Originally posted by Dinner
View Post
I dont know... There are so many factors involved in the final cost analysis. I would expect covering more people better will cost more. I'm okay with that, spend less on having armies all over the world. But how do we calculate the pluses? People get care sooner and that means catching problems earlier. Maintenance reduces costs. Businesses no longer need to provide health coverage so employees should eventually get raises to help pay the health tax. Thats gonna be a problem, if an employee cant get a raise to offset the tax they're not gonna support M4A.
And if businesses are required to raise paychecks they aren't gonna benefit as much from removing the burden of providing health care benefits. I just dont see any point running health care thru employers and insurance companies. That has to raise costs. I wouldn't get rid of private insurance, I'd create a public option. I'm sure private policies would still exist, people on Medicare now buy supplemental policies.
Comment