{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/1/2018 1:09:18 AM
1
The numbers are wrong and he also doesn't provide how he got them.
https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NationalHealthAccountsHistorical.html
[i]U.S. health care spending grew 4.3 percent in 2016, [b]reaching $3.3 trillion[/b] or $10,348 per person.[/i]
I'm not sure about the 2.2 trillion for the cost of a universal system.
Using Colorado's estimate ($36 billion a year) it would cost 2.3 trillion. But, if we use the estimate that California figured it would cost for their universal system ($400 billion a year) it would cost 3.3 trillion.
So, I'd say the $2.2 trillion estimate is low.
And as I showed above, the government already spends more than $1.3 trillion a year that your link estimated.
English
-
[quote]The numbers are wrong and he also doesn't provide how he got them. https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NationalHealthAccountsHistorical.html [i]U.S. health care spending grew 4.3 percent in 2016, [b]reaching $3.3 trillion[/b] or $10,348 per person.[/i] I'm not sure about the 2.2 trillion for the cost of a universal system. Using Colorado's estimate ($36 billion a year) it would cost 2.3 trillion. But, if we use the estimate that California figured it would cost for their universal system ($400 billion a year) it would cost 3.3 trillion. So, I'd say the $2.2 trillion estimate is low. And as I showed above, the government already spends more than $1.3 trillion a year that your link estimated.[/quote] Did you read the article? The trillion dollar amounts are how much the U.S. spends on healthcare total, private and government. After switching to UHC we we would need to find an additional $500 billion after we factor in how much is saved by not spending on private healthcare, medicaid, and Medicare.
-
I just showed you that the numbers he used are wrong and you still argue. http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-first-fiscal-analysis-of-single-payer-1495475434-htmlstory.html Here is the link showing California's cost. https://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/08/coloradocare-amendment-69-election-results/ Here's a link showing Colorado's cost. Notice how it says it would "dwarf the state budget"? Do you still want to argue with numbers I have literally shown to be wrong?
-
This is why it was pointless to provide you with a number. You don’t believe anything anyone else says. I even gave you a number and you ignored it.
-
I provided links proving it to be wrong. I know it must be hard for you to deduce. The number you gave me was pointless to the debate. I see you still can't answer my question even though you said it was a simple Google search away....
-
[quote]I just showed you that the numbers he used are wrong and you still argue. http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-first-fiscal-analysis-of-single-payer-1495475434-htmlstory.html Here is the link showing California's cost. https://www.denverpost.com/2016/11/08/coloradocare-amendment-69-election-results/ Here's a link showing Colorado's cost. Notice how it says it would "dwarf the state budget"? Do you still want to argue with numbers I have literally shown to be wrong?[/quote] Again you are totally ignoring how much will be saved by implementing UHC. the cost to California after factoring in how much will be saved, so the total amount of new money spent, will be between $50 and 100 billion.
-
Go back and reread that. You got it wrong
-
This entire thread proves you don’t even care about facts. You just like to argue. The number I gave was spot on and this guy is spot on. You are the incorrect one here and everywhere else you post.
-
[quote]This entire thread proves you don’t even care about facts. You just like to argue. The number I gave was spot on and this guy is spot on.[/quote] I never said your number was wrong (just pointless to the convo) and I provided links to show that the other guys numbers were wrong. [quote] You are the incorrect one here and everywhere else you post.[/quote] You sound like an emotional teenager
-
[quote]This entire thread proves you don’t even care about facts. You just like to argue. The number I gave was spot on and this guy is spot on.[/quote] I never said your number was wrong (just pointless to the convo) and I provided links to show that the other guys numbers were wrong. [quote] You are the incorrect one here and everywhere else you post.[/quote] You sound like an emotional teenager
-
I’m pretty sure emotional teenagers say things like: Elon musks flame thrower is lame because the flame isn’t big enough.
-
Idk about emotional teenagers, but that is something an immature person would say. [spoiler]and I know it's me that said it. ;-))[/spoiler] But it still doesn't remove from the fact that I'm right ;-)
