Current Events > Medicare for All will save $450 billion and 68000 lives every year.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday applauded a new study published today by a team of epidemiologists in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet, which found that Medicare for All will save Americans $450 billion and prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths each and every year.
This study confirms that Medicare for All will save the American people $450 billion on health care costs and will prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths each and every year, Sanders said. In other words, guaranteeing health care as a human right by creating a Medicare for All system will cost substantially less than our current dysfunctional health care system. It will save working class families thousands of dollars and it will prevent tens of thousands of Americans from dying each year. While the CEOs in the pharmaceutical and health insurance industry may not like it, we will end their greed and enact Medicare for All when I am president.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/02/15/sanders-applauds-new-medicare-all-study-will-save-americans-450-billion-and-prevent

Hopefully it passes, but America is more interested in killing other people than saving their own.

---

I would note that a previous study found that 45,000 Americans die each year owing to lack of insurance coverage:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-healthcare-deaths-idUSTRE58G6W520090917

So this finding isn't all that outlandish.
---

I wonder how much of the resistance involves us Americans thinking it actually costs tens of thousands of dollars to deliver a baby.

---

CBO's report tldr's to "i dunno":
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2019-05/55150-singlepayer.pdf

It doesn't matter the money you save, the issue is that we have good medical people here because they get paid a lot of money. It's why people still come to the US and pay money to get shit done, we have the best medical people, but they charge a lot. Let them not charge as much, then those doctors don't work anymore, so all the best doctors get into private practice where they can charge what they want. Now all the best doctors are for the rich and all the shitty ones are for the poor. Just another way to kill poor people - bad medical advice from bad doctors

---

cool.

Let's see it in practice.
---

Not that I think the current state of the system is good or it should remain as such, but it seems most of these alternative plans are just pipe dreams.

Bad_Mojo posted...

Let them not charge as much, then those doctors don't work anymore, so all the best doctors get into private practice where they can charge what they want. Now all the best doctors are for the rich and all the shitty ones are for the poor.

This is why a better plan is to just accept that's going to happen, and do VA for All.

I love the socialist stance. Why even try the government will take care of us .

Bad_Mojo posted...

It doesn't matter the money you save, the issue is that we have good medical people here because they get paid a lot of money. It's why people still come to the US and pay money to get shit done, we have the best medical people, but they charge a lot. Let them not charge as much, then those doctors don't work anymore, so all the best doctors get into private practice where they can charge what they want. Now all the best doctors are for the rich and all the shitty ones are for the poor. Just another way to kill poor people - bad medical advice from bad doctors

so basically no difference from what it is now?

gotcha.

---

They've got to roll with this narrative for the rest of the election year if they want to grab that spurned low income middle American base.

---

muchdran posted...

I love the socialist stance. Why even try the government will take care of us .

The stance is that addressing the issue collectively rather than individually will save both time and lives.
---

solosnake posted...

so basically no difference from what it is now?

gotcha.

Not at all.

I can pay for the best because I have insurance. I have insurance because it costs so much money. It costs so much money because they have great doctors.

Now let's free medical, which takes away insurance. Now to get the best you have to pay out of pocket. So now I have to take a shitty doctor because I don't have the insurance to get the good ones.

---

"sorry, your drug requires prior authorization"

"Fucking socialists"

---

muchdran posted...

I love the socialist stance. Why even try the government will take care of us .

Has nothing to do with socialism

Try again

---

This isn't a surprise, virtually any system universal healthcare system would be an improvement over the US's current system in every way

Bad_Mojo posted...

It doesn't matter the money you save, the issue is that we have good medical people here because they get paid a lot of money. It's why people still come to the US and pay money to get shit done, we have the best medical people, but they charge a lot.

then why does the US have higher rates of medical error than every country with universal healthcare



---

Antifar posted...

The stance is that addressing the issue collectively rather than individually will save both time and lives.

Yeah because the government has always ran things smoothly.

You can't be denied care based on your ability to pay.

Frolex posted...

then why does the US have higher rates of medical error than every country with universal healthcare

1.) In almost all medical reports rely on self reporting with no standard of that reporting. American routinely uses a higher standard than European countries

2.) We're a gigantic country with population spread across many areas. It's impossible to have a consistent quality across a wide area with each state having it's own laws and regulations

3.). Your chart has nothing to do with the quality of care.

Denying the simple fact that America has the best doctors and medical technology and drugs is being astonishingly ignorant at best and trolling at most likely.

There's a reason why the wealthy come to America for care. And those doctors are here because of the quality of hospitals we have and those hospitals are that quality because our flawed system makes it most profitable to be here.

Without fundamental understanding of the issue you can not fix the issue.

Contrary to popular belief we already spend more money on health care at a federal level than military spending



The notion that throwing money at the problem is going to fix it doesn't grasp the problem.

