Supporters of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) hold signs during an event on healthcare September 13, 2017 on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Sep 01, 2018
Medicare-for-All sounds great, but how do we pay for it?
In a normal country, the answer would be simple -- just raise taxes. But in the United States, healthcare is so outlandishly expensive that the simple solution is anything but. Where Austria or Finland would be assured that a modest tax hike could (and did) cover everyone, America has to grapple with a bloated healthcare sector eating up over 17 percent of GDP -- nearly 5 points (or about $1 trillion) greater than Switzerland, the second-most expensive country.
As Jon Walker argues, this reality forces Medicare-for-all advocates into one of two basic choices, neither of them easy:
1. Swallow the huge costs, shove through a really big tax hike, and hope that people will understand the taxes-for-premiums swap.
2. Try to cut costs, and keep the tax increase modest, but tempt the wrath of the medical lobby.
Some tax increases are certainly inevitable. But the second choice is by far the best, on grounds of both practical policy and politics.
When writing a Medicare-for-All bill, it is critical for legislators to understand that traditional Democratic logrolling -- in the form of policy carveouts for powerful interest groups -- will create more problems than it solves. The way to make the legislation work is to isolate the sources of the most hideous and immoral waste in the healthcare system and concentrate the pain on them, so as to provide a really excellent benefit for the broad population with a minimum of necessary new taxes.
Read the full article at The Week.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
© 2023 The Week
Ryan Cooper
Ryan Cooper is the Managing Editor of The American Prospect. Formerly, he was a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. His work has appeared in the Washington Monthly, The New Republic, and the Washington Post.
Medicare-for-All sounds great, but how do we pay for it?
In a normal country, the answer would be simple -- just raise taxes. But in the United States, healthcare is so outlandishly expensive that the simple solution is anything but. Where Austria or Finland would be assured that a modest tax hike could (and did) cover everyone, America has to grapple with a bloated healthcare sector eating up over 17 percent of GDP -- nearly 5 points (or about $1 trillion) greater than Switzerland, the second-most expensive country.
As Jon Walker argues, this reality forces Medicare-for-all advocates into one of two basic choices, neither of them easy:
1. Swallow the huge costs, shove through a really big tax hike, and hope that people will understand the taxes-for-premiums swap.
2. Try to cut costs, and keep the tax increase modest, but tempt the wrath of the medical lobby.
Some tax increases are certainly inevitable. But the second choice is by far the best, on grounds of both practical policy and politics.
When writing a Medicare-for-All bill, it is critical for legislators to understand that traditional Democratic logrolling -- in the form of policy carveouts for powerful interest groups -- will create more problems than it solves. The way to make the legislation work is to isolate the sources of the most hideous and immoral waste in the healthcare system and concentrate the pain on them, so as to provide a really excellent benefit for the broad population with a minimum of necessary new taxes.
Read the full article at The Week.
Ryan Cooper
Ryan Cooper is the Managing Editor of The American Prospect. Formerly, he was a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. His work has appeared in the Washington Monthly, The New Republic, and the Washington Post.
Medicare-for-All sounds great, but how do we pay for it?
In a normal country, the answer would be simple -- just raise taxes. But in the United States, healthcare is so outlandishly expensive that the simple solution is anything but. Where Austria or Finland would be assured that a modest tax hike could (and did) cover everyone, America has to grapple with a bloated healthcare sector eating up over 17 percent of GDP -- nearly 5 points (or about $1 trillion) greater than Switzerland, the second-most expensive country.
As Jon Walker argues, this reality forces Medicare-for-all advocates into one of two basic choices, neither of them easy:
1. Swallow the huge costs, shove through a really big tax hike, and hope that people will understand the taxes-for-premiums swap.
2. Try to cut costs, and keep the tax increase modest, but tempt the wrath of the medical lobby.
Some tax increases are certainly inevitable. But the second choice is by far the best, on grounds of both practical policy and politics.
When writing a Medicare-for-All bill, it is critical for legislators to understand that traditional Democratic logrolling -- in the form of policy carveouts for powerful interest groups -- will create more problems than it solves. The way to make the legislation work is to isolate the sources of the most hideous and immoral waste in the healthcare system and concentrate the pain on them, so as to provide a really excellent benefit for the broad population with a minimum of necessary new taxes.
Read the full article at The Week.
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.