I’m continually amazed by the inability of “progressive” health care reformers to learn from experience. The latest example of this phenomenon can be found at the Health Affairs Blog:
Medicare-for-All is the most practical reform option. It would greatly reduce non-benefit outlays …
What BS! Even if we accept (for the sake of argument) the myth of Medicare’s lower admin costs, the program loses all those alleged savings by paying out stupendous sums in fraudulent claims. Per the WSJ:
Medicare may have paid $2.8 billion in improper or fake claims for medical equipment in 2006. That’s an error rate of 31.5%, in a single corner of this colossal entitlement.
And yet Merton Bernstein and Theodore Marmor still have the crust to make the following claim in their Health Affairs post:
We must move to a system that reduces per capita costs and pays for expanding coverage from those savings. That’s where Medicare for All shines. Much of its savings derive from simplifying medical care insurance …
When I read this passage I was momentarily deprived of speech. The current “Medicare-for-Some” program is so “simple” that its rules and regulations fill 120,000 pages of undecipherable bureaucratic gibberish.
Bernstein, Marmor, and the other ”progressives” who continue to push Medicare-for-All are so blinded by their ideology that they are unable to absorb and process objective data.
It isn’t too much to say that they have a learning disability.