Affordable Care, affordable healthcare, affordable insurance, Canada, centralized, Cost, decentralized, Denmark, Factcheck, France, health coverage, Larry Sanders, NHS, OECD countries, price caps, private coverage, public coverage, UK
Below we see the types of health coverage in OECD countries. Bernie Sanders continues to mislead people on this topic. There is great variation. Many countries do force their citizens to buy health insurance, i.e. “compulsory health insurance”. Some of this health insurance coverage only allows treatment within the local county or region. It’s not a socialist wonderland.
P. 10 http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=COM/DELSA/GOV(2019)2&docLanguage=En
Denmark has “government schemes” based on taxation, but is decentralized into regions and previously in counties. In the Canadian system providers are mostly private and the provinces (i.e. states) tax and administer the system. If you move to another province you have to get private insurance for several months, until you are covered. None of these have the highly centralized system that Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for All” proposes. The closest is probably France, which is a much smaller country. France and Canada put caps on fees charged, however, whereas there appears to be no real caps in Bernie’s plan. Much of the infrastructure of British system is public owned, but even it is administered in a decentralized manner, with the different countries within the United Kingdom responsible for healthcare.
Bernie’s brother Larry Sanders is very worried about the financing and risk of privatization of the much cheaper British NHS system. So, Bernie should know very well the pitfalls of funding shortfalls, and yet he ignores them.
The current overall projected cost of US health care expenditures for 2023 to 2032 is over $60 trillion. Currently businesses/corporations directly pay 20% of this amount by providing health insurance to their employees. Thus, a cost currently borne by corporations would be shifted in the “Medicare for All” bill to the taxpayer, i.e. 12 trillion.
https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NHE-Fact-Sheet Less than a third of this would be recovered through employer payroll tax, according to Bernie’s web site. He appears proud that employers would save money, while he gouges the middle class. Some will be recovered through increasing employee (worker) payroll tax. There remains a huge funding gap in Bernie’s bill.
The Medicare for All bills (House and Senate versions) specifically do not require a social security number, meaning that non-Americans can access care and the cost will be even greater for that reason alone. As can be seen, above, 41% of Mexicans lack health insurance, and might wish to get free healthcare, too.
Bernie’s bill is upside down. The first step should be capping-reducing costs, and not forcing the taxpayer to pay for a bloated, overpriced system.
Bernie’s bill needs to be stopped in Congress. It appears a trick to destroy Medicare for seniors, and to remove corporate responsibility for healthcare. The end result will be forcing everyone of all ages to buy private health insurance, as in some other countries. The better option is to help those who lack health insurance coverage obtain coverage at a county hospital, instead of blowing up the entire system.