that will always be the case, unless youre an ancap advocating for no government.

that article you link doesnt show how they get that 47.1% figure btw

I am advocating for the policies described in that book by Phelps and Parente, which would seriously reduce the amount of money we spend on healthcare. Which is why Parente could not become the most important policy person re health in the Trump Administration.

I listened to you, and im not convinced.

Ok.

The problem is trump never released a healthcare policy, which makes his direction unclear. Granted he could have ran on not giving a shit about healthcare, let the senate handle it :p

If Parente's ideas were good, the Republicans would have talked about it. If his ideas were bad, the Democrats would talk about them. But since they are dangerous to the swamp, nobody talks about them.

Not one article on the book written by Trump's nominee to be the head of policy.

No hearings. No vote.

#FreeAllTheThings /s

Everyone has heard of "Medicare for All" and "single payer." Not one word about what Phelps calls a "shameful" transfer of money from the poor to the rich. The socialists don't care!

What is the nature of this wealth transfer? You are alluding to something but it would be more helpful if you would just spell it out.

"Watch my 2 hour YouTube video or you're dumb/ignorant" isnt good faith argumentation, nor is it convincing

The ability to summarize is key to getting your core point across. Links are for requested evidence, not for the core argument

@argyris the Forbes article you posted says the Federal government pays for almost 50% of healthcare, not that healthcare is almost 50% of the Federal budget.

Also please explain this wealth transfer that is supposedly happening from the poor to the rich.

Isn’t welfare + social security basically 65% of the federal budget anyways?

The wealth transfer is the tax expenditure for employer healthcare. Phelps and Parente provide the details, including in that video. I'm sorry if I cannot explain it better than two of the most prominent professors of healthcare economics in the U.S. I didn't say "you're dumb/ignorant." I said this is important information about public policy.

You don't need to explain it better, you need to explain it *at all* because I'm not going to watch a long video. If you think this is an important issue then learn to summarize the key points of the argument.

Employer-provided health insurance isn't even a tax. It's a benefit as part of an overall compensation package. So how is that a wealth transfer?

"Employer-provided health insurance isn't even a tax. It's a benefit as part of an overall compensation package. So how is that a wealth transfer?"

Jews

I'm sorry. Not everything fits in 140 characters. Especially things that the Swamp doesn't want us to talk about. Em.ployer provided health insurance is the largest tax expenditure in the budget

When you talk about things that are not in the public view, nobody knows the ABCs. That is by design.

The words "tax expenditure" aren't even something most people have heard.

Discord has a 2000 character limit. And I'll repeat that employer-provided health plans are not taxes. They are compensation paid by employers to employees. So what are you talking about?

They are exempt from federal income taxes. That is called a tax expenditure. It is a trick to hide subsidies. Instead of handing people money, you make something they buy anyway tax deductible. That is the same thing as handing them cash.

But that is not a wealth transfer, a wealth transfer would be a subsidy for providing healthcare

Ok, now I understand what you are saying, at least.

Okay, so Professor Phelps knows nothing about economics. Glad you understand economics better than he does.

Its an incentive to soend money in a way that the government finds more advantageous than how they would spend it themselves

Silly AEI, having him speak about something some fool on the Internet can't explain better than he does.

But health insurance premiums are tax deductible for everyone.

I'm sure your sarcastic attitude is helping you feel superior but it is not making your argument more persuasive, fyi.

What argument? All I am arguing is that we should pay attention to important things. How is that something that needs to be argued?

"Let's spend time listening to experts about the largest parts of our budget." What is your counterargument to that?

Lol.

America is not a technocrancy

Bingo! It is an idiocracy... At least it feels like it at times.

We listen to the people who are most entertaining, not most knowledgeable.

We do, that doesnt mean are representatives do

We outsource our democratic process because the ROI on a full democracy is not good

Wouldn't it be nice if a single newspaper in this country reviewed a book on healthcare policy by Trump's nominee to head healthcare policy? I would then be able to point you to that review instead of having to try to explain it to you.