Warren Admits Universal Medicare Would Result in Two Million Lost Jobs

[George II]

Last edited Thu Oct 31, 2019, 06:37 PM - Edit history (2)

Precisely what I've been saying here for a long time, which fell on deaf or unbelieving ears. Anyone else going to address this huge loss of jobs?

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) agreed on Wednesday with an assessment that a “medicare for all” plan would eliminate roughly two million jobs.

Warren was speaking during an interview at New Hampshire Public Radio.

Full 58 minute NPR interview!! I hope this soothes those who think this WASN'T Warren's words.

“An economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, told Kaiser Health News earlier this year that that could result in about 2 million jobs lost,” mostly within the healthcare industry, said NHPR reporter Casey McDermott.

“So I agree,” Warren replied. “I think this is part of the cost issue and should be part of a cost plan.”

[paulkienitz]

1. now wait, what jobs are we talking about?

[Voltaire2]

11. people employed to keep you from getting healthcare services.

[Tiggeroshii]

24. +1,000

Exactly. What hasnt been discussed is how many public sector jobs will be created from the expansion and the increased revenue from the taxes that opponents keep talking about.

[snort]

28. Bingo

[wasupaloopa]

90. It isn't discussed because it isn't true!

Just more made up shit!

[Tiggeroshii]

97. What do you suppose the medicare for all plan will pay for?

What will the enormous amounts of money that opponents are dying for Warren and Bernie to admit it would cost, pay for? Will it just pay for expanded medical insurance, publicly funded for 350 million people -with no additional workers to run it? Now that WOULD be a scam!

[UniteFightBack]

162. I just heard her say that these people will get jobs in other insurance sectors like automobile

and car insurance. Yes she said that.

[oldsoftie]

39. Except not even 1/2 million are employed by the health insurance industry.

According to Statista.com

[Voltaire2]

49. Well that is odd then.

The increase in demand will increase the number of people providing actual healthcare, so who are these other 1.5 million?

[wasupaloopa]

92. Why? It takes an education to be a health care provider. Who is going to pay for the education?

You?

I know we will just raise more taxes to cover the education.

[Voltaire2]

154. Under our current system individuals pay for their own education.

But increased demand for services doesn’t cause job loss it causes job growth. So where are these other 1.5 million jobs being lost?

[karynnj]

56. Maybe they added the extra people needed in doctor's practices who need to deal with the

insurers.

[Mr.Bill]

81. And other medical facilities.

My wife was a case manager at our small local hospital. There were four of them who sat in a room and chased insurance money all day. They were all RNs who made six figures.

[blm]

103. And all the many different forms instead of one.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. DING! DING! DING! We hava winner!!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[DENVERPOPS]

14. all the jobs

All the jobs in the corrupt Medical Insurance Industry and all the corrupt pharmaceutical executives sure would't be missed.....

Somehow all the other countries manage, why can't the U.S.

[oldsoftie]

41. The same reason we wont look at funding like the other countries do.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

53. Jobs that drive the cost of US healthcare to twice anyone else's with worse outcomes. . . . nt

[dem4decades]

76. Doesn't matter. People losing jobs is a problem.

[Rebl2]

95. Yep

This is a non-starter for me. We need Medicare for those who want to buy into it. I like my employer insurance and will not be happy if it is taken away from me.

[blm]

107. Yeah - HRC was wrong to say coalworkers would get retrained for

jobs in new industries. Trump was clever to scare them and tell them he would save the coal industry.

HRC was SO stupid to think being realistic about future jobs had value.

[dem4decades]

123. I wouldn't say she was stupid. She was hopeful they would understand.

They just weren't smart enough. I pity the day we can't be hopeful. Though it might be right around the corner.

[blm]

127. She wasn't stupid. And that was my point.

Some here think we shouldn’t even attempt to move forward into the future because they find it too difficult to explain.

[highplainsdem]

145. There were roughly 50,000 coal miners in 2016, according to Wikipedia. Warren was

answering a question about 2 million jobs.

[LanternWaste]

161. One of these things is not like the other.

One of these things just doesn't belong.

(but I get it... playing the "whatabout" card is a standard response. And, as all answer are responses, but not all responses are answers, yours was indeed simply a reponse)

[blm]

164. Gee thanks, old buddy.

There was a larger point.

[mcar]

96. Regular Americans who work for insurance companies, perhaps?

[LanternWaste]

160. Only the jobs we mock... so it's ok.

(I'd guess there's already two dozen rationalizations justifying job loss as part of the American dream)

[MaryMagdaline]

2. This is why president obama did not go for this

The transition to MFA has to be gradual. He wasn’t going to bleed more jobs.

