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
Much of the reporting on California's proposed plan for single-payer infers an outrageous price for universal healthcare, but doesn't adequately mention the savings from scrapping the current for profit insurance system. (Photo: National Nurses United/flickr/cc)
Opponents of Single Payer Think You're Stupid... But Nothing Is Dumber Than a For-Profit Healthcare System
Lack of critical thinking: it's killing us. And if you get alarmed by the headline of a May 22, Sacramento Bee article, it will continue killing us.
May 24, 2017
Lack of critical thinking: it's killing us. And if you get alarmed by the headline of a May 22, Sacramento Bee article, it will continue killing us.
One of the few reasonable opinions President Trump expressed recently - in the face of stark ridicule - is that healthcare reform shouldn't be that difficult. "Nobody knew" He quipped.
I like boiling the healthcare discussion down to very few words - four in fact - live longer, pay less. When looked at with those four words in mind, the answer changes.
Nobody knew? Well some folks do.
Just look at whom lives longer and pays less. Why the Canadians, the Brits, the French, the Dutch, the Japanese, the Swiss, the Danes, the Italians, the South Koreans, the Israelis... They knew.
I could go on and on, but I don't need to. 'Cause if you're still reading this and you favor our system of paying more and dying sooner - well forgive me - but perhaps you're just too stupid to live.
And if the U.S. Healthcare system only caused the untimely and early demise of stupid people - like Paul Ryan - who prefer a profit drenched system, then it might be ok. But you and I pay for Speaker Ryan to have some of the best health insurance in the country, so no, it's not working out that way.
Back to the article in the Sacramento Bee - and I'm not blaming the reporter because her editor likely wrote the headline, which reads, "The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," and while technically true, it's still less then the price tag on our current system. And in the case of California's newly proposed Universal Healthcare plan, everyone is covered.
"The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," is like saying, the price of a family's new car is in and it's more than the grocery budget. It's just erroneous math compounded with irrelevance.
See using their comparison, the newspaper infers an outrageous price for universal healthcare, but doesn't adequately mention the savings from scrapping the current for profit insurance system. When you read the article written by Angela Hart, you see that she did look into savings. She even accounted for $100 to $150 billion that employers pay in right now. Her article is far more scholarly than the scare-tactic headline implies. But she says the accounting still falls $50 billion short overall. That's because there's no mention of out-of-pocket cash payments (or those foisted onto overburdened credit cards) that also go to pay for our current for-profit system.
So let's do this differently.
Right now, Hart's article says that the cost of California's proposed single payer system would be $400 billion. But using statistical information released in 2016, the U.S. spends - on average - $10,345 per person for healthcare - and that's counting the people who don't even get it. California has - as of 2015 - 39.14 million people. The total cost for the current system is $404.903 billion. That's nearly $5 billion more that Californians pay to - you guessed it - die sooner.
$5 billion that could be better spent teaching headline writers logic and math.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Pat Lamarche
Pat LaMarche is an author, activist and advocate. She is the author of "Left Out In America: The State of Homelessness in the United States" (Updated, 2020). Her novel, "The Magic Diary" (2019) is now available.
Lack of critical thinking: it's killing us. And if you get alarmed by the headline of a May 22, Sacramento Bee article, it will continue killing us.
One of the few reasonable opinions President Trump expressed recently - in the face of stark ridicule - is that healthcare reform shouldn't be that difficult. "Nobody knew" He quipped.
I like boiling the healthcare discussion down to very few words - four in fact - live longer, pay less. When looked at with those four words in mind, the answer changes.
Nobody knew? Well some folks do.
Just look at whom lives longer and pays less. Why the Canadians, the Brits, the French, the Dutch, the Japanese, the Swiss, the Danes, the Italians, the South Koreans, the Israelis... They knew.
I could go on and on, but I don't need to. 'Cause if you're still reading this and you favor our system of paying more and dying sooner - well forgive me - but perhaps you're just too stupid to live.
And if the U.S. Healthcare system only caused the untimely and early demise of stupid people - like Paul Ryan - who prefer a profit drenched system, then it might be ok. But you and I pay for Speaker Ryan to have some of the best health insurance in the country, so no, it's not working out that way.
