the LA Times reported that we spend already 200 billion on healthcare that would be routed through Healthy California.
-
-
-
so it is really like 1 extra California budget of new tax+spending
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
would we be able to vector other funding besides taxes (existing Insurance spend?) to pay for this?
-
Well, a huge part of it is what people already spend on private insurance.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
400 bio $ looks like it's about 15.5% of California GDP, which is slightly under the 17.8% share of healthcare expenditure in US GDP.
-
That 15.5% is probably still too high compared with other countries at comparable income level, but the hypothetical comparison shud be vs.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Still imagining as a business you would want to save costs over trad. group plans so you would contribute here.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Those... are not great selling points
-
They get better when you (a) capture existing private expenditures as taxes and (b) use the resulting market power to drive down prices
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Okay, but would the tax bill to cover the cost be substantially less that what people and corporations are paying to private insurers now?
-
I meant to emphasize *and*. Judging from this article, the analysis only counts corporate contributions when calculating private offsets
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.