Single-Payer Health Care Would Stimulate Economy

Jolie, BSN · Jan 14, 2009

This article strikes me as over-simplistic and overly-optimistic regarding the likelihood of mandated government health care coverage rescuing the nation from the current economic crisis.

The following statistics, meant to bolster the argument that this is a good idea for saving the economy concern me:

* Create 2,613,495 million new permanent good-paying jobs (slightly exceeding the number of jobs lost in 2008)

* Boost the economy with $317 billion in increased business and public revenues

* Add $100 billion in employee compensation

* Infuse public budgets with $44 billion in new tax revenues

Create 2,613,495 million new permanent good-paying jobs. If extending Medicare to all Americans will indeed create over 2 million new health care sector jobs, then we're in trouble, as we don't have workers with the education and credentials available to step into those jobs. It would take years (and possibly trillions of dollars) of job re-training to move currently unemployed workers into health care positions. In the meantime, if this statistic is accurate, we would have demand for health care far in excess of our ability to provide it, for lack of workers. FWIW, I question the accuracy of this number. While we have un- and underinsured Americans forgoing most medical care at this time, they are not shut out of the system altogether. Many still avail themselves of some services (ER, for example), making its seem unlikely that expanded insurance coverage would result in a rise in health care utilization so dramatic as to require over 2 million additional skilled workers.

Boost the economy with $317 billion in revenue. OK, that revenue will come from the federal coffers as payment for nationalized health care. That means it will have to come from taxes. Is anyone ready for new taxes?

Infuse public budgets with $44 billion in new tax revenues. Where do these tax revenues come from? Will health care services be taxed to generate this revenue? The previous statement estimates that the economy will be boosted by $317 billion in revenue (read federal payments for health care). But those expenditures are projected to result in only $44 billion in new tax revenues. That's a deficit of $237 billion that has to come from the taxpayers.

allnurses Guide · Jan 14, 2009

Of course the article is simplistic compared to the study report:

http://www.calnurses.org/research/pdfs/ihsp_sp_economic_study_2009.pdf

It is only 39 pages.

It will take me a while to understand and read the sources (links are included in the study report).

Koyaanisqatsi-RN · Jan 19, 2009

It would take years (and possibly trillions of dollars) of job re-training to move currently unemployed workers into health care positions.

I'm curious what your source is for this information. Can you provide it?

In the meantime, if this statistic is accurate, we would have demand for health care far in excess of our ability to provide it, for lack of workers. FWIW, I question the accuracy of this number.

This is a valid concern, but UHC would not be instituted overnight. There would be plenty of transitional time to address these concerns.

Boost the economy with $317 billion in revenue. OK, that revenue will come from the federal coffers as payment for nationalized health care. That means it will have to come from taxes. Is anyone ready for new taxes?

This is just my personal opinion, but yes I'm absolutely ready for a marginal increase in taxes if it means healthcare available for those who cannot afford it.

This marginal increase would also be offset by my no longer needing to pay a ridiculous monthly sum for private insurance, not to mention the tax relief in us no longer having to pay for those easily preventable ER visits you mentioned earlier.

I think you would agree that preventative care is cheaper than catastrophic recovery efforts, yes?

Infuse public budgets with $44 billion in new tax revenues. Where do these tax revenues come from? Will health care services be taxed to generate this revenue? The previous statement estimates that the economy will be boosted by $317 billion in revenue (read federal payments for health care). But those expenditures are projected to result in only $44 billion in new tax revenues. That's a deficit of $237 billion that has to come from the taxpayers.

Addressed above, but this number becomes easier to absorb when you compare it to how much money we currently waste on private coverage (which would no longer factor in under a single payer system)

allnurses Guide · Jan 21, 2009

urge congress to enact single-payer health care

there is an unhealthy tendency on the part of politicians and journalists to see discussions about economic recovery and health care reform as separate debates.

in fact, one of the most important steps on the road to economic recovery -- or, more precisely, toward a new, responsible and sustainable prosperity -- involves the fundamental reform of this country's broken health care system.

but it must be the right reform: the establishment of a national single-payer-style system accomplished by expanding the existing medicare system to cover all americans....

http://www.madison.com/tct/opinion/433735

allnurses Guide · Jan 30, 2009

[color=#333333]nurses to congress: expanding medicare could reverse job losses, and repair our broken healthcare system and safety net

[color=#333333]on a day in which congress prepared to vote on the obama administration's proposed $800 billion economic stimulus package, the nation's largest organization of registered nurses said expanding medicare to cover all americans would be one of the most effective economic recovery programs - and could virtually end the nation's healthcare crisis overnight....

[color=#333333]http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/printerfriendlynews.php?newsid=137044

Katie82, RN · Feb 1, 2009

Create 2,613,495 million new permanent good-paying jobs. If extending Medicare to all Americans will indeed create over 2 million new health care sector jobs, then we're in trouble, as we don't have workers with the education and credentials available to step into those jobs. .
Boost the economy with $317 billion in revenue.
Infuse public budgets with $44 billion in new tax revenues. quote]
My feeling is that many of these "new" jobs will involve administrative duties. Best guess is that the people who are performing these jobs in the private sector will simply cross over to the public sector, as the government will not be doing the day-to-day administration of this coverage, but rather continuing as a Policy and Procedure controller as they do now. There will be new positions created,however, because of the increase in population, so while all those ppeople are being trained, the system will be a mess. You are correct that the demand for educated, licensed providers will double and overwhelm an education system that seems incapable of keeping up with even the current demand. I'm not quite sure where this tax revenue is coming from - payroll taxes from the jobs that are created? Premiums (there will be premiums)? Hardly enough to produce $44b.
My only concern is the new social class this will create. The uninsured and underinsured will now be the "publicly insured". I work with the Medicare and Medicaid population now, and I can tell you that although the medical care they receive is not inferior, the customer service they receive is. I believe the government will allow those who wish to be private-pay to do so, so in an infrastructure that will not be equipped to handle the numbers, who do you think will receive the best care?