Kamala Harris Wants To Impose A Soviet-Style Medical System On Americans Prior to her sudden silence after becoming the Democrat presidential nominee, Kamala Harris had been an eager, full-throated supporter of single-payer medicine like the Bernie Sanders-Pramila Jayapal Medicare for All Act of 2023. This would put the federal government in complete control of all aspects of health care: financing, staffing and credentialling, and all medical decisions. Presumably, if Harris attained the presidency, she would “do whatever it takes,” just as Barack Obama did with the (un)-Affordable Care Act (ACA), to pass her version of Medicare for All. Preserving just one payer for health care is the best choice. That should be the patient, not the federal government. Although the specifics of Medicare for All are variable and complex, the major elements are straightforward. D.C. promises to deliver cradle-to-grave medical care at a cost of $32.6 to $40 trillion over a 10-year period. The higher figure is according to Sanders. For perspective, consider the following amounts. The ACA cost $1.76 trillion. The U.S. expended $4.8 trillion on medical care in 2023 when the U.S. gross domestic product was $27.3 trillion. In 2023, the combined GDP of all nations was $105 trillion. Harris would spend nearly half the productivity of planet Earth on her single-payer health care. Medicare for All would abolish all public and private insurance plans, except Indian Health Service and Tricare, replacing them with a single federal plan. A national health budget would dictate payments for both services and goods. Patients would pay nothing directly but a massive amount indirectly, as Medicare for All would be funded by taxes. Given the cost of Medicare for All, the tax burden could easily double for Americans. In Sweden, a cradle-to-grave socialist economy, the top tax rate is 52.2 percent. The 2023 Medicare for All plan would cover most Americans. Harris intends to add approximately 11 million illegal entrants, at least initially. The Medicare for All bureaucracy would determine what care individuals get, when, by whom, where, and even if. Medical autonomy, the freedom to choose one’s care, would be nullified, just as in the United Kingdom’s single-payer system.
US will fire sale itself, bit by bit to every oligarch in the world. This is what you do when bankruptcy is inevitable, blame the FED.
It is long overdue that the U.S. introduced a public health plan. We are the only first-rate nation who does not have one. Additionally our health outcomes are below all these other developed nations. The concept that many people file bankruptcy in the U.S. due to medical bills is absurd.
I'm actually more ambivalent about the issue than it appears, but single payer systems have their drawbacks. They tend to ration health care for the elderly. Over 75, no transplant for you. Universal coverage is an advantage, but we're almost all the way there with the ACA.
Yes, I agree there are issues with rationing and long waits in the public healthcare system. In the past I have pointed out these issues in Canada -- after hearing the complaints from people living there when I worked each week in Toronto for four years. Some countries like Germany have public / private systems. You can be on the public plan or pay a little bit more money for additional private coverage which typical gives shorter waits, better service, etc. We should look into some type of public / private model in the U.S. --- but at minimum ensure that all people can be covered at no personal out-of-pocket cost.
i don’t care, as long as it is single payer type across all states. went to er in florida with my nyc insurance network, none wants to take nor pay the bills. and need to bankrupt united healthcare type of insurance brokers, it is pure evil.