The facts? Hardly.

Bernie Sanders in the 2020 Iowa Democratic Party debate said, “Let us be clear what Medicare for all does. It ends all premiums. It ends all co-payments. It ends the absurdity of deductibles. It ends out-of-pocket expenses.”

The facts? Hardly.

There are currently two Medicare pathways: 1) Medicare Advantage insurance, and 2) Original Medicare, which is a government run program.

Medicare Advantage insurance has networks and preferred providers, but appeals to poor people because of the lower and sometimes zero premiums advertised by the insurance companies. Many of these insurance products also include some dental, hearing, prescription drug, and vision coverage within their networks.

However, currently, you still have to pay $144.60/month per person to the government in addition to the insurance company premiums. For a family of four, that would be $578.40/month, which is not the same as, “It ends all premiums.” Depending on the insurance plan, there are currently co-payments and deductibles. There are networks such that if you go outside the network, coverage is limited, leading to out-of-pocket expenses. Therefore, Medicare Advantage does not match his description of ‘Medicare for all’.

The second pathway, Original Medicare, has no network. It covers doctors, hospitals, and other medical providers anywhere in the United States that ‘accept Medicare assignment’, but it only covers 80% of most costs. If you go to a provider who doesn’t ‘accept Medicare assignment’, you could be paying for a substantial amount of the services yourself (out-of-pocket expenses). Since the government stopped allowing Plan F, which had no deductible, most of the Original Medicare Supplement insurance plans have deductibles and/or co-pays.

Original Medicare comes with a government premium of $144.60/month per person. Those with Original Medicare typically get a Medicare Supplement insurance plan that closes the 20% gap at a cost to senior citizens of $225-450/month per person of premium. Presumably younger people without disabilities would be quoted lower costs by these insurance companies. In addition, they are wise to look into Medicare D prescription drug insurance that costs $20/month per person and up. These plans, particularly the low premium ones, come with deductibles and co-pays. All in, Medicare can cost $389/month per person to well over $600/month per person. For a family of four, this would be $1,556-2400/month.

In addition, Original Medicare doesn’t cover certain costs such as annual physicals. Instead of a true physical, Original Medicare allows a doctor to ask you a dozen or so questions, but not actually examine you. If you want a true physical, that would be an out-of-pocket expense. Therefore, Original Medicare does not match his description of ‘Medicare for all’.

The only Medicare option that is not currently an insurance product is Original Medicare, that has a premium of $144.60/month per person. This covers doctors, hospitals, and other medical providers in the United States that ‘accept Medicare assignment’, but only pays 80% of most costs, and no prescription drug coverage. All other Medicare is provided by private insurance.

Thus, what Senator Sanders describes as ‘Medicare for all’ doesn’t look anything like Medicare. It probably looks more like the platinum Senate plan that he has. Converting Medicare over to the Senate plan would greatly increase the cost of providing his ‘Medicare for all’.

Why doesn’t the press or anyone else call him on this???

Side Effects

button

Tax Fantasy

Promising to lower taxes wins over certain voters who believe their taxes are too high and they’re not getting much for their money. Promising higher taxes on the “rich” wins over other voters who believe that someone other than themselves should be paying more because they’re not getting the services they need. Telling the truth wins nothing because people have been conditioned to want what government can’t deliver. The result is a lot of frustrated voters searching for someone to fix the problem.

For insight into why increasing the top tax rate above 40% won’t increase tax revenues enough to pay for new programs, read Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You, and consider what the real motivation is for candidates telling you this works. To see the impact of dropping taxes below current levels, read Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You, and ask yourself what the motivation is for candidates to tell you this works.

button

cropped-ucs-d-front.jpg

It Was Amazing (5* Review)

cropped-ucs-d-front.jpg

Of all the books I’ve ever read on contemporary politics, this book has some qualities that I’ve never seen before. Depending on what you’d prefer to get from a book like this, you could perceive those qualities as positive or negative.