[blm]

44. Not when unemployment was at 10%, but, now it's at 4.

Of course it will be gradual. No one is saying it will be done immediately.

And Obama, over the past year, has been speaking supportively of M4A.

[doc03]

3. Wow that is not a winning issue. nt

[guillaumeb]

4. So the only option is to keep insurance companies in control

so they can continue to put profit above patients?

[elleng]

7. Right, 'f' that!

[DrToast]

12. It probably is necessary to bring down costs

Jobs will have to be lost in the sector and people will have to find other work.

But this is a disaster politically. It’s sad that’s the case, but it is.

The ads will write themselves.

[WobblyDem]

150. You might be right, but we can counter it

It helps that we're probs not looking at any redundancies in frontline services + plenty of the people that'll swap from private to public positions are going to straight up end up with nicer jobs.

Even so, you have a point.

PERI published a study outlining recommendations for the workers, and it seems to be what dialogue between Unions, the DSA and the campaign is based around.

snipped this from elsewhere :
The Sanders bill provides a broad promise to guarantee assistance to displaced workers. The PERI bill elaborates on this promise with three concrete proposals: pension fund guarantees for all impacted workers; support for near-retirement workers, including 100 percent wage replacement for multiple years; and support for displaced workers, including job training and relocation support and total wage replacement for one year.

There will be positives to combat Republican talking points when they come

[elleng]

5. Which jobs?

Insurance company and advertising? If so, that's fine with me; those folks should and will find other jobs.

[BeyondGeography]

6. This is shoddy, George

Reporter says “could,” Warren agrees with the premise of job loss without specifying a number, headline says “would,” and attributes the number to Warren.

C’mon.

[George II]

18. Not my headline. In this context though, could/would are essentially interchangeable. Remember....

Kaiser's report was the one being held up as the "gold standard" in assessing M4A by the current originator.

[BeyondGeography]

23. See below

You are pushing a headline that originated in Wingnut world. Warren made no such statement.

[blm]

37. National Review knew they were changing the word. Now you do, too.

The headline was written to dupe careless readers.

[melman]

62. You've now removed the article but kept the headline

Why?

[George II]

65. Is it inaccurate? Did you watch the interview yet?

No comment on the fact that now you know it wasn't a "rightwing" originated interview?

[melman]

85. No, it's not accurate

And yes I did watch it.

I also never said it was a right-wing "originated" interview.

[George II]

89. That's funny. I added the video at 6:37, you criticized it at 6:59, the video is 58 minutes long....

[melman]

91. I never criticized the video

And believe it or not your posts are not my only way of accessing information on the internet.



So with that silliness out of the way why don't you tell us where this admission takes place.

[George II]

99. Watch the video.

[melman]

106. I did

That's how I know the headline is inaccurate.

[ehrnst]

110. Perhaps you watched another video by mistake.

Click on the video that's in the OP.

[melman]

111. No I actually didn't do that

But thanks for your input.

[ehrnst]

112. Sounds like you did.

Do we have to go through videos on message boards 101 again?

[melman]

113. No it actually doesn't sound like that at all

And if you watched the video you know full well the headline is false.

[ehrnst]

114. No, I watched the video and the headline is accurate.

Anyone who watched the video knows full well that to say otherwise is false.

[melman]

115. It's actually not

It's a distorted rightwing framing from the National Review.

[ehrnst]

116. No, you're wrong. The headline is accurate concerning the video.

“An economist at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, told Kaiser Health News earlier this year that that could result in about 2 million jobs lost,” mostly within the healthcare industry, said NHPR reporter Casey McDermott.

“So I agree,” Warren replied. “I think this is part of the cost issue and should be part of a cost plan.”

Is that clearer? Perhaps if you saw it without the words National Review anywhere near it, you'd have a better understanding of what was said.

[melman]

117. No, I'm not wrong at all

The headline is from the National Review.

[melman]

120. I understand perfectly what was said

And it's perfectly clear she did not "admit" any such thing.

[ehrnst]

124. Yes, she did. Here is the section with what she agreed was "part of the cost issue"

I hope that this helps to clarify things for you - it starts at 16:37 in the video. That's a long time to wait, so I've cued it up most of the way for you:

?t=997

[melman]

125. I've already watched it

And there is no such "admission"

[ehrnst]

126. There is. (nt)

[melman]

129. There actually isn't

[Skya Rhen]

143. There is no one so blind as one who refuses to see. Unbelievable!

[melman]

144. Whatever

The headline misrepresents what was actually said. Anyone who watches can see that.

[sheshe2]

147. Slow clap.

[melman]

156. Well isn't this interesting

[George II]

140. As they say, "the truth will set you free!" Thanks ehrnst for that mega dose of truth and reality..

It pays to watch the WHOLE video and it's nuances. Takes a bit of work though.

