Bernie Sanders Thanks the Koch Brothers For 'Accidentally' Supporting Healthcare For All

[DonViejo]

Source: Mediate



by Rachel Dicker | Jul 31st, 2018, 12:15 pm

Link to tweet

Koch Brothers, you done played yourselves.

As Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) pointed out in a video for Twitter, a study by the Mercatus Center – which is “significantly funded” by the Koch Brothers – found that, in a ten-year period, Medicare for All would save Americans $2 trillion.

“I suspect that that is not what the Koch Brothers intended to do,” Sanders quipped.

“At a time when the United States spends far more per capita on health care than any other country on Earth… a Medicare For All health care system would save the average American significant sums of money,” he continued.

Read more: https://www.mediaite.com/online/bernie-sanders-thanks-the-koch-brothers-for-accidentally-supporting-healthcare-for-all/

[TexasBushwhacker]

1. Would save $2 Trillion while covering EVERYONE n/t

[AlexSFCA]

2. and even more after a decade of coverage for all

the country would be getting healthier

[SkyDaddy7]

3. Now that is too FUNNY!

😂🤣😂🤣😂

[ancianita]

4. To keep Republicans running the US for life. This shit's not funny. Kochs will use this as a sell.

Kochs are betting that they will not only save millions, short term, but get those trillions, long term, too.

[demmiblue]

5. Thank you, Bernie, for being such a great and tireless advocate!

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[SunSeeker]

6. Everything Bernie says in that video is correct EXCEPT that it's just "a little bit more in taxes."

Claiming people will only need to pay "a little bit more in taxes" to fund single payer is simply not true. When we say stuff like that, and people are told the actual numbers, we lose credibility.

As the Mercatus study Bernie now gives credence to states, people's federal income taxes will have to double to pay for single payer. That is still a deal and we would still save money overall, but we have to be real about the numbers.

If we want European style healthcare, we need to pay European style taxes. I'm happy with that, but not sure the majority of Americans are. Until we can sell the majority of Americans on paying substantially more in taxes to get single payer, we will never get there.

[marble falls]

7. What's wrong with raising the taxes for the wealthy? Don't they own for the maintenence on their ...

money makers?

[SunSeeker]

8. Sure. But even if we DOUBLE taxes on the rich, that still won't be enough.

That's what the Mercatus study says. Mercatus says EVERYONE'S taxes would need to be doubled. And Bernie agrees with the Mercatus numbers.

We have been imbued with tax-phobia in the US. Posts like yours demonstrate the sort of resistance we will face when talking to people about paying substantially more in taxes. And you're a progressive. Could you imagine what the reaction would be from an independent? Forget about trying to convince Republicans....

This is why single payer died in Vermont, the bluest of blue states. Even though people would save money overall, the average VT resident's state taxes would increase substantially, going from up 6% to 12%.of income, IIRC. Still a deal. But no VT politicians, including Bernie, would speak out in support of the needed taxing legislation, because they knew it would be politically toxic.

[lapucelle]

10. According to the abstract

"The leading current bill to establish single payer health insurance, the Medicare for All Act (M4A), would,und er conservative estimates, increase federal budget commitments by approximately $326 trillion during its first 10 years of full implementation (2022-2031), assuming enactment in 2018."

and

"Doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan."

I don't think the Kochs "accidentally helped" our side, given the summation (abstract) of the findings.

[SunSeeker]

11. Yep.

When the actuarials figure out how much the taxes will need to be, it won't be pretty. We need to be prepared for that. Ignoring reality, or worse, being untruthful about it, will not serve us well.

[lapucelle]

12. It's bewildering why anyone who read the study

would think it helps prove the case for medicare for all.

I wonder if the Kochs are secretly thanking anyone for publicizing a study that so strongly makes the the market-based side of the equation.

[lapucelle]

9. Here's the abstract for the study.

Charles Blahous. “The Costs of a National Single Payer Healthcare System.” Mercatus Working Paper, Mercatus Center at George Mason University, Arlington, VA, July 2018.

Abstract

The leading current bill to establish single payer health insurance, the Medicare for All Act (M4A), would,under conservative estimates, increase federal budget commitments by approximately $326 trillion during its first 10 years of full implementation (2022-2031), assuming enactment in 2018. This projected increase in federal healthcare commitments would equal approximately 10.7 percent of GDP in 2022, rising to nearly 12.7 percent of GDP in 2031 and further thereafter.

Doubling all currently projected federal individual and corporate income tax collections would be insufficient to finance the added federal costs of the plan. It is likely that the actual cost of M4A would be substantially greater than these estimates, which assume significant administrative and drug cost savings under the plan, and also assume that healthcare providers operating under M4A will be reimbursed at rates more than 40 percent lower than those currently paid by private health insurance.