In the early days of the US, political theorist Thomas Paine wrote a pamphlet called Common Sense and now an author with essentially the same name (maybe Tomas Payne is a pen name?) shows a lot of common sense in exploring the current political environment in the US. Payne explains his thinking clearly and in multiple instances had me questioning my current political stances. If that possibility concerns you, this book isn’t for you. No matter where you fall on the political spectrum you’ll almost surely find that Payne agrees with you on some things and disagrees on others. If you’re willing to have your thoughts and political beliefs challenged, this book will do the trick.

— by Al from Books and Pals (Goodreads)

button

5* Review

A timely book we should all read. Payne effectively lays out, in easily understood language, the issues being debated (???) by today’s political candidates. More importantly, he does not take sides, instead explaining the complexities of the issues. He goes deep, showing the stupidity and recklessness of today’s “sound bites”. Covered are issues such as immigration, taxes, wages, climate change, and many more. Truth be told, after reading this I am now frightened at the challenges we face! Great book!

— by Randal White (Goodreads)

button

Contentious Election

Instead of dealing with the issues that affect the American voters, today’s candidates have descended to character assassination as the only way to get elected. The question we might ask ourselves is why they aren’t more confident that they can deliver on the issues. Perhaps it has to do with how the solutions they propose won’t have the desired effects, which is why so many Americans are upset today on both sides of the aisle.

In an election like this, no matter who wins, the American people lose. How have we gotten to this point?

Find out why candidates can’t or won’t stick to the issues and give real solutions to the issues they bring up. Read Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You.

button

$1.99 for limited time

The book candidates don’t want you to see:

cropped-ucs-d-front.jpg

Sorry for my absence over the summer and into the fall, but family emergency has taken me out of action for 4 months. While family health issues still tug on my time, I wanted to present you with a special promotion taking place this weekend and into next week. Only $1.99 on Kindle for a limited time.

It had been our intent to get Side-Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You out over the summer to coincide with the conventions and debates, but alas, life intervenes. The book was released July 1, but I was unable to engage with potential readers.

I know bringing up politics can be dicey, particularly in such a cantankerous year, but as a CPA with an MBA in finance, a BS in Political Science, and over 30 years of experience that involved digging behind the scenes, I’ve taken a hard look at the consequences of campaign promises on both sides of the aisle and wanted to share my observations on the issues.

One early reviewer noted that Side-Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You “tackles some thorny issues with uncomplicated uncommon insight.” It’s a balanced look behind campaign promises on wealth redistribution, taxes, healthcare, depressed wages, foreign policy, and much more. In short, it doesn’t toe the line on either side. It takes each issue and dives into the history and data behind it, fact-checking if you will.

Side Effects is available on Amazon. Help us celebrate the new release.

Thanks,

Tomas Payne

http://www.WhatTheyDontTellU.wordpress.com

Amazon book link

https://www.amazon.com/Side-Effects-What-Candidates-Dont-ebook/dp/B01G0KUW0G

Free Tuition

(by Tomas Payne)

There is no question that college and university tuition costs are out of control in America. Something needs to be done to make advanced education more affordable.

Unfortunately, “free tuition” won’t be as free as promised.

The inconvenient truth is that overall, college educated individuals make more money than people who don’t have college degrees. That means that they are more likely to be earning higher incomes in the years after college. Otherwise, a key reason to go to college (to better ourselves) wouldn’t be true. When they are earning these higher incomes, they will be asked to pay higher taxes. Guess what part of those higher taxes will be for.

If you guessed for future students to have “free tuition” you would be correct.

What will really happen is that those who receive “free tuition” today will have to pay higher taxes to perpetuate the “free tuition” program for future students. Since this policy won’t do anything to curb the escalating costs of higher education, the burden of future higher education costs will be equivalent to having to repay student loans in the current system.

So, a vote for “free tuition” today will remove your student loans today and increase your taxes to pay for student tuition in the future. Welcome to the side-effects of the “free tuition” plan.

A better solution would be to tackle the question of why tuition costs have risen faster than inflation over the past 50 years. That would bring real progress.

For more, check out Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You:

button

Political Journey

(by Tomas Payne)

The focus of this journey will be to explore headline issues based on history, digging behind the issues, and highlighting their implications. The purpose will be to stimulate readers to dig deeper into candidate promises.

