Bernie Sanders' New Favorite Medicare for All Study Has Major Problems. Medicare for All would cost far, far more than he says.

Reason ^ | February 26, 2020 | Peter Suderman

[karpov]

Has any question taken up more airtime at the Democratic debates than how to pay for Medicare for All? The question keeps being asked partly because multiple estimates have found that the single-payer plan, which would eliminate virtually all private health insurance, would require more than $30 trillion in additional government spending over a decade, a historically unprecedented sum. But it has also been a fixture because of the way it has caused candidates to stumble in revealing ways.

No primary candidate is more closely associated with Medicare for All than the current front-runner and likely nominee Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.). At last night's debate, Sanders was once again asked how he would pay for the plan. He responded by citing a study "that just came out of Yale University, published in Lancet magazine, one of the prestigious medical journals in the world." The study, co-written by a former unpaid Sanders adviser, purports to show that Sanders' Medicare for All plan would save $450 billion a year, and 68,000 lives.

A detailed article produced by Kaiser Health News and Politifact, however, rates Sanders' claim "mostly false." The true part is that such a study exists. The false rating comes from the story's conclusion that the Lancet study's major findings are wildly disingenuous because they ignore or discount much of the evidence about what effects such a program would have on the health care system.

The Lancet study assumes, for example, that the Sanders plan could pay Medicare rates across the board. Medicare rates are far lower than private insurance rates, and the hospital lobby is a powerful political force that has successfully fought off payment reductions in multiple venues.

[Erik Latranyi]

Who thinks gov’t healthcare would be more efficient than the current system?

Just ask that and you can win many people away from Medicare for All.

[DOC44]

Everybody is taking shots at Bernie these days.... THEY don’t want him and THEY know crazy Joe Biden is unelectable so what or who do they have up their sleeve? The only board in their platform is “BEAT TRUMP” but who is do they have that can do it in a fair election.

[griswold3]

With proper Rationing, costs can be contained.
Even Bloomberg says denying services to the elderly will help. Depends on how close you are to dying. I suppose that monies would be better spent on the young. “Paging Ezekiel Emmanuel . Your Complete Lives System is Calling”

[SkyDancer]

And Bernie will start using only lower case letters on his computer to fight CAPITALISM.

[goldstategop]

It could work. Its Achilles Heel is the exorbitant cost.

[momincombatboots]

Has the cost of a program ever mattered? Look around, there are more people on free, government funded healthcare for life than anyone can imagine. Including those who serve 20 years in the service, earring them a lifetime of freebies, along with their dependents Not for 20 years of wartime service, or 20 years of hardship.