[BeyondGeography]

121. To repeat the obvious, the National Review headline which the OP adopted is bullshit

Reporter says “could,” and cites a number, Warren agrees with the premise of job loss without specifying a number, headline says “would,” and attributes the number to Warren.

Carry on.

[ehrnst]

128. I will thanks. Because I'm not "bullshiting." (nt)

[Cha]

168. Snap!

[blm]

130. Economist said could, as in possibly. NR switched to WOULD

Which is declarative.

[George II]

141. Bazinga!

[Auggie]

8. A lot of whaling jobs were lost with the transition to nature gas

Just like the coal industry, the dominance of for-profit health insurance is not sustainable.

Stuff evolves. And it's a necessity, because humans evolve.

[guillaumeb]

51. Bring back whaling jobs.

And making carriages.

[DrToast]

9. Well, that doesn't sound good

She doesn’t want to say taxes will go up because she’s worried about handing Republicans an attack ad quote, but what about this?!?!

[Hoyt]

10. MFA is a loser in General Election. The jobs, if in fact that many would be lost,

are a minor consideration, IMO.

Featherbedding is not a reason to stall trying for a better healthcare system, that covers everyone.

Warren sure is taking her time finding a funding source for her healthcare proposal. You’d think she would have done that long ago.

[B Stieg]

15. Yeah, this is one place where I diverge from Ms. Warren.

And agree with Mr. Biden: instead of Medicare for All, securing Obamacare and adding the Public Option definitely feels less disruptive...

[melman]

16. This is a National Review article

The fact that you linked it from Yahoo doesn't change that.

[George II]

21. So?

[melman]

29. So you don't see the issue with posting right wing garbage from the National Review?

Okay.

[George II]

58. National Review was only reporting on Warren's interview, which is now in the OP...

The facts of the interview remain the same, regardless of the reporting source.

Do you see an issue with the ACTUAL interview on NPR? If you'd paused for a moment you would have known where the actual interview took place.

Okay.

[melman]

59. Yet you've kept their negatively framed headline

[blm]

40. Do you think NR chose the word 'would' honestly?

[oldsoftie]

45. "Shoot the messenger", George. It doesnt matter if the message is true. Here's the full interview.

[George II]

47. Thank you. I'll add that to the OP to soothe those who don't think Warren said such words.

I certainly hope her actual image/voice on NPR are "good enough".

[BeyondGeography]

72. Said what words?

“Could” is not “would” and she never states that number.

Your thread title is still bullshit RW scaremongering unless you have fresh quotes to go along with the interview.

[DrToast]

17. This is the tax issue on steroids

[blm]

27. Millions of fossil fuel jobs will be lost if we move to renewable energy.

[Aaron Pereira]

19. So that's how many unnecessary middle men we've been supporting all this time?

Not sure I favor paying astronomical insurance premiums for the sake of keeping them employed.

[Demobrat]

77. Why yes. Yes it is.

That's how many people our health care dollars are paying to sit at desks and deny as claims as possible, so that the insurance companies that employ them can continue to reap billions in profits.

[Aaron Pereira]

83. On the bright side.

Now they'll get a chance to go out and spend all that money they made. It's a win for everybody.

[ehrnst]

20. She's someone who has the capacity to change her mind when new data come available.

Unlike some other candidates. I think that's a basic element of an effective leader.

Perhaps it's her intellect and teaching experience that gives her that mental agility.

[Cha]

22. If it gets passed.. Biden's Plan is Ready to Go from Day ONE..

Link to tweet

[blm]

25. The healthcare INSURANCE industry. There will be more jobs

in the medical healthcare service industry because it will be needed.

If they did good work in an insurance office they can apply those skills to the jobs opening in healthcare service offices, or the government jobs dealing with the process.

All the jobs lost in fossil fuel industry shouldn’t stop us from pushing towards 100% renewable energy goals, should it?

[TexasTowelie]

38. You are under the assumption that those over 45 year old

will get hired into the government job--that probably is not going to be the case when employers search for younger workers. There is also the fact that government jobs pay less than private sector jobs and that the new employees will also be included in government pension systems which is a liability to all taxpayers.

It's an oversimplification to believe that there will not be other ripple effects and that a lot of people won't be harmed by the transition from the current system to a MFA system. I certainly expect that the retail sector and the food industry sector will be affected because people change their behaviors during times of uncertainty.

[blm]

43. Not just the government jobs, but, all related healthcare

services. Hospitals now closing all over, including in rural areas, will be back in business along with the industries that support them.

