Why not Medicare for all?

On June 29, 2011, in Opinion, by admin

A federal appeals court in Cincinnati has upheld President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul.

The three-judge panel delivered a long opinion Wednesday with disagreement on some issues. But it affirmed a Michigan federal judge’s earlier ruling that Congress can require Americans to have minimum insurance coverage.

The deeper and more important question here is why do we want a healthcare system that provides more to the healthcare insurance industry than to our citizens?
Why not simply say ‘Medicare for all’?

If the healthcare insurance industry is a massively profitable industry, then it means that it would not be a drag on the tax payers to have Medicare for all. The healthcare insurance industry drives the cost of health up because it needs to be profitable.
The healthcare costs are so high because the healthcare insurance companies need to make massive profits, taking a big cut of the money spent on healthcare by citizens and our government.
healthcare insurance would still exist as a business, just like it exists in all civilized countries that have universal healthcare (Canada, western Europe, Australia, …)
In those countries there is still a need for premium healthcare coverage, but at least basic needs are addressed by the government.
So simple… can you say : ‘Medicare for all’ ?

Post Tagged with:  

4 Responses to “Why not Medicare for all?”

  1. Saying “Medicare for All” is okay as long as we all know what it really means, which is “Improved Medicare for All via single-payer health care”.

    For promotional items, such as the bumper stickers that are now available …
    … , there are 3 basic options: Medicare for All, Improved Medicare for All, and Medicare for All – Single-Payer for the USA. Although I still think Medicare for All is “okay”, my promotional items purchases will probably be “Improved Medicare for All” from now on.

    Many Americans across the country have been helping develop the website “Medicare for All” ….
    Therefore, at the top of the website it says “Medicare for All”.

    However … as much as possible … we need to say and write “Improved Medicare for All”, which are the more accurate set of words stated in four places on the homepage at the Medicare for All website.

    Why? —- See the side-by-side comparison between Medicare and Improved Medicare for All.

    We can and will be the best among all free-market countries.We can and will have one plan and one payer. See a side-by-side comparison chart with notes about how we will be the best.
    Efficiency at its finest with no major medical bills.
    See the testimonials of Americans living and working in other free-market countries
    Move to simplicity: eliminate the unnecessary bureaucracy and get the benefits.
    See for yourself:
    http://mforall.org/p/997 – comparison to 6 countries

    Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate

    • admin says:

      Thanks for the post… Your web site contains a lot of very useful information, really enjoyed reading it.
      This is a subject that concerns me a lot and I don’t understand why such a simple and fair concept can be controversial here in the US, when it can be so easily proven that it would lower costs AND improve the life of our citizens.

      Great work !!!!

      • You’re most welcome. My work is more the work of others than mine. I’ve received help from many Americans since the first quarter of 2007 (and we can always use help from even more due to turnover and currently available time of individual team members). The preparations have been gradual and solid for one of the largest grassroots activities the United States has experienced to achieve one of the most positive goals one could imagine: the world’s best health-care-for-all system.

        On behalf of all of us, thanks for the compliment that the website is useful. We are very happy to provide it. Within its usefulness is the Support Monitor: careful monitoring and reporting of the support from the people and the support from the politicians in the U.S. Congress. The latter is very low, but it will ramp up to well over 50% in both the U.S. House and U.S. Senate via the participation of over 10 million Americans in the education and communications campaign titled Million Letters for Health Care.

        Regarding your concern about “why such a simple and fair concept can be controversial here in the US, …”
        — We need to realize the impact of the opposition and the importance of informing Americans of the facts:
        — The critical need is for Americans to know what the subject is and know the benefits. We could complain about how horrible the current complex system is for paying for health care. Alternatively, our choice is to focus on what we want, not on what we don’t want. We can be positive to get the desired positive results.

        To participate
        To help notify others … via this new web page as of June

        Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate


      I wrote that promotional items would have three choices for words on the logo. Since then I requested feedback from 22 activists across 12 states. As a result of that feedback:
      —- Only “Medicare for All” is on the logo of the promotional items for sake of simplicity and some other factors.
      —- As emphasized in the July 1 comments, it is important to emphasize, such as in articles, that we want improved Medicare for All … now with the “improved” in lower case, but still important.

      Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate …. Bob Haiducek

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.