SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
With Real Health Care Reform, US Would Not Need Affordability Tax Credits
Dec 29, 2009
Our health care system is unbelievably more expensive than any other first world nation. On a per capita basis, we spend over 50% more on health care than the second most expensive nation, Norway. As a nation, we spend more than twice as much per capita on health care than first world countries like Germany, Denmark, Belgium, France, Sweden, the UK, or Australia. If we actually got real health care reform that brought our health care costs down closer to the rest of the industrialized world, their would be no need to grant affordability tax credits on the new exchange.
In 2016, the Senate bill will spend $76 billion on affordability tax credits in the new exchange. The CBO says in 2016,
The majority of nongroup enrollees (about 57 percent) would receive subsidies via the new insurance exchanges, and those subsidies, on average, would cover nearly two-thirds of the total premium
Using this data, I can estimate that roughly $210 billion will be spent on premiums in the non-group market in 2016. Of that $210 billion, about 36% ($76 billion) will by paid for by the government in the form of tax credits, and about 64% ($134 billion) will be paid directly by individuals.
If we had a health care system as cost effective as Germany, Denmark, or France, that $134 billion paid by individuals would be more than enough to cover everyone in the non-group market with several billion left over. If we could truly reform our broken health care system and bring its costs in line with the rest of the industrialized world, there would be no need for large government tax credits on the exchange. Think about that for a moment. Even with the government picking up about 36% of the cost, individuals in the new exchanges would still be dramatically overpaying for health insurance compared to the rest of the world.
What this bill does is expand something called "coverage" and adds some new regulations to insures. It is not real health care reform. Because Obama cut sweetheart deals with the hospitals, doctors, and drug companies, true cost-controlling reform became impossible.
Some supporters of the Senate bill have pointed to all the money going to middle class families to help them afford insurance as a great thing. The help is nice, but it only points to how terrible the underlying problem really is. It is simply a strategy of throwing good money after bad. Middle class families should not need government subsidies to afford health insurance. What middle class American families really need is for our government to rein in the different industries ruining our health care system, not pass a bill that will only enrich and empower them further.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 FireDogLake
Jon Walker
Jon Walker is political writer who has written for FireDogLake, Vice, The Intercept, @TheProspect and The Week. He is an expert on health care policy and the politics of health care reform.
Our health care system is unbelievably more expensive than any other first world nation. On a per capita basis, we spend over 50% more on health care than the second most expensive nation, Norway. As a nation, we spend more than twice as much per capita on health care than first world countries like Germany, Denmark, Belgium, France, Sweden, the UK, or Australia. If we actually got real health care reform that brought our health care costs down closer to the rest of the industrialized world, their would be no need to grant affordability tax credits on the new exchange.
In 2016, the Senate bill will spend $76 billion on affordability tax credits in the new exchange. The CBO says in 2016,
The majority of nongroup enrollees (about 57 percent) would receive subsidies via the new insurance exchanges, and those subsidies, on average, would cover nearly two-thirds of the total premium
Using this data, I can estimate that roughly $210 billion will be spent on premiums in the non-group market in 2016. Of that $210 billion, about 36% ($76 billion) will by paid for by the government in the form of tax credits, and about 64% ($134 billion) will be paid directly by individuals.
If we had a health care system as cost effective as Germany, Denmark, or France, that $134 billion paid by individuals would be more than enough to cover everyone in the non-group market with several billion left over. If we could truly reform our broken health care system and bring its costs in line with the rest of the industrialized world, there would be no need for large government tax credits on the exchange. Think about that for a moment. Even with the government picking up about 36% of the cost, individuals in the new exchanges would still be dramatically overpaying for health insurance compared to the rest of the world.
What this bill does is expand something called "coverage" and adds some new regulations to insures. It is not real health care reform. Because Obama cut sweetheart deals with the hospitals, doctors, and drug companies, true cost-controlling reform became impossible.
Some supporters of the Senate bill have pointed to all the money going to middle class families to help them afford insurance as a great thing. The help is nice, but it only points to how terrible the underlying problem really is. It is simply a strategy of throwing good money after bad. Middle class families should not need government subsidies to afford health insurance. What middle class American families really need is for our government to rein in the different industries ruining our health care system, not pass a bill that will only enrich and empower them further.
Jon Walker
Jon Walker is political writer who has written for FireDogLake, Vice, The Intercept, @TheProspect and The Week. He is an expert on health care policy and the politics of health care reform.
Our health care system is unbelievably more expensive than any other first world nation. On a per capita basis, we spend over 50% more on health care than the second most expensive nation, Norway. As a nation, we spend more than twice as much per capita on health care than first world countries like Germany, Denmark, Belgium, France, Sweden, the UK, or Australia. If we actually got real health care reform that brought our health care costs down closer to the rest of the industrialized world, their would be no need to grant affordability tax credits on the new exchange.
In 2016, the Senate bill will spend $76 billion on affordability tax credits in the new exchange. The CBO says in 2016,
The majority of nongroup enrollees (about 57 percent) would receive subsidies via the new insurance exchanges, and those subsidies, on average, would cover nearly two-thirds of the total premium
Using this data, I can estimate that roughly $210 billion will be spent on premiums in the non-group market in 2016. Of that $210 billion, about 36% ($76 billion) will by paid for by the government in the form of tax credits, and about 64% ($134 billion) will be paid directly by individuals.
If we had a health care system as cost effective as Germany, Denmark, or France, that $134 billion paid by individuals would be more than enough to cover everyone in the non-group market with several billion left over. If we could truly reform our broken health care system and bring its costs in line with the rest of the industrialized world, there would be no need for large government tax credits on the exchange. Think about that for a moment. Even with the government picking up about 36% of the cost, individuals in the new exchanges would still be dramatically overpaying for health insurance compared to the rest of the world.
What this bill does is expand something called "coverage" and adds some new regulations to insures. It is not real health care reform. Because Obama cut sweetheart deals with the hospitals, doctors, and drug companies, true cost-controlling reform became impossible.
Some supporters of the Senate bill have pointed to all the money going to middle class families to help them afford insurance as a great thing. The help is nice, but it only points to how terrible the underlying problem really is. It is simply a strategy of throwing good money after bad. Middle class families should not need government subsidies to afford health insurance. What middle class American families really need is for our government to rein in the different industries ruining our health care system, not pass a bill that will only enrich and empower them further.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.