[TexasTowelie]

50. Not necessarily.

With the reimbursement rates that were proposed (I believe that Bernie wanted a 40% cut), there won't be many rural hospitals reopening because it won't make sense financially as they lose all of the business from private insurance companies which provide a significant chunk of revenue. The situation with rural hospitals has impacted me both directly and indirectly. I was on indigent care in a county where the local hospital closed a few years ago so I wasn't able to receive medical care. My brother also worked at that hospital.

[blm]

66. In N.C. rural hospitals are suffering BECAUSE Republicans are blocking

the expansion of Medicare and Medicaid.

https://www.ncjustice.org/publications/strong-medicine-why-medicaid-expansion-is-the-right-treatment-for-rural-hospitals-economies/

[TexasTowelie]

132. Two things:

1) There is no expansion of Medicare.
2) Texas also blocked the expansion of Medicaid.

The rural hospitals are closing because of the number of uninsured patients they provide care for. So yes, it would be better to get paid something (even if the rates paid for Medicaid are lower than the overall market rates) than nothing. It wouldn't help much if hospitals see only Medicaid patients at lower rates if they lose the insurance companies that are paying top dollar, particularly if they are out-of-network.

Another reason why the rural hospitals are failing are due to the management itself. The owners of the rural hospital where my brother worked actually took actions that were not in the fiduciary interest of the hospital in order to enrich themselves. When the hospital administrators are taking home $600K per year and flying around in private jets between the resort communities where they live and the string of hospitals they are bankrupting, it spells doom. Those administrators feel no guilt taking that money because they are not members of the community and they don't care about the community itself.

[blm]

133. It's so wrong to have such obscene profits allowed

while actual health services are squeezed.

[TexasTowelie]

139. There are opportunists in every business sector.

However, it isn't possible to legislate against greed. There are a lot of things that I don't like about capitalism, but I also recognize that there are a number of ways that I benefit from capitalism even while I have nearly nothing in my wallet. Life isn't fair.

[Gothmog]

167. I doubt that this will happen

Link to tweet

[Bartollo]

26. National Review...

[pangaia]

68. The Interview was with NPR NOT NR...

[blm]

70. The word switch was done by National Review

[pangaia]

71. that is true....

[OKNancy]

30. I was thinking about lost jobs earlier today before hearing of this

Blue Cross has a big building here in Tulsa and lots of employees. One of my friends I made while a dance teacher/studio owner works there. Single mom. She came into my studio on weekends and taught classical Indian dance.

[blm]

31. National Review twists key facts to dupe a gullible audience anxious to attack Warren

out of loyalty to their preferred candidate.

How wholesome.

[Fiendish Thingy]

32. Maybe they could get jobs as coal miners?

Seriously, moving the US healthcare system into the 21st century won't be painless, but just as jobs are lost in the private sector, some of those jobs will transfer to the public sector (somebody has to keep records and manage reimbursement of providers), so I think the net job loss would be much less than 2 million.

...and in any case, those folks who lose their jobs won't lose their healthcare with M4A, and if Warren is President, those folks can go back to college for new training at little or no cost!

[TexasTowelie]

46. The net job loss number is meaningless

compared to whether that job loss involves your own job. The chances of someone over 45 years old getting rehired decrease dramatically and that person will likely take a salary cut as well since government jobs pay less than the private sector. There is also a long term cost associated with paying retirement benefits to government employees which is a liability to all taxpayers.

[Fiendish Thingy]

48. It will take tremendous personal and political courage to move beyond the Status Quo nt

[TexasTowelie]

55. Tell that to the gentleman (or lady) that loses their job

and can no longer support their family. They'll probably give you the middle-finger salute and say that they were satisfied with the status quo.

(Nothing personal meant towards you, but I'm gauging the typical reaction from most people that lose their jobs).

[Fiendish Thingy]

118. Disgruntled blacksmiths didn't stop the transition to automobiles

But then, there was a lot of money to be made in selling cars and gasoline. Nobody was calling for incrementalism then.

M4A is just about people's health, their lives, and financial solvency.

[TexasTowelie]

138. Your comparison is not analogous.

Going from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles represented a major advancement in technology. There is not a similar advancement in technology transforming from the current health system to MFA. The only change is who pays the bill.

There are definitely debate as to whether MFA will improve people's health or lives since in order to control costs there will be some type of rationing of care (be it longer lines, delayed procedures, or niche markets being eliminated). As far as the issue of financial solvency is concerned, is it worth destroying what is already in place in order to benefit the relatively low number of people that do go bankrupt? Most people that have adequate insurance would say no which is why M4A will not be adopted and why Warren's and Sander's plans are DOA in Congress. As bad as some people believe that our current system is, there are plenty of other people who realize that it can also be worse.

[Fiendish Thingy]

148. I bet the blacksmiths didn't care if it was a major advancement in technology

They only cared about their jobs.

