LogFAQs > #913556733

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Politics Containment Topic 209: Lord of the Lies
Eddv 12/04/18 9:17:00 PM #121:	LordoftheMorons posted... DoomTheGyarados posted... LordoftheMorons posted... ChaosTonyV4 posted... The plan is certainly optimistic, but its also 100% possible. Like the main number everyone quotes is literally from a Libertarian think tank. They're from a libertarian, but his study takes Sanders' claims about how much things will cost at face value. I'm not saying that no form of MFA can work (or even that Sanders' can't work!), but Sanders' plan will, in all likelihood, cost considerably more than $32 trillion. Do you know the cost of our current system? Just curious. Apparently about 3.3 trillion in 2016, though medical costs have been growing faster than inflation so the total cost over 10 years would be considerably more than 10 times that. Its also worth noting that the 32 Trillion number is probably too low a figure not too high because it doesn't account for the fact that the main area of cost for Medicare is in administrative costs which would increase exponentially rather than in a linear fashion of it were to cover literally everyone rather than just people over 65. There's also the fact that you need to take a hard look at say the NHS in Britain (which is rapidly turning into a mutant version of the American system) in order to determine what exactly you WANT out of Medicare for All and what the attacks on it would be. Literally passing a piece of legislation that removed the "over 65" from Medicare would be the single biggest expansion of our government since WWII. Like I agree it's worth doing but lets not sit here and pretend that words like "efficient" or "easy" apply to it. --- Board 8's Voice of Reason https://imgur.com/chXIw06 <cite>Eddv posted [p:913556733] in Politics C... [t:77254277]...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote><cite>DoomTheGyarados posted...</cite> <quote><cite>LordoftheMorons posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote>The plan is certainly optimistic, but its also 100% possible. Like the main number everyone quotes is literally from a Libertarian think tank.</quote> They're from a libertarian, but his study takes Sanders' claims about how much things will cost at face value. I'm not saying that no form of MFA can work (or even that Sanders' can't work!), but Sanders' plan will, in all likelihood, cost considerably more than $32 trillion.</quote> Do you know the cost of our current system? Just curious.</quote> Apparently about 3.3 trillion in 2016, though medical costs have been growing faster than inflation so the total cost over 10 years would be considerably more than 10 times that.</quote> Its also worth noting that the 32 Trillion number is probably too low a figure not too high because it doesn't account for the fact that the main area of cost for Medicare is in administrative costs which would increase exponentially rather than in a linear fashion of it were to cover literally everyone rather than just people over 65. There's also the fact that you need to take a hard look at say the NHS in Britain (which is rapidly turning into a mutant version of the American system) in order to determine what exactly you WANT out of Medicare for All and what the attacks on it would be. Literally passing a piece of legislation that removed the "over 65" from Medicare would be the single biggest expansion of our government since WWII. Like I agree it's worth doing but lets not sit here and pretend that words like "efficient" or "easy" apply to it. --- Board 8's Voice of Reason https://imgur.com/chXIw06</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1