We will look at options and alternatives, as well as the side-effects of various proposals. While candidates try to keep their appeals simple, there is no free lunch and no easy answers to the problems we face. If there were, we wouldn’t need representatives.

Rather than beginning with ideology, this journey begins with history and what we can learn from experience. Some of this may fly in the face of common sense. If so, bear with me.

We all know if you throw a baseball up in the air that it will come down to Earth. That is common sense that we can experience every day. But, if you could throw a ball hard enough, let’s say with a rocket, it would keep going. We know this from the Voyager spacecraft that has sailed past the orbit of Pluto.

It is racing out of our Solar System. Even if it didn’t, it would be unlikely to return to Earth. The Sun would be a more likely destination or perhaps in orbit around the Sun as the asteroids do. This is uncommon sense since it doesn’t fit our everyday expectations. Yet it’s true and verifiable.

I’m sure there will be some people who object to one item or another on ideological grounds despite what the facts say. To those who reject the information contained here, I welcome any corrections of factual errors.

For more, check out Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You:

button

Fear

(by Tomas Payne)

To collect our votes, many candidates appeal to our fears, hoping we’ll see the world in their stark vision of black and white. It often sounds as if they’re offering us a crystal clear choice in which we can sever our right hand or our left in order to serve their needs—to serve them instead of them serving us.

As an example, consider coal. Since coal is not a clean, green energy source, some people demand shutting down all coal production while others deny that there’s a problem. Yet, if we think outside the box, there could be other choices, such as developing technologies to provide cleaner ways to use the coal we have.

Most of us believe that the ends do not justify the means. Americans believe in fairness and a prosperous future for our children. With regard to such broad goals for this country, we may not differ by as much as it seems, yet we argue over ways to get there. However, when the means lead to the wrong ends, the means necessarily must be wrong.

What I’m talking about are consequences. When a pharmacy fills a prescription, they provide a long list of side-effects, some of which can make you ill or kill you. We rarely get such a list for the prescriptions provided by candidates asking for our support.

For more, check out Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You:

button

Tough Times

(by Tomas Payne)

History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does illustrate human behavior over time. If we choose not to learn from history, if we bury our heads, then we tend to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Here’s a mantra: We live during tough times. Yet it was hard for the first immigrants who set foot on this land. It was dangerous for those on the wagon trains heading west. It was rough for the farmers when they left their homes and moved to the cities in search of work. We perceive our times as tougher because we’re living through them and we don’t know how this will turn out.

We tend to forget that America became great by individuals and groups overcoming adversity. Perhaps part of our angst comes from not having to face the clear hardships that our ancestors did, where there was no turning back. When they lost their jobs or the dustbowl took their farms, there was no safety net. They had to move on and do the best they could. Hardships gave their lives clarity and straightforward direction we often find lacking today. Few of us would want to return to what they faced but perhaps we can learn from their experiences.

It’s true that today’s events seem to happen faster than ever, yet is that any more disruptive than when our ancestors got on a boat, crossed the ocean, and faced an uncertain future in a new land? They did so because often they saw no better option. They were motivated to take personal risks. They plunged into uncertain futures.

Indeed, times have changed. We live in a global society with rapid communication that bombards us daily with terror and dismay. It tempts us with toys and wealth, if only …

Most Americans live much better than their counterparts 100 years ago, with indoor plumbing, air conditioning, refrigeration, vehicle transportation, cell phones, and countless appliances to make our lives easier. Yet, we are enticed to want more than we can afford, which leads us to despair. Our ancestors crossed oceans for less than we have today. Yet many of us today would not consider moving twenty miles for a better opportunity.

We lose faith in the future and become fearful, pining for a past shrouded in myth, a past that never was, when life was simpler and we didn’t have the problems we face today. We the people look for answers while those who represent us announce that they have the cure to what ails us. In fact, they tell us that what ails us is what they have a solution to.

“Vote for me and I’ll make your worries go away.” Just don’t ask too many inconvenient questions.

For more, check out Side Effects: What Candidates Don’t Tell You:

button