Comments by "Harry Stoddard" (@HarryS77) on "Warren Is Good, But WHY Is She Hedging On Medicare For All?" video.
-
Here's how you answer that universal healthcare question:
Unions have fought for health plans for workers precisely because something like M4A did not exist.
The private health insurance industry increases the cost of care relative to what we see in countries that have single payer systems, and because costs for care are increasing at a rapid rate, employers try and often succeed, every time contracts are renewed, to cut coverage.
That means that the great healthcare you had in the 70s, 80s, and even the 90s, was is the 00s good, in the 10s decent but becoming less affordable—higher copays, higher deductibles, etc.—and in the future will be further eroded into the most basic and burdensome gesture toward insurance.
The way to obviate this development is through a single payer plan that will in the long term control costs and puts everyone into the same pool.
So if you are happy, right now, with the standard of care offered by your employer, the only way to maintain that standard is through M4A.
6
-
2
-
@MrOttopants That's a lot of hypotheticals and ifs. The fact is that in this political and economic environment—not Japan's, not Switzerland's—it is going to be basically impossible, and, more importantly, unsustainable, to get to a universal healthcare plan with a duct taped-together hodgepodge of private insurance, medicaid, the ACA, and ever-eroding employer coverage. It may seem like the smarter, more practical solution right now, and maybe you can get asymptotically close to something decent, but you will never get heliocentric ellipses from epicycles. You won't fix arguably the least efficient, most expensive health system in the modern world by putting private insurance on life support. Moreover, M4A has huge bipartisan support—not among politicians, but among the population.
2
-
1
-
1