Sometimes it takes bold leadership to move a nation in a better direction, despite the pain such a shift may cause initially.

[TexasTowelie]

149. For those who are having their livelihoods threatened

they could just as easily classify bold leadership as uncaring leadership. Good intentions aside, those voters won't be persuaded with spin about bold leadership.

[ritapria]

33. There will be a need for a crash program in health care providers

More jobs... Tens of Millions of people will have access to health care …...That is why MFA can not come all at once ..We need a 5 year transition period to meet this new demand

[NurseJackie]

35. Twenty.

[peggysue2]

42. I would think a decade at a minimum

Probably more considering our size. Canada wrangled with their system to what we see now for nearly 50 years. Tiny Taiwan took 8 years before their system was ready-to-go, passed through legislation and actually implemented.

None of this will be fast or easy. Just won't.

[NurseJackie]

34. I do not like her plan.

[peggysue2]

36. Which is why diving headlong into Medicare4All is a losing proposition

Easing into and/or transitioning into the program is the only way to go without causing major disruption in services and the overall economy. A two million job loss + unknown tax increases are simply not selling points, particularly with the personal nature of healthcare. None of this will be quick or easy. And the issue itself is a loser for 2020.

That being said, I commend Senator Warren for being upfront about this rather important detail. What she still isn't clear about are the tax implications:

“We will see most likely rich people’s costs go up, corporations costs go up, but the costs to middle class families will go down,” Warren asserted.

Most likely doesn't do it, nor does the refusal to mention the word tax. I believe ultimately a M4A program would mean reduced costs but that won't happen instantly. In order to implement a $32 trillion National Healthcare Program, taxes will go up. Across the board. Even Bernie Sanders is now willing to admit that basic truth.

So for me, Senator Warren is still tap-dancing around the issue.

[Gore1FL]

52. Like the coal jobs lost to solar and wind?

I like progress. I am not afraid of moving to jobs that better fit with the times than staying entrenched in procedures of the past.

It's a silly argument to make, especially on a progressive site.

[George II]

57. The coal jobs and jobs in other industries mentioned her migrated to other jobs....

....over several decades, not four years.

[Gore1FL]

60. Fortunately, new ones are on a fast time schedule too.

If the system is created that quickly, so will the employment needs. The time variable is on both sides of the equation.

[George II]

63. Except that the current employees are spread over all 50 states, PR, Guam, and other territories....

CMS offices aren't nearly as widespread, so there will be massive relocation required.

[Gore1FL]

74. Maybe. Maybe they'll go to the same offices and do the same basic jobs.

My soothsaying license expired.

If the wheelwright needs to move closer to his new job at the tire factory, I apologize for the inconvenience, but I'd rather buy gas than hay.

In 2008 we ran on "Yes We Can." The "No We Can't" vibe doesn't work so well for me.

Does there need to be as smooth a transition as possible? Yes, absolutely. But we need to make the transition. Additionally, why would this transition be worse than any corporate merger, restructuring, downsizing or relocation of employees?

[Eliot Rosewater]

54. My proposal would employ all rank and file workers in the related fields in the new govt

system so hopefully not that many lost jobs.

HOWEVER at this time I fear that M4A which we NEED may be a losing issue ONLY because of the fear people have.

REMOVE THE FASCIST first...then do this.

[Downtown Hound]

61. When factory workers lost their job the response was pretty much, "Get bent."

So uh, am I supposed to really all of a sudden be concerned about a bunch of insurance jobs being lost that were only there in the first place to profit off the misery of others?

[George II]

67. People seem to think it's no big deal to pick up and move hundreds/thousands of miles....

....and get a job in an entirely new industry or occupation.

[Downtown Hound]

73. Never said it wasn't a big deal

I'm just not willing to say that it's worth thousands of people dying and being driven into bankruptcy every year over health costs and lack of affordable care so some people can have a job. If we sacrificed millions of workers to improve a company's bottom line, I'm willing to do the same so people can have health care.

[Gore1FL]

75. At least they will have healthcare while they do it... nt

[Kurt V.]

64. K&R as our history shows, with any major change of course, from the new deal to

the great society, some ppl , in this case 2 million workers, there will be some fallout for the greater good.

[Hortensis]

69. Fwiw, health INSURANCE is already mostly obsolete.

Insurance for niche markets will survive, but people in general need health maintenance for their lifetimes. Insurance is coverage for unforeseeable problems that would be too expensive to save for, like house fires and first heart attacks (which obligingly used to carry a lot of older insureds off instead of leading to another 30 years of stents, etc.).

Thus companies are increasingly morphing from providing insurance to providing mostly computerized health "paperwork" administration, and expenses are far lower for that.

