The Nation idiotically asks “Why Won’t More American Corporations Support Single-Payer Health Care?” Perhaps they should have read the LA Times
Single-payer healthcare could cost $400 billion to implement in California
A single-payer healthcare system in California — a galvanizing cause among the state’s progressive flank — would cost $400 billion annually, according to a legislative analysis released on Monday.
The analysis, released in advance of the proposal’s hearing in a key fiscal committee, fills in what has so far been the biggest unanswered question over the plan to dramatically overhaul California’s healthcare coverage.
$200 billion would need to be reallocated from other funds, while, get this, the other $200 billion would need to be raised with new taxes. But, um, there’s a little problem with the numbers that are being thrown around in all the stories, since the California budget is $180 billion annually. So, it’s not just reallocation, it’s the need for, realistically, way more than the supposed raising of $200 billion.
The write-up also notes the universal healthcare proposal would likely reduce spending by employers and employees statewide, which currently ranges between $100 billion and $150 billion annually. Therefore, the total new spending under the bill would be between $50 billion and $100 billion each year.
That’s rather rosy. If single payer is offered, companies would drop their health offerings, especially when one of the recommendations is to increase the tax on payroll. And you can bet other taxes would be aimed at employers.
(Seattle Times) Employers, business groups and health plans warned that the tax increases would crush businesses and make it harder for them to expand their workforce in California.
And, unsurprisingly,
SB562 would guarantee health coverage with no out-of-pocket costs for all California residents, including people living in the country illegally. The state would contract with hospitals, doctors and other health care providers and pay the bills for all residents similar to the way the federal government covers seniors through Medicare.
And we all know how efficient government is.
Two-thirds of the Assembly and Senate must approve the tax increases required to fund it. If it were to clear the Legislature and be signed by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown, who has expressed skepticism, it would need cooperation from President Donald Trump’s administration to waive rules about federal Medicare and Medicaid dollars.
Hey, Trump should waive them. Then we can watch the implosion.
How much do Californians spend now on healthcare? 39 million people times 10,000 per capita average = 390 billion. And that’s without covering everyone. Single payer takes profit out of the equation, so of course business people oppose what the citizens want.
US citizens pay nearly twice as much per person on healthcare as other advanced nations – without covering everyone – and with no better outcomes than Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark etc. That excess trillion dollars is a “tax” on average Americans and is rigged to reward insurance companies, drug companies, doctors, clinics, lawyers and hospitals. One trillion is redistributed from the working classes to the wealthy with no improved outcomes (except for the wealthy).
Jeffrey wrote:
Hardly. Most health related businesses oppose single-payer, but other businesses like the idea, because they
thinkhope that, for the ones currently providing health insurance, it will cost them less.Though it isn’t quite what the Bard meant, the real answer to reduce health care costs comes in Henry VI, Part 2, Act IV, Scene 2.
You mean the same Pres. Trump the California Democrats gave a two bird salute while shouting f**k Trump? Uh huh, yeah, that will make him willing to work with them.
Dana,
Every other advanced nation on Earth, e.g., Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Monaco, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Switzerland etc, (you get the idea) spend much less per person than US citizens. And these nations deliver this less expensive healthcare to ALL their residents, AND obtain as good and in many cases better outcomes.
Single payer will cost everyone less, including businesses and residents.
We (our politicians) choose to transfer money from the working classes to the wealthy.
TEACH typed:
True. The administrative costs of Medicare are much lower than of private insurance. Much lower. In addition Medicare must cover all elderly sick people. Up until a few years ago private insurers could pick and choose among healthier customers.
Healthcare in universal and better (not to mention less expensive) in nations like France, Germany and Japan. How do they do it??
The Nation article reported that GM claimed that the price of each GM new car includes $1500 of healthcare costs. Starbucks claimed they spend more on healthcare than they spend on coffee beans.
Even if Republicans are not moved by stories of human suffering, our piecemeal healthcare system, transferring at least $1 trillion from the working classes to the political donor class, hurts our global economic competitiveness. No wonder US corporations move manufacturing jobs overseas.
We understand the ideological bent (swim or sink), and the true constituency (the wealthy) of the GOP, but it’s time to do what is best for all of America, to do what is best for all Americans.