and make plenty of money on it. The same will happen when we have medicare for all.

They do that now too so they

...platform will be what matters.

So they don't care about the middle class or the poor in the long run.

Care to revise and extend?

Just curious if there's another source.

Here it is: BY THE INTERCEPT

who want MFA.

It provides basic in-patient services under Part A
It provides basic outpatient services under Part B which has to be paid for by the insured at about $102-114 per month.

Naturally, it doesn't cover all and so people have to get supplemental health coverage from guess who? Insurance Companies. This is not mandatory but most people pay for it to lower their costs.

It still works out cheaper for people but one cannot get rid of health insurance companies with MFA.

and won because the people want it. It makes them and her look bad when she said publicly that she is open to “Medicare for All” and “It’s All on the Table” while privately telling the insurance executives not to worry about the Democrats pushing “Medicare for All” .

Yeah I'm going to think about it and I'm going to pay close attention until Nancy herself says it a lie and Wendell Primus, her health care policy adviser never did any such thing. When names are named and power point presentations are leaked the odds of that being made up rat fuckery is damn near none.
If she's saying privately to the executives not to worry about Dems pushing for MFA after saying publicly she was open to it and it was on the table it makes her look bad, and the Dems who ran on MFA. Not to mention the voters who want it and were under the impression that leadership and the Dems that they voted for were going to fight for it. A large majority of Americans, 70 percent, now support Medicare-for-all.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5724245-Health-Powerpoint-Final.html#document/p1

... a less biased report.

Bottom line this needs context because we don't know if this was presented as pro con or against for

Without that context I'll wait

a month for me, just got my notice last month.

it won't be brought up until that time. The House is going to have other things to deal with very shortly, e.g., the Mueller Report and Congressional investigations into all the Trump atrocities as well as possibly, impeachment. OTOH, this article is from the Intercept, I've been under the impression the Intercept is considered to be slightly lower than whale doo-doo by DU'ers.

There's no point in the House spending valuable time passing progressive proposals that will just die a swift death as soon as they hit the Senate.

It's not time yet.
But, it will be in a few years from now.

supported and sustained with the current wall street model. The Single Payer Medicare model is the only way forward and it will happen sooner or later.

it ain't so private and somebody probably has a purpose for making it public. Likely not to my benefit. In other words, I remain skeptical.

don't worry, we don't really mean what we told the voters, skeptical is the last thing I feel.

I'd tell them not to worry too

Get real.

not so much basic medicare. Personally, Dems should start with eliminating Medicare Advantage plans and have private insurance plans be medi-gap/supplement only.

Medicare Advantage plans seem to be more cost-effective to me.

per subscriber. It incentivizes them to enroll healthier people and cut more costly enrollees so they make more money.

Here's a link to this week's New Yorker magazine story about it and the whistleblower who exposed it: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/02/04/the-personal-toll-of-whistle-blowing

The difference between medicare advantage and medicare supplement is this:

In medicare advantage plans, the insurer is the first party payer. Then they bill medicare for reimbursement.

In medicare supplements/medi-gap plans, medicare is the first party payer and the insurer pays the balance.

A good example is co-pays. Under medicare advantage, you have a co-pay that you pay regardless - even if medicare reimbursement covers the entire cost of dr visit, procedure etc. Under medicare supplement, if medicare pays the entire cost, you have no co-pay even if the insurer lists one.

Recently switched from advantage to supplement and the supplement is cheaper and better.

paying another $150 to $200/month for what amounts to supplemental and drug coverage.

Hugely profitable for the provisioners.

thanks for posting the link to it, CentralMass. Oh, and greetings from Greenfield!

Seems genuine. Don't think it's Republican divisive ratf*cking.

Of course, message was tailored for insurance company audience and we should see what Pelosi says.

But I am concerned.

Or more hyperbole?

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/22/the-real-reason-medical-care-costs-so-much-more-in-the-us.html

“Cost” -Cost to who dufus? It's ultimately much less expensive overall than the current system. The fact that taxes will increase will be more than offset by the savings to business, individuals, and health care providers.

“Creates winners and losers”- The current system doesn't? The winners in single payer are virtually everyone who will be insured by it. The losers will be insurance companies.

“Stakeholders are against” - This assumes, or course, that the people being insured are not stakeholders, which they most definitely are.

“Monies are needed for other priorities” - Name a higher priority than giving everyone health care.

“Implementation challenges” - Phase it in, one year at a time. Keep lowering the age to participate. Easy.

Sid

in the fight against single payer?

Even if there was this double speak meeting, that went down exactly as Glenn Greenwald spins it, do you think we have a chance in hell of ever getting RepubliCONS to provide health care for all Americans?

This story comes off just like those Russian Troll stories back in 2016. They are trying to divide and conquer .....again.