| ▲ | garbawarb a day ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
That would be a massive hit to our GDP. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | bensyverson a day ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Just think about the boost to our GDP by having healthier consumers who live longer, don't go into medical bankruptcy, and continue to buy stuff. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | karakoram a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
In all seriousness, this would be a massive stimulus to the economy. Americans are consumers at heart. All the money saved on insurance and/or other healthcare related costs would then be spent elsewhere. Cars, clothes, TVs, Labubu dolls. People will use the savings to buy things. In massive quantities. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | triceratops a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Not necessarily, over the long-term. That's $1 trillion more in disposable income. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | ovi256 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Not at all. Reducing a cost means the payer can spend the money on something else | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | oa335 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | dgellow a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Are you implying you would decide to sacrifice citizens health for a few GDP points, a somewhat useful but oversimplified metric that doesn’t reflect anything tangible? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | brainwad a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Presumably not; the same national income would just be redistributed from shareholders to insurees (or shareholders of companies that pay for employee health insurance). | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | nemomarx a day ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Think of all the insurance jobs that would be hit, too. Unfortunately we've bloated the healthcare industry to have a lot of employees | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||