As for job losses, of course there have already been millions due to computerization and these changes and will be more. In future, when most everyone's charged the same rate, people skilled in pricing applicants won't be needed. When coverage can't be denied, people skilled in rooting out reasons and supplying excuses aren't needed.

[aikoaiko]

78. We do have a nursing shortage.

A little retraining and education.

"According to The American Nurses Association (ANA) (2018), there will be more registered nurse jobs available through 2022 than any other profession in the United States. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018) projects 1.1 million additional nurses are needed to avoid a further shortage. Employment opportunities for nurses are projected to grow at a faster rate (15%) than all other occupations from 2016 through 2026 (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018)."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK493175/

[George II]

82. So, someone who does data entry and clerical work at an insurance company can become a nurse?

[aikoaiko]

84. they could.

[emmaverybo]

102. Depending on their age, availability of nursing programs and spaces in them, ability to repay

loans to attend independent colleges with nursing programs...very difficult field by the way. Try going out tomorrow and just “becoming a nurse.” Good luck.

[aikoaiko]

104. Its rough I agree, but better than system with millions uninsured and dying too early

and millions more going bankrupt and losing everything because of medical bills.

[emmaverybo]

134. M4All is simply not the only option to provide healthcare for all. Do you realize millions

of state and fed workers and other types of union members have terrific private health insurance
at affordable rates? In many cases, employer picks up most of the premium. Vested, retired, these same folks may pay zero for a lifetime of high quality Med care.

People like Obamacare. Its costs can be brought down and a public option added. Medicaid, Medicare are good if not cut. Still leaves some millions without insurance, but won’t cost 32 trillion to cover them, a tax hike, lost jobs, and take five to ten years at the least, if ever to implement such changes.

Why reinvent the wheel?

Why insist on one way or the highway? Why push an unpopular program which may be an election killer when we have other options?

[forthemiddle]

157. Most of the people that now have those wonderful plans

Also happen to be a very valuable, reliable part of our parties voting bloc.
Do we really want to alienate upper middle class Americans, that really like the insurance coverage they have today?

[Thekaspervote]

79. Even if one over looks the job losses. The CBO study says mfa...32 trillion over 10 years

It’s not a winning strategy in the GE, and why she isn’t talking about the cost and tax increases

[blm]

108. And that's 2 trillion less than what we're paying now.

And why so many don’t want to speak about THAT as a cost saving.

[Gothmog]

86. that is more jobs than the *entire* United States economy will create this year.

Link to tweet

[OAITW r.2.0]

88. There is going to be hugh structural changes for whatever plan eventually gets adopted.

My girlfriends daughter is a physician's assistant (PA). She is now working, from home, for 2 different HCP that do tele-medicine....initial, lower cost, internet interface to people who can get pre-screened and qualified w/o using hospital resources. Seems like a smart evolution in how we approach healthcare.

[blm]

100. ✔️

[highplainsdem]

93. That'll go over well with voters.

[Joe941]

94. You have to break some eggs to make omelet

[Demsrule86]

105. There will be no omelet because we will lose the 2020 election if we run on MFA.

Reality is, MFA will cost us the election.

[Joe941]

109. Wrong. A wet paper bad could beat tRump.

[emmaverybo]

136. Polls do not support this and there will be mass cheating,

[Cicada]

98. If we cure cancer many oncologists will lose their jobs

Job losses are a feature, not a bug. Those who lose their jobs can do other work.

[mcar]

101. I worked in the HC industry for many years

in hospital administration. I saw, experienced, and truly believe, we need a universal, single payer system in this country.

But here's the rub. Job losses, taxes raised.

I think all the candidates, quite frankly, especially those who are pushing M4A right now, need to do a better job of explaining the entire system and process - how taxes would go up, but premiums would come down. How to manage those insurance industry job losses. How to increase the rolls of primary care providers.

That's why I like Kamala Harris's 10 year out plan. People called it a flip flop or something, but she listened to people's concerns. It's why I like Biden's plan to shore up the ACA, add a public option, and gradually move to a universal plan.

We cannot just blow up the system and start from scratch. I wish we could, but we can't.

[Farmer-Rick]

119. I would more than gladly turnover the $100,000 that I paid in medical bills

To the tax man if it meant I didn't have to deal with another idiotic, rude, snooty insurance rep who can't give me the same answer twice of why they won't pay the hospital. I would more than double that to the tax man if I could find one healthcare rep who can code the forms properly. Paying my taxes is much more preferable and easier to understand then dealing with these arrogant insurance companies and their rediculus hoops patients have to jump through.

If I have to listen to one more idiot doctor who doesn't know anything about his billing or who thinks praying is the answer to my bills, I think I will strangle them.

