There are nuances & caveats but essentially most M4A estimates tell us that year 1 yields b/t a small decrease to a modest increase in national health expenditures Whether funded by “taxes” or “premiums” they will neither be a windfall nor an onerous burden on average in year 1https://twitter.com/ernietedeschi/status/1184316670665527296 …
Those estimates must make some big assumptions about M4A’s ability to force cost reductions, which makes sense if you buy the rhetoric about insurance/pharma profits But if healthcare costs are really being driven by hospitals and providers? That changes the equation, no?
-
-
Here’s a very good article laying out the assumptions underpinning different estimates:https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/10/upshot/medicare-for-all-bernie-sanders-cost-estimates.html …
-
If I’m reading that correctly it supports what I said. How much you believe M4A’s cost savings comes down to how much you believe pharma and insurance companies are the main drivers of our expensive system If doctors and hospitals don’t want to play along, the plan goes to pot
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.