---

Frolex posted...

This isn't a surprise, virtually any system universal healthcare system would be an improvement over the US's current system in every way

then why does the US have higher rates of medical error than every country with universal healthcare

That would be because you get greedy people who dont really care about being doctors and hate their job and just do it because it makes them rich.

---

muchdran posted...

I love the socialist stance. Why even try the government will take care of us .

whats wrong with that? Its a good mentality to have

if you pay taxes, you pay my welfare checks that go into microtransactions for video games

LinkScorbunny posted...

Its a good mentality to have

In a utopia with good politicians and an efficient government.

Don't take low quality bait. A government has a responsibility to take care of it's citizens. There is a limit to that responsibility. The us is clearly not at that limit, but given policies are dictated by corporations, even things like ACA ultimately help the healthcare system more than the average citizens.

Ever wonder why blue cross and United were so quiet when aca came out? Because it's not that bad for them and they got a built in excuse to raise premium to blame it on aca

---

"buh-buh-buh socialism!11!"

fuck off anyone who thinks this or bernie are bad things

---

I Like Toast posted...

1.) In almost all medical reports rely on self reporting with no standard of that reporting. American routinely uses a higher standard than European countries

Would have a great argument if a:those rates weren't consistent with independent research on the subject and b:the rates of death associated with medical errors in the US weren't disproportionately high as well

https://www.vitapurity.com/reference/jlt1125-1.html
https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMp048243
http://www.ashnha.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/To-Err-is-Human-Ch-1.pdf

I Like Toast posted...

2.) We're a gigantic country with population spread across many areas. It's impossible to have a consistent quality across a wide area with each state having it's own laws and regulations

Gaps in state healthcare policy sure seems like it would be a strong argument in favor of a universal healthcare system then

I Like Toast posted...

3.). Your chart has nothing to do with the quality of care.

no, it has to do with the specific claim that doctors in the US have a higher level of competency compared to the rest of the world. If you want charts about the broader quality of healthcare in the US, we can look at those too tho





---

Frolex posted...

a:those rates weren't consistent with independent research on the subject

I Like Toast posted...

In almost all medical reports rely on self reporting with no standard of that reporting. American routinely uses a higher standard than European countries

If you aren't going to bother to read why do you expect me to read what you wrote?

---

I Like Toast posted...

If you aren't going to bother to read why do you expect me to read what you wrote?

Data Extraction. Data extracted independently by 2 investigators were analyzed by a random-effects model. To obtain the overall incidence of ADRs in hospitalized patients, we combined the incidence of ADRs occurring while in the hospital plus the incidence of ADRs causing admission to hospital.

The real reason i don't expect you to read anything I posted is because it's above a 4th grade reading level

---

Do you know what the word extract means?

---

I Like Toast posted...

Do you know what the word extract means?

Lucky for you, that paper outlines exactly the methodology behind what data they were gathering, and how they analyzed it.

---

Damn, I Like Toast is a savage. Poor Frolex!

---

Frolex posted...

Lucky for you, that paper outlines exactly the methodology behind what data they were gathering, and how they analyzed it.

So, that's a no to knowing what the word extracted means.

If you bothered to read the post I gave you two chances to read, you'd understand the problem is the data, because it's not physically possible to visit a statistically relevant amount of hospitals in multiple countries in a time period that doesn't further taint the data. And then you'd realize, for the 3rd time now for you.
I Like Toast posted...

In almost all medical reports rely on self reporting with no standard of that reporting. American routinely uses a higher standard than European countries

Take something simple like infant mortality. Seems pretty simple to define right? Yet you have some countries that define it as only still births. Some define it as left the hospital alive (most European countries standard) And then the american standad of the baby died within 2 weeks of leaving the hospital.

Again the data relies on self reporting with inconsistent standards. And that's just the data, that's before you look into things like because we have more ways to save a child, we're more likely to keep a high risk child in an attempt to fix it. While other countries will say sorry, we can't do anything else enjoy the limited time you have left.

Again any arguement that the American health care system isn't the peak of health care is not entering the conversation with any honesty.

Much like those other countries get to keep their defense cost down thanks to American army bases, those countries are relying on american innovation to push healthcare forward.

Yes, we need to do a better job of taking care of the average person, but again, if you don't understand the problem then you can't fix it. And you've shown that you fundamentally don't understand the problem, and worse than not understanding is your refusal to even try to.

---

Frolex posted...

then why does the US have higher rates of medical error than every country with universal healthcare

Because that poll is based on customer complaints. Americans are more the type to complain about shit to people, we have a huge number of people, and

solosnake posted...

That would be because you get greedy people who dont really care about being doctors and hate their job and just do it because it makes them rich.

Also this

Never use a poll for proof, because it never really is the truth, imo. Go gather up 100 people on the streets and ask all of them that is a racist to raise their hand. Oh, nobody raised their hand. Zero racists, right?

