The only thing worse than Washington being foolishly swept up in unnecessary deficit hysteria when our political leaders should be focused on jobs, is that all these so called “deficit hawks” entirely ignore the actual best solutions to shrink our long term deficit. That is why it is encouraging to see more regular exposure of the fact that adopting Medicare for All is the best way to address our long term deficit concerns. From an editorial in the Kansas City Star originally in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:
That being the case – and nobody argues that it isn’t – there are two broad ways for the government to address its spiraling health care costs. One, shift more of those costs to recipients, by trimming benefits and/or extending eligibility ages and indexing eligibility to personal income. This is politically unpalatable, particularly to most Democrats, President Barack Obama being a conspicuous exception.
The second way for government to address its health costs is not to shift them, but to reduce them. This is what a single-payer health care system would do, largely by taking the for-profit players (insurance companies for the most part) out of the loop.
As a country we spend way more on health care than any other nation. If the United States adopted a working health care system like the rest of the first world we won’t have any issues with our long term deficit.
The choice is pretty simply: we can deal with increase public health care cost by either dramatically cutting Medicare or greatly expanding it out. Frighteningly, President Obama has offered to raise the Medicare retirement age as part of grand bargain. He is leading the entire Democratic party to join with GOP in choosing the cut Medicare route.