Our healthcare system is broken and lying on the floor withering and we are wondering if our taxes might go up or if the same idiots who are making our healthcare system a living helll may lose their shitty jobs. You know maybe some of those idiots should lose their jobs because they are so absolutely bad at them.

[blm]

131. 👏👏👏

[Cha]

152. Thank you for your post, mcar..

It makes good sense!

[Gothmog]

169. From Harry Reid

Link to tweet

[tirebiter]

122. Then there's the real estate

Who will own the hospitals? How will they be managed and staffed? Dignity Health and the Catholic Church May have an opinion on this for starters. And speaking of them there’s choice issues that have yet to be resolved.

[Farmer-Rick]

137. Oh that's a minor complication. Why does the real estate have to change hands?

When we went from not for profit to profit making hospitals, making huge profit off of the suffering and dying, they changed hands into regional monopolies with out any problems.

Why are changes that make healthcare reasonable and not predatory a problem but as long as some filthy rich snowflake is making money no one has a problem with real estate changing hands.

The system is broken. People are going out of business to pay medical bills. The farmer down the road sold his 35 acre farm and all he got for it was one heart by-pass surgery. Is this how we want this once great nation to run? When one surgery is valued more that 35 acres of productive farm land that use to feed hundreds.

The system is broken and if we don't fix it it will continue to break all the rest of us.

[Indykatie]

135. Bernie Was Never Held to Account for the Jobs, Cost and Tax Implications of His Healthcare Plans.

Without these details Medicare 4 All and other calls for universal coverage were just campaign rallying cries for a desired end. People have to be told what it will cost and how we're going to pay for services so they don't feel tricked when they find out much later. You can't hide the trade offs. Like it or not Obamacare was a good approach that should have been built on and improved rather than attacking it because it wasn't perfect. Warren has saddled herself with Bernie's healthcare plan so she will own defending the costs and job losses as a top tier candidates. The Media will probably give Bernie a pass.....again.

[highplainsdem]

142. This is at least as bad for Warren & MFA as a sound bite admitting taxes will have to go up.

And given how obsessive Warren seemed to be about avoiding creating such a sound bite -- until it was painfully obvious in the last debate that she was hurting herself dodging the tax question -- I'm amazed she not only admitted to the job losses that would result from MFA but didn't really say anything about how to manage the transition, in response to that question, even though she was specifically asked what "a just transition, a fair transition" would look like.

[Lexblues]

146. Will this cause her to lose Minnesota in the GE?

United Healthcare is based in Minnesota. If MFA came to be, then the company would be forced to lay off thousands of Minnesotans. Minnesota is not a slam dunk at all anymore. Loss of jobs, no matter the industry, is not a good talking point for someone trying to win votes.

[Eyeball_Kid]

151. You could address this as a job loss, or...

you could credit the designers of universal health coverage for making a much more efficient delivery system. The job losses might be in the HEALTH INSURANCE INDUSTRY, perhaps?

Isn't that what anyone would expect who considers actions and consequences?

When capitalism is inefficient, what shall we do? Oh, and please. Capitalism does have its strengths. And let's remember: the private sector makes a ton of money off the Medicare system.

A system that approximates Medicare should be more efficient. A close approximation of a socialistic system for delivery of health care services just may be more efficient. Is there anything wrong with facing that possibility?

Warren also adds that the job losses would be part of the "cost plan." If you know Warren by her previous actions and words, you could probably guess that she wants the job losses to be balanced by increases in other areas of the economy, and that those who lost jobs would have preferences in some areas of the economy. Just a guess.

[duforsure]

153. With millions more people insured and seeking health care

There will be jobs created to support the growth . You can't increase Medicare rolls that much without expansion of people working to serve them. Can these fewer numbers of people losing there jobs be given the chance to work for the new system? Right now people have lost their jobs in the health care system from Medicare, Medicaid cutbacks from republicans and trumps policies, so we're losing jobs already. Rural area's especially hurt as cuts reduce their numbers needed to stay in business. We've already seen some medical outlets close down because of this. Add trump and republicans destroying Social Security and watch as more are hurt economically so they can't afford health care, which is on trump and the GOP agenda if they are re-elected. trump and the gop are already killing affordable health care and jobs , so this isn't as if job loss is a main issue. When the average consumer realizes they no longer have to carry a private insurance plan, their saving not having to pay an extra $400-$1000 a month , and private insurance subsidizing Medicare stops it'll also reduce its costs, which helps that system work more efficient, lowering costs. MFA is a win /win, unless you're a insurance company that's been gouging Americans for along , long time. I know some people paying extremely high premiums above $1000 a month that are being drained economically , and could face bankruptcy with just small increases now in their premiums, and more health issues.

