Further proof that the liberal establishment and the far-right are different sides of the same coin serving plutocracy

globinfo freexchange

As Jacobin reported recently, the US could insure 30 million more Americans and virtually eliminate out-of-pocket health care expenses while saving $300 billion in the process, according to a new report about Medicare for All released by the libertarian Mercatus Center.

In the report, Charles Blahous attempts to roughly score Bernie Sanders’s most recent Medicare-for-All bill and reaches the somewhat surprising (for Mercatus) conclusion that, if the bill were enacted, the new costs it creates would be more than offset by the new savings it generates through administrative efficiencies and reductions in unit prices.

Federal health expenditures refer to health spending from the federal government in particular. Since the federal government takes on nearly all health spending under Medicare for All, federal health expenditures will necessarily go up a lot, $32.6 trillion over the ten-year period according to Blahous.

But this is more of an accounting thing than anything else: rather than paying premiums, deductibles, and co-pays for health care, people will instead pay a tax that is, on average, a bit less than they currently pay into the health care system and, for those on lower incomes, a lot less.

Immediately, the vast majority of the establishment spectrum from the liberal to the ultra-conservative media, isolated the "$32.6 trillion over the ten-year period" cost and used Τwitter and related headlines to do the propaganda. Very few bothered to give the whole picture.

David Doel of The Rational National gave an example of these reactions:

Bloomberg: "Medicare for all" bill estimated at $32.6 trillion over 10 years, study says.

CBS News: "Medicare for all" plan touted by Bernie Sanders would cost $32.6 trillion, study finds.

National Review: A new study has found that 'Medicare For All' would cost a whopping $32.6 trillion over ten years.

FOX & friends: The real cost of Democratic socialism? New study finds giving Medicare for all would cost the country $32.6 trillion over 10 years.

ABC News: Sen. Bernie Sanders' "Medicare for all" plan would increase government health care spending by $32.6 trillion over 10 years, according to a study.

TIME: 'Medicare for all' could cost $32.6 trillion, George Mason study says.

Yahoo Finance: 'Medicare for All' bill estimated at $32.6 trillion, says study.

The New York Times: Study: 'Medicare for All' projected to cost $32.6 trillion.

Why the vast majority of the media across the political spectrum rushed to attack the "Medicare for All" plan of Bernie Sanders? Basically for two reasons:

First, because the private insurance industry will suffer heavy losses, meaning billions in profits.

Second, because the super-rich who own the corporate media will have to see their taxes rise in order to contribute to a publicly managed healthcare system. They don't like such things. They are addicted to continuous tax reliefs since the Reagan era, which, by the way, brought much more poverty, enormous inequality and a deficit beyond any comparison.

Notice that the politicians and the pundits both from the liberal and the ultra-conservative side are frequently using exactly the same pseudo-arguments of the type 'who is going to pay?' for such things.

In an awful theatrical performance, of course, the liberal establishment pretends that it fights against Trump on fabricated, or very selective, or minimum importance issues. Yet, it remains silent or even supports actions like further tax-reliefs for the super-rich, or, more military action abroad dictated by the deep state and the war lobby.

So, here is another evidence that the liberal establishment and the far-right are different sides of the same coin that serves plutocracy.