Elizabeth Warren releases her Medicare For All fan fiction.
She will hold down costs by paying current Medicare reimbursement rates, in a fantasy taken seriously by on one.
Would ‘Medicare for All’ Save Billions or Cost Billions?
...
In our current system, doctors, hospitals and other health care providers are paid by a number of insurers, and those insurers all pay them slightly different prices. In general, private insurance pays medical providers more than Medicare does. Under a Medicare for all system, Medicare would pick up all the bills. Paying the same prices that Medicare pays now would mean an effective pay cut for medical providers who currently see a lot of patients with private insurance.
For a Medicare for all system to save money, it needs to reduce the health care industry’s income somewhat. But if rates are too low, hospitals already facing financial difficulties could be put out of business.
Medicare for All' backers find biggest foe in their own backyard
Hospitals threaten to derail big and small Democratic plans for coverage expansion.
On the revenue side Sen. Warren proposes a spate of new taxes and a level of IRS enforcement and taxpayer compliance that seems unprecedented (in a "Gee, how come nobody ever thought of THAT?" kind of way) - she hopes to raise compliance from 84% to 92%, which is great. Why not 95% like in the UK?
Left unmentioned: the rest of her plan includes having government office workers check under the cushions of every sofa in Federal offices for spare change. Another revenue source is money left by the Tooth Fairy.
This will work.
No it won't. Politico again with Obama alums rehashing their battle scars and guessing Warren has no chance with this.
If i read that right, but its like that revelation that upends 20 years of biblical archeology.
Posted by: Narciso | November 02, 2019 at 03:30 PM
Narciso, maybe it was a wooly rhino.
Posted by: henry | November 02, 2019 at 03:31 PM
Interestimg when i looked in on vindmans cv it was remarkably spare, it listed nost ly his education it disnt relate his combat tours.
Posted by: Narciso | November 02, 2019 at 03:37 PM
World’s largest outdoor cocktail party is under way. Missing Vern Lundquist.
Posted by: Jack is Back (Again)! | November 02, 2019 at 03:42 PM
And congrats to DrJ and jimmyk for the victory. After a couple earlier disappointments Harbaugh seems to have developed the team well.
Posted by: Captain Hate | November 02, 2019 at 03:42 PM
Posted by: JM Hanes | November 02, 2019 at 01:09 PM
Excellent analysis! Imagine the message to women. You can be all that you can be, but there are stipulations.
Posted by: Barbara | November 02, 2019 at 03:48 PM
On the fourth text down in this article, Strozk texts Page
And I love you.
First time I've seen anything to indicate they were any thing but co-workers on a mission. And I can't even give that too much weight, as I know I've said the same to my colleagues when they've done me a favor or helped me out. (She was editing his 302 of Flynn interview, it seems.)
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/11/01/doj-files-surreply-response-to-flynn-brady-motion-with-a-valuable-little-nugget-of-a-mistake/
Posted by: anonamom | November 02, 2019 at 03:49 PM
vindmans cv it was remarkably spare, it listed nost ly his education it disnt relate his combat tours.
Posted by: Narciso | November 02, 2019 at 03:37 PM
My guess is that Vindman's combat tours had something to do with polishing brass.
Posted by: Barbara | November 02, 2019 at 03:51 PM
Robin:
“Life is a series of chapters “
I like that analogy and I can put my family’s life directly into those chapters.
The first twenty years of my life I lived in the city.
The last 50 in the suburbs.
Just saw that an NFL player for the Panthers won’t play tomorrow because his brother was shot and killed.
If you are making his salary, why isn’t your brother living somewhere his life is not at risk?
What good is all that money if you can’t protect your family?
Posted by: D | November 02, 2019 at 03:53 PM
Anonamom:
The amount of time and energy these traitors put into framing the President and working on their”insurance plan” amazes me.
What about protecting us and finding terrorists and stopping the trafficking and drug trades?
Posted by: D | November 02, 2019 at 03:56 PM
What about protecting us and finding terrorists and stopping the trafficking and drug trades?
Posted by: D | November 02, 2019 at 03:56 PM
Not when it's feeding their piggy bank.
Posted by: Barbara | November 02, 2019 at 04:06 PM
Maryrose, the IRS gets very grabby with gift taxes... like 125% of the gift if it is too big. The last I looked, the no tax gift max was $12,500 (or thereabouts). Any dollar after that gets the penalty rate applied on top. $12,500 after tax is nice, but it doesn’t fund life in the suburbs.
Posted by: henry | November 02, 2019 at 04:07 PM
Even the Obamaite IG said the dude wasn’t a whistleblower. Why does he get a protected spot to [slander or whatever] the President? Put his scraggy mug on the front page you losers.
@WSJ
Several conservative media outlets have named a person they speculate is the whistleblower whose complaint touched off the impeachment probe—and some GOP lawmakers are amplifying the articles on social media
Posted by: henry | November 02, 2019 at 04:19 PM
TM double clutched new x 2.
That is two new threads.
Posted by: henry | November 02, 2019 at 04:22 PM
Ignatz:
I thought the author was quoting David Brooks, and am happy to be corrected, but my remarks were directed at the substance of the quotation no matter who wrote it. The problem with generalities is that in this actuarial culture we live in they morph into putative absolutes all too quickly. It seems to me the author's prescription for women was pretty definitive than you're suggesting.
Posted by: JM Hanes | November 02, 2019 at 05:33 PM
New?
Posted by: President-Elect Jim,SunnyvaleCA | November 02, 2019 at 05:59 PM
--It seems to me the author's prescription for women was pretty definitive than you're suggesting.--
I didn't say it wasn't definitive. I said it wasn't absolute. Neither was it exclusive of other things.
Her belief seems to be that the route to happiness is the best marriage you can find and building the rest of your life around that as ancillary. That seems generally true to me. A lot of people unfortunately find a lousy marriage[s] and find single life better. Some people have no desire to marry. But for the large majority, and at least as importantly, for society as a whole, the first general truth holds and is an ideal to shoot for.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | November 02, 2019 at 06:29 PM