who's gonna pay for it" and even after he's answered this question 200 times on national television, you sheep still parrot this taking point. But I'll tell you.... A tax on wallstreet speculation and a raise in taxes. All in all 99% of Americans will save NET cash and get 100% care. So you'll literally MAKE MONEY for unlimited car forever! For your babies and kids and wife's and husband's and foster kids and fading parents. We will literally MAKE MONEY to get coverage for everything.
But all those who want Medicare for all, cannot come up with a cost estimate in tax increase. How much with this healthcare plan cost me compared to the private payer insurance that I currently pay for and control? Will there still be a need for supplemental insurances because of lack in coverage (Part A, B, C, D...etc.)? I currently already fund Medicare and because of the service to this nation, I will never need. Would I still be taxed at 50-60% of my wages even though I will never use the benefit? And finally, being a veteran and receiving care from a government controlled facility, are you sure you want the government to control every facet of your health? Try driving 100 or more miles because your clinic does not have an x-ray machine/ultrasound/CT/MRI and the list goes on.
I'll tell you how it works up north. It's painfully simple. Everyone gets a card. You go to the Dr you present the card. You go to the hospital you present the card. You go too a lab to get a blood test or x-ray or something you present the card. There is absolutely no paperwork bills nothing. We pay about 26 percent in federal income tax. (I'm in a tax bracket from 48000-around 100000 ) if you make more your tax rate is a bit higher and if you make less your tax rate is lower.
"cannot come up with a cost estimate in tax increase"
because the public tax will be significantly lower that the "private tax" you currently have to pay to private insurers.
"Will there still be a need for supplemental insurances because of lack in coverage (Part A, B, C, D...etc.)?"
it will not be outlawed to provide supplemental stuff, but this will be totally unnecessary. For example in Austria, where I live, you can get supplemental insurance to get extra money when sick or to be in a more calm room when in hospital (like 2 beds instead of 7-8).
"Try driving 100 or more miles because your clinic does not have an x-ray machine"
with medicare for all you can visit any facility existing anywhere - so why would that be a problem? rather, as it is not profit-driven, but care-outcome-driven, coverage should increase
Sorry, but less costly health care doesn't matter when there are going to be a million times more patients (and growing every day). It is still going to cost more and more than what we pay now. It will also greatly lower the quality of heath care.
Medicare In no way is free to who has it. There is a premium and a deductible.
Instead of paying premium, companies pay that part; citizens pay tax (in place of premium) for Medicare for all. Greedy guys & unpatriotic politicians always mislead the American opinion to get their way. We think the majority of American people don’t want to fatten those bad guys up…
This isnt like Medicare. This bill you would have no premiums or deductibles. It's free at the point of service.
@@froggy2therescue0266 So we will have to cover people jamming doctor's offices and hospitals with hang nails and simple colds? Bad move, every patient needs to have some skin in the game to check over abuse.
@@erth2man show a study where this has actually happened when people switched over. Instead of just false assumptions.
@@froggy2therescue0266 I don't have to show a study for what is obvious, how about 65 years of observing human behavior. If something is free it will get used a lot more than if someone has to reach into their own pocket to pay money for it. The inverse is why people don't use healthcare services because they have to pay. That's were we are now Foggy.
The rhetoric needs to change from "you'll save money" to "You will MAKE MONEY while getting UNLIMITED CARE"
Not a bad take on the matter.
I’d recommend people watch ZdoggMD video on Medicare for all
Thanks!
This man knows his facts presenting it in a nonpartisan independent manner, negative comments down below are all conservatives. #MedicareForAll is the solution to make America a developed country.
Medicare for all means YOU ARE FORCED TO PAY EVERY MONTH for it whether you need it OR NOT
Kind of like an Insurance Premium now that you mention it
@@iron_talon why is it privately owned companies like the DMV.....or schools districts.....medical insurance companys..car companies can all demand mandatory minimum amount that you have to pay them.....
Why cant any other company do that?
Like say babysitting.....right? Cause you never know when your going to need a sitter.... Or Plummer....cause you never know when your sink is going to need snaked.....
Aren't they all just businesses that have to pay their bills???
Why can they Expect their paychecks from billions of people around the world and if we dont comply with their LAWS AND RULES THEN THEY HARASS YOU AND KIDNAP YOU OR YOU'RE LOVED ONE'S AND HOLD THEM HOSTAGE AND DEMAND FOR A LARGE AMOUNT OF RANSOM OR THEY KEEP YOU HOSTAGE
@@pearltears8039 I mean why stop there? Are you suggesting it's a waste to pay for Firefighters that aren't actively fighting fires on your house? Policemen who aren't stopping crimes against you? Roads to cities you don't go to?
Healthcare is a community service, not an individual product. Everyone benefits when we are collectively healthy and well taken care of. Why has all the other leading countries of the world realized this but us?
@@iron_talonNO other countries incarcerate
their people and their community's on Mass numbers ......and another thing.....
Dont you know that Alot of our firefighters are men that are incarcerated forced to do community service......
And other countries have FREE HEALTH CARE ....
Another thing look at whats going on now a days......WE GOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MAKING THE LAWS....?
THE 1 THING OUR FOUNDING FATHERS FOUGHT HARD TO KEEP FROM HAPPENING.....
THEY SAY OUR FALLEN SOLDIERS DIED FIGHTING TO KEEP OUR FREEDOM.....
but our freedoms and HUMAN RIGHTS are non existent...
But funny thing if YOU HAVE ENUFF MONEY you can get The Medal of Freedom..
Did you know Ellen a talk show host has one! Thats insain what did she ever do besides openly announce to men women And Children Who she likes to have Sex with.....GROSS
WHAT DO YOU LIVE UNDER A ROCK?
or your probably one of the people who would be out a job if there were to be WORLD PEACE
This is a really dumb way of looking at it 🤦🏻♀️
So what you want, is for Doctors who have spent minimum of 12 years in medical school to give up private practice, they would have to as their overhead would not be paid, ie insurances, bldg rent and insurance, employee income, insurance, worker’s compensation, supplies to run a practice, which is a huge amount of money, not to mention their own salary. Doctors who already have a practice would have to forfeit their own practice, go into a group setting, and be government managed more than they are now on how to treat their own patients. The waiting lists to see specialists, get tests done, or even see the same doctor for test results and a treatment plan wouldn’t happen.
If it’s not happening for the Veterans, or just barely happening for the Veterans, what makes.you think this will work?
There are far too many loopholes and egos involved to call it a solid plan.
Trump just sent money to each State for road improvement so don’t give me that excuse.
If you cannot tell me where the money saved is going? Then is sounds sketchy to me.
Don't providers retain their own private practices under Medicare. Why are you creating a straw man of a VA system? No one is advocating for such a system.
It means: Enormous tax increases, your private insurance banned and taken away, and a huge government agency that cannot possibly guarantee quality of care.
Don't forget that the government agency will create more positions than it will need and bloat would be created.
Great explanation. Will anybody pay attention? Who know. It’s easier to listen you particular propaganda tv station which most people will do. Lazy people...