Okay, but that isn't anonymous. Poll 100 men online, blindly, and ask them measure the size their dick. Do you think all of them would tell the truth?

Ask a group of 100 randomly selected people and ask them if they have ever seen a hate crime before. But all 100 of those people would see a hate crime as something different, so what is yes or no?

Polls are BS

---

Is there anywhere to read the entire paper for free? It interest me, but not $31.50 interests me.


---

Bad_Mojo posted...

Never use a poll for proof, because it never really is the truth, imo.

Welp, some guy on CE just wrecked the social sciences. Time to discredit sociology
---

I Like Toast posted...

So, that's a no to knowing what the word extracted means.

If you bothered to read the post I gave you two chances to read, you'd understand the problem is the data, because it's not physically possible to visit a statistically relevant amount of hospitals in multiple countries in a time period that doesn't further taint the data. And then you'd realize, for the 3rd time now for you.

No, personally individually vetting every medical procedure to ensure there's a 1:1 consistency between every medical practitioner in the field and how they record their data is not the only way we establish rates of medical error, or anything in statistics in general. If you want to make the claim that there's a major disparity in the specific reporting that the paper analyzed, then post your proof that disparity exists. Otherwise continue to cry and cope with the fact that you have zero empirical backing.

I Like Toast posted...

Again any arguement that the American health care system isn't the peak of health care is not entering the conversation with any honesty.

No i'd say the person arguing that we cant empirically establish the quality of healthcare on a per country basis because "the data is the problem" is the one arguing dishonestly.

But seriously, if the overwhelming academic and research consensus behind the topic isn't to your liking, what actual evidence would actually be acceptable in backing up or addressing your claims?

---

How will it save money when it needs money to be funded?

---

I have lived in America and Japan, and I can say for 100% certainty that Japanese healthcare has ben better for me in every single possible way. America needs to wake up and realize the narrative they are fed isnt true.

---

We don't need 68000 more people a year we need less man.
---

eggcorn posted...

We don't need 68000 more people a year we need less man.

but our economy is so great more jobs! More bigly american workers

---

The sooner we nuke the American healthcare system, the better. I am beyond sick and tired of this shit.

---

_____Cait posted...

I have lived in America and Japan, and I can say for 100% certainty that Japanese healthcare has ben better for me in every single possible way. America needs to wake up and realize the narrative they are fed isnt true.

Ive been living in Korea and my wife has been to the doctors for a bunch of stuff since weve been here.

The standard of care we see is comparable to what we had in the US for a laughably small fraction of the price.

Its not perfect either, to be sure. But Ill take this over what we had back home 10 times out of 10.


---

We definitely need to do something. American healthcare is a shitshow
---

MarqueeSeries posted...

We definitely need to do something. American healthcare is a shitshow

You have to remove it from capitalism. Pharmaceuticals too. Its horrible

---

Ive worked in hospitals dealing with all of this.

I've never heard a single convincing argument against universal healthcare. All of the arguments are from people who haven't been through the system

---

Bad_Mojo posted...

It doesn't matter the money you save, the issue is that we have good medical people here because they get paid a lot of money. It's why people still come to the US and pay money to get shit done, we have the best medical people, but they charge a lot. Let them not charge as much, then those doctors don't work anymore, so all the best doctors get into private practice where they can charge what they want. Now all the best doctors are for the rich and all the shitty ones are for the poor. Just another way to kill poor people - bad medical advice from bad doctors

cool

this is ignoring the sheer overhead administrative costs this would save, not to mention the vast majority of operations either a. go unpaid or b. get negotiated to be paid X amount up front instead of full cost. Theres still room to pay physicians competitive salaries

---

shockthemonkey posted...

Its weird watching people argue that youre just not allowed to compare the US to anywhere else.

Universal healthcare is one of those things like anthropogenic climate change where the data and concordance of research is so comically overwhelming that the only way to argue against it is to plug your ears close your eyes and pretend it doesn't exist

---

Is Medicare for all literally just giving medicare to everyone? With no changes to Medicare itself?

Because, like, I wouldn't say that's a *bad* idea, but I don't think it's going to be the life changer everyone thinks it is.

As someone who has been on an ACA plan and also on Medicare, Medicare didn't cover much at all. I was still paying a shitload in deductibles and premiums under Medicare.

MedicAID is fucking boss though, but I literally had to become disabled with kidney failure to get it so that wasn't really worth it.

---

Bad_Mojo posted...

It costs so much money because they have great doctors.

No, it costs so much money because they've abused the system for so long. Doctors don't mean shit.

---

KillerSlaw posted...

Is Medicare for all literally just giving medicare to everyone? With no changes to Medicare itself?

It's a misnomer, really. It would make care free at the point of service, which is not how Medicare works.
---