[TidalWave46]

155. A single payer system would be a jobs creator.

Of course millions of jobs would be lost. In the end, I believe more will be gained. The biggest elimination would be in upper management, actuaries, and sales. Most all other areas would see an increase in jobs, productivity, and quality of life. In the end, I also don’t give a shit. My centrist ass will only accept a plan that at least moves us toward the direction of single payer. Most of our candidates do just that.

[MrsCoffee]

158. Unrec.

[Gothmog]

159. Statement from Biden campaign

Link to tweet

?s=20

[UniteFightBack]

163. Regardless, this will not play well...AT ALL. What don't people get about that???? nt

[Amimnoch]

165. Is that a net or total number?

And is it assuming that the bill that passes will actually eliminate all private insurances?

If it’s modeled off of the existing medicare/medicaid system, There will certainly be a lot of downsizing in the insurance industry, but there will still be a large remaining niche for the medicare supplemental programs, like the one my mother uses for her medicare using Humana, or my grandmother with United Healthcare.

I also imagine the staffing of the medicare program itself will have to increase at the national, state, and local levels absorbing at least a portion of the lost jobs.

I also still think this entire issue is a fluff issue, since this is something that will need a congress to pass, and really wish our pool of candidates would focus on Trump and how they will undo his damage.

[Gothmog]

166. Elizabeth Warren's latest health plan is causing concerns for some centrist, moderate and rural Demo

I and other true Democrats have been working hard to turn Texas blue. We hope to pick up six congressional seats in addition to the two seats we flipped in 2018. We have a chance to defeat Cornyn in the Senate. The Democrats picked up 12 seats in the Texas House and need 9 more to take control of the Texas House prior to the next redistricting session. If Biden is the nominee, Texas will be a battleground state. If Warren or sanders is the nominee. Texas will not be a battle ground state and we can forget about keeping the two seats that we flipped in 2018

Speaker Pelosi is worried about losing control of the House with a weak top of the ballot ticket with a program that will kill down ballot candidates
.

Link to tweet

The most-vulnerable Democrat in Colorado’s state House, Bri Buentello, is dreading door-knocking in her rural district now that Elizabeth Warren dropped her massive “Medicare for All” plan into the presidential arena.
“This is going to cause down-ballot damage in swing districts and states if she’s the nominee,” Buentello says, describing how her Pueblo-area constituents — who voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump in 2016 — were already echoing criticisms about a giant, one-size-fits-all big government run plan that cancels private health insurance and raises taxes.
Story Continued Below

The fear of blowback is indicative of the broad and largely negative response to Warren’s proposal from centrist, moderate and rural Democrats — many of whom, like Buentello, back Joe Biden in the primary. And it exposes the fault line between those who fret about winning voters in the center and the activist progressive base propelling Warren to the front of the Democratic pack.

The long-awaited plan to raise the $20.5 trillion she says is needed to pay for single-payer health care in America is Warren’s attempt to answer critics after weeks of questions from rival candidates about the cost of her proposal and the prospect of higher taxes. Warren promised, as she has in the past, that "not one penny in middle-class tax increases” is necessary to finance the effort.

[Gothmog]

170. Medicare for All's JOBS problem

Link to tweet

Initial research from University of Massachusetts economists who have consulted with multiple 2020 campaigns has estimated that 1.8 million health care jobs nationwide would no longer be needed if Medicare for All became law, upending health insurance companies and thousands of middle class workers whose jobs largely deal with them, including insurance brokers, medical billing workers and other administrative employees. One widely cited study published in the New England Journal of Medicine estimated that administration accounted for nearly a third of the U.S.’ health care expenses.

Even if a bigger government expansion into health care left doctors, nurses, and other medical professionals’ jobs intact, it would still cause a restructuring of a sprawling system that employs millions of middle-class Americans.

University of Massachusetts researchers who analyzed the 2017 version of Sanders’ Medicare for All bill estimated that nationwide more than 800,000 people who work for private health insurance companies and a further 1 million who handle administrative work for health care providers would see their jobs evaporate.

The workers generally earn middle-class wages, according to the November 2018 study forecasting the economic ramifications of Sanders’ plan. The median annual income of a worker employed in the health insurance industry is nearly $55,000; for office and administrative jobs at health care service sites, it’s about $35,000, researchers said.

“The savings don’t come out of the sky,” said Pollin. “The main way we save money is through administrative simplicity. That means layoffs. There’s just no way around it.”

[Gothmog]

171. Nancy Pelosi is "not for doing away with Obamacare" and prefers to give people choices.

Link to tweet

[TCJ70]

172. Why not start your own thread about it...

...rather than bumping multiple old threads with the same post?