Dean Baker: Medicare for All 64-Year-Olds
- Total Posts: 10,257
Not thrilled about incrementalism, but this argument is worth considering
Doing this one year reduction in the Medicare age would be a test of how easily a reduction in the age of eligibility can be done. It should open the door to further reductions in future years. It is also likely to be popular politically. People in their late 50s and early 60s will surely appreciate the fact that they are one year closer to qualifying for Medicare. That is especially likely to the case with people who do not have good insurance through their employer and/or have serious health conditions.
The proposal for a one year reduction in the age of eligibility should also help to clarify where things stand within the Democratic caucus. Many members have argued against having the party endorse M4A.
Some of this opposition undoubtedly reflects realistic political concerns that a quick switchover from the current system to M4A will not be popular in many districts. Many people are satisfied with the insurance they have now and will be reluctant to support what they will view as a big leap into the unknown. Perhaps these people can be convinced over time that a universal Medicare-type system will be at least as good for them, but they are not there now.
However, some of the pushback stems from the fact that many Democrats have long depended on campaign contributions from the health care industry. While the party has not gotten as much money as the Republicans, many members do get substantial contributions, which they are not prepared to abandon.
Jesus: Hey, Dad? God: Yes, Son? Jesus: Western civilization followed me home. Can I keep it? God: Certainly not! And put it down this minute--you don't know where it's been! Tom Robbins in Another Roadside Attraction
April 18, 2019 at 10:37 AM #55676djean111Participant
- Total Posts: 6,571
And in only 64 years, we will cover everybody!!!!!!! Unless and until a Republican and/or Vichy Dem president/Congress puts an end to that.
No, that’s not incrementalism, that’s the insurance industry sighing with relief.
America is not a country, it's just a business. (Brad Pitt, Killing Them Softly)
Everything I post is just my opinion, and, honestly, I would love to be wrong.
April 18, 2019 at 11:19 AM #55684algernonParticipant
- Total Posts: 539
There’re a lot of universal health care insurance systems out there. They’re all different and they’re forever evolving. I can’t think of any such system being born, like some kind of Easter duck, from incrementalism. Because they’re universal systems and cover everybody.
April 18, 2019 at 1:10 PM #55713PunxsutawneyModerator
- Total Posts: 2,190
Do one year a year decrease and a birth to five years with a one year increase on the bottom and meet in the middle. At some point it would be practical to convert the remainder.
Yeah, incrementalism, I know.
In America, “Liberty” means “Free to Die in Service of Capital” - Amfortas the hippie.
Most of today’s elites have the moral and social reasoning capacities of spoiled toddlers.
“People of privilege will always risk their complete destruction rather than surrender any material part of their advantage...but the privileged also feel that their privileges, however egregious they may seem to others, are a solemn, basic, God-right. The sensitivity of the poor to injustice is a trivial thing c
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.