<p>So Bernie Sanders' plan considers healthcare as: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Bernie’s plan will cover the entire continuum of health care, from
  inpatient to outpatient care; preventive to emergency care; primary
  care to specialty care, including long-term and palliative care;
  vision, hearing and oral health care; mental health and substance
  abuse services; as well as prescription medications, medical
  equipment, supplies, diagnostics and treatments.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>And the main way to raise revenue to pay for it will be: </p>

<blockquote>
  <p>A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers. A
  2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households. Increasing Progressive income tax rates on certain brackets. Changing
  qualifications for capital gains, dividends, and deductions.
  Increasing the estate tax on certain brackets.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Now I am assuming the cost the healthcare products and services will fluctuate just like all other products and services do in one way or another. My question is, under such a plan, in a given year, what happens when the costs of the products and services is less than revenue (do taxpayers get the difference back) and what happens when the costs of the products and services is more than revenue (will taxpayers see an increase to percentages taxed of their income).</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T04:19:00.407Z
I am voting to close, because this is a question to be addressed to Mr Sanders' campaign, since what will happen with the possible yearly surplus you mention, should be a feature of the whole proposed policy, it cannot be deduced by Economics principles. Economics will come after, to tell you what effects the proposed policy, when fully specified, may have on the economy.
Alecos Papadopoulos
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T04:20:24.163Z
I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about completing an incompletely specified policy proposal, not about the economic effects of this proposal.
Alecos Papadopoulos
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T04:25:39.993Z
That sounds fair enough. I assumed it was something that was implied from the economic literature the campaign had cited in the past and not just completely absent from the policy proposal.
user1086516
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-03-24T04:31:46.720Z
Redistribution issues is at the core of policy and ideology. One could say "I will give a tax rebate using (one million different) schemes". Or "I will use the surplus to buy insurance for the uninsured". Or "I will use the surplus to fund Medicare". Or the military budget. Whatever. Economics will help by analyzing the possible economic effects (and most importantly, unintended consequences) in each proposed alternative.
Alecos Papadopoulos
<taxation><government>
Sanders' Plan to tie health care spending as a percentage of income
user1086516
# Sanders' Plan to tie health care spending as a percentage of income

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-03-21)

So Bernie Sanders' plan considers healthcare as:

> Bernie’s plan will cover the entire continuum of health care, from
> inpatient to outpatient care; preventive to emergency care; primary
> care to specialty care, including long-term and palliative care;
> vision, hearing and oral health care; mental health and substance
> abuse services; as well as prescription medications, medical
> equipment, supplies, diagnostics and treatments.

And the main way to raise revenue to pay for it will be:

> A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers. A
> 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households. Increasing Progressive income tax rates on certain brackets. Changing
> qualifications for capital gains, dividends, and deductions.
> Increasing the estate tax on certain brackets.

Now I am assuming the cost the healthcare products and services will fluctuate just like all other products and services do in one way or another. My question is, under such a plan, in a given year, what happens when the costs of the products and services is less than revenue (do taxpayers get the difference back) and what happens when the costs of the products and services is more than revenue (will taxpayers see an increase to percentages taxed of their income).

**Tags:** taxation, government

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I am voting to close, because this is a question to be addressed to Mr Sanders' campaign, since what will happen with the possible yearly surplus you mention, should be a feature of the whole proposed policy, it cannot be deduced by Economics principles. Economics will come after, to tell you what effects the proposed policy, when fully specified, may have on the economy.  
> **username_1**: I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about completing an incompletely specified policy proposal, not about the economic effects of this proposal.  
> **username_0**: That sounds fair enough. I assumed it was something that was implied from the economic literature the campaign had cited in the past and not just completely absent from the policy proposal.  
> **username_1**: Redistribution issues is at the core of policy and ideology. One could say "I will give a tax rebate using (one million different) schemes". Or "I will use the surplus to buy insurance for the uninsured". Or "I will use the surplus to fund Medicare". Or the military budget. Whatever. Economics will help by analyzing the possible economic effects (and most importantly, unintended consequences) in each proposed alternative.  

---

## 0 answers

