Study: Medicare for All would save Americans $450B (after taxes) and prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths every year.

"Sen. Bernie Sanders on Saturday applauded a new study published today by a team of epidemiologists in the peer-reviewed medical journal The Lancet, which found that Medicare for All will save Americans $450 billion and prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths each and every year.

“This study confirms that Medicare for All will save the American people $450 billion on health care costs and will prevent 68,000 unnecessary deaths – each and every year,” Sanders said. “In other words, guaranteeing health care as a human right by creating a Medicare for All system will cost substantially less than our current dysfunctional health care system. It will save working class families thousands of dollars and it will prevent tens of thousands of Americans from dying each year. While the CEOs in the pharmaceutical and health insurance industry may not like it, we will end their greed and enact Medicare for All when I am president.”

According to the study, by replacing premiums, deductibles, co-payments and out-of-pocket costs with a progressive tax system, Medicare for All will save the average family thousands of dollars each year and will provide lower-income households the greatest relief.

Struggling hospitals serving low-income communities would be particularly helped by Medicare for All by eliminating uncompensated care, increasing Medicaid reimbursement rates to Medicare levels, and reducing administrative overhead, according to the study.

The study also debunks several attacks on Medicare for All from the private health care industry that made well over $100 billion in profits last year. Doctors and hospitals would see large savings in cost and time from streamlining our bloated and inefficient administrative and billing system, allowing doctors to spend more time with patients, the study found."

Considering that God's chosen creation almost instantly broke his laws and that the one who was supposed to sort out this mess after pulling a mass genocide through drowning on any human or non-marine animal not on that boat, and a buttload of other such jerkish choices (really, from a modern point of view, God is an absolute jerk up there with the Greek gods in being a dumb asshole, especially throughout Genesis), I'd say him choosing Trump is only consequential to his bad choices in the past.

Well he is the 'great divider' isn't he?

So fill up existing farmland with renewables to save tree's and build roads to cut down the Rainforests to replace the filled up farmland?

1. Poorly made graph? The graphs are based on facts and shows that when Republicans are in control the economy does better in terms of unemployment rate. 

2. The economy was getting worse because of Democrats took control of the house.

3. Nope, it lines up when Republicans taken over the house and senate. Then when Trump became president we seen a record unemployment rate.

4. How the hell are homeless people with no jobs and doing drugs are going to afford a house?

5. Not exactly, Democrats generally believe in higher taxes on all and more business killing regulations

I don't understand the question. My point is what's your solution to feed the world and create clean energy without negatively impacting each other?

Thanks for making my overall point.

Shift the problem from climate change to food supply, which of course will become the next problem to be solved, because you created it by filling up farmland with renewables to 'save the trees', meanwhile just as many tree's or more are being cut down to make up for the used up farmland and increasing demand.

Then shift the conversation to make it seem like I'm the environmentalist trying to save the world, when really that's the side you're taking, while I'm just pointing out it's not going to work because you're just shifting the problem to something else, yet you want a solution from me, when you're the one with the solutions apparently.

Shifting (the blame) doesn't solve problems. If anything, it ends up creating more.

I posted this already but nobody read it or responded to it despite it being a VERY good point:

I find it utterly astounding how blinded both sides are by the concept that...there are more factors at play in the complicated US (or any) economy than who was president at the time. I hate Trump, but he's not the sole reason things are as they are. I loved Obama, but he was not the sole one responsible for the ebb and flow of the US Economy between 2008 and 2016. Anyone actually arguing that they - and even the parties that they are a part of - are solely responsible for the economy during their tenure is exactly the kind of person who's opinions can be immediately dismissed for bias or ignorance.

So, SO many factors are involved in an economy that even if I spent the next ten years of my life trying to explain it, someone could easily mention how rice production in Taiwan was missed out. Every little thing factors into the economy. World interactions are important, global events, the climate, general public perception, technological advancements, the ebb and flow of various companies and their impact, international trade factors, availability, pandemics, relations, corporate shenanigans, and so, so many other factors need to be considered. Yeah, politics are a slice of that - as different political parties push for different policies and changes in laws - but it's only a small fraction of the vast pie that is global economics. And, even if political parties do have some influence, the time and effort needed to put new laws into place ensures that it could be years or even as much as a decade before a proposed bill really has far-reaching effects.

Politics are important, they do have impact, but to assume that a politician or party is solely responsible for the economy during their tenure is so palpably stupid that anyone arguing using that as their primary point can be and should be immediately dismissed. If anyone does that they are clearly showing they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about no sense of perception, and no grasp of the vastly complicated workings of international economics.

It's almost like EVERYTHING is more complicated and nuanced than headlines and sensationalist garbage could ever possibly hope to convey.