Back to the article in the Sacramento Bee - and I'm not blaming the reporter because her editor likely wrote the headline, which reads, "The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," and while technically true, it's still less then the price tag on our current system. And in the case of California's newly proposed Universal Healthcare plan, everyone is covered.
"The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," is like saying, the price of a family's new car is in and it's more than the grocery budget. It's just erroneous math compounded with irrelevance.
See using their comparison, the newspaper infers an outrageous price for universal healthcare, but doesn't adequately mention the savings from scrapping the current for profit insurance system. When you read the article written by Angela Hart, you see that she did look into savings. She even accounted for $100 to $150 billion that employers pay in right now. Her article is far more scholarly than the scare-tactic headline implies. But she says the accounting still falls $50 billion short overall. That's because there's no mention of out-of-pocket cash payments (or those foisted onto overburdened credit cards) that also go to pay for our current for-profit system.
So let's do this differently.
Right now, Hart's article says that the cost of California's proposed single payer system would be $400 billion. But using statistical information released in 2016, the U.S. spends - on average - $10,345 per person for healthcare - and that's counting the people who don't even get it. California has - as of 2015 - 39.14 million people. The total cost for the current system is $404.903 billion. That's nearly $5 billion more that Californians pay to - you guessed it - die sooner.
$5 billion that could be better spent teaching headline writers logic and math.
Pat Lamarche
Pat LaMarche is an author, activist and advocate. She is the author of "Left Out In America: The State of Homelessness in the United States" (Updated, 2020). Her novel, "The Magic Diary" (2019) is now available.
Lack of critical thinking: it's killing us. And if you get alarmed by the headline of a May 22, Sacramento Bee article, it will continue killing us.
One of the few reasonable opinions President Trump expressed recently - in the face of stark ridicule - is that healthcare reform shouldn't be that difficult. "Nobody knew" He quipped.
I like boiling the healthcare discussion down to very few words - four in fact - live longer, pay less. When looked at with those four words in mind, the answer changes.
Nobody knew? Well some folks do.
Just look at whom lives longer and pays less. Why the Canadians, the Brits, the French, the Dutch, the Japanese, the Swiss, the Danes, the Italians, the South Koreans, the Israelis... They knew.
I could go on and on, but I don't need to. 'Cause if you're still reading this and you favor our system of paying more and dying sooner - well forgive me - but perhaps you're just too stupid to live.
And if the U.S. Healthcare system only caused the untimely and early demise of stupid people - like Paul Ryan - who prefer a profit drenched system, then it might be ok. But you and I pay for Speaker Ryan to have some of the best health insurance in the country, so no, it's not working out that way.
Back to the article in the Sacramento Bee - and I'm not blaming the reporter because her editor likely wrote the headline, which reads, "The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," and while technically true, it's still less then the price tag on our current system. And in the case of California's newly proposed Universal Healthcare plan, everyone is covered.
"The price tag on universal health care is in, and it's bigger than California's budget," is like saying, the price of a family's new car is in and it's more than the grocery budget. It's just erroneous math compounded with irrelevance.
See using their comparison, the newspaper infers an outrageous price for universal healthcare, but doesn't adequately mention the savings from scrapping the current for profit insurance system. When you read the article written by Angela Hart, you see that she did look into savings. She even accounted for $100 to $150 billion that employers pay in right now. Her article is far more scholarly than the scare-tactic headline implies. But she says the accounting still falls $50 billion short overall. That's because there's no mention of out-of-pocket cash payments (or those foisted onto overburdened credit cards) that also go to pay for our current for-profit system.
So let's do this differently.
Right now, Hart's article says that the cost of California's proposed single payer system would be $400 billion. But using statistical information released in 2016, the U.S. spends - on average - $10,345 per person for healthcare - and that's counting the people who don't even get it. California has - as of 2015 - 39.14 million people. The total cost for the current system is $404.903 billion. That's nearly $5 billion more that Californians pay to - you guessed it - die sooner.
$5 billion that could be better spent teaching headline writers logic and math.
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.