The subject of ‘Military vs Medicare’ came up again in a Facebook thread, so I figured I ought to put some fixed numbers on it. The most complete data I could find was for 2015. I’ll just have to assume that the number ranges are similar for 2020 vs 2015. Let’s dig.
The US annual budget is separated into two parts: Mandatory and Discretionary. The first are those expenses that are required as the result of existing laws. The second are those dollars that Congress has to appropriate, either thru the budgetary process or via ‘continuing resolution’, should a budget not get passed. As of 2015, Mandatory spending stood at $2.43T, Discretionary at $1.11T, for a total of $3.54T. Also, the US population in 2015 was 320M. The number of people on Medicare in 2015 was 53M. The Medicaid numbers were not available.
The numbers I found were a bit cloudy because of the accumulation methods. Social Security was combined with Unemployment and Labor. Medicare was combined with Medicaid and Schip (State programs for children), and so on. So, some of the numbers lack the precision I’d like, but I think the comparisons below will stand up, even with the fuzzy math.
To begin with: Mandatory Spending was 68.64% of the total budget, Discretionary was 31.35% of the total budget. Military spending ($609B) was 15.88%, while Medicare and Health ($1.05T) was 27.42%. This negates a few statements I’ve encountered recently, specifically that Military spending was MORE than Medicare, yet it really was around HALF of Medicare. The second statement was that Military spending was 60% of the Total Budget. While Military IS 53.71% of DISCRETIONARY spending, it is only 15.88% of the total budget. I can see how folks could mistake the two—numbers do get thrown out quite a bit, and keeping them straight is a real challenge (hence, this post).
Next, a desire was made for ‘Medicare For All’, and the statement was made that ‘we can afford it’. Let’s use the numbers above to see that impact. Note: this is a STATIC analysis, which I hate doing—it implies that nothing else will change when you change the environment, which is seldom the case. But, using the numbers above, we can play. 53M Medicare folks for a total population of 320M is roughly 16.6 %. That 16.6% costs us $1.05T. So, if 320M become Medicare people, that is roughly 6 times the existing cost–$6.30T! To put that in perspective, compare that number to our total budget of $3.54T—roughly DOUBLE THE ENTIRE BUDGET! That means you can have Medicare For All, but only if you double ALL Taxes, and stop EVERY OTHER FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM! Now, some savings could be had by those consumers (and their employers) that currently buy health insurance, but not enough to cover the massive costs.
To make the above analysis DYNAMIC, rather than STATIC: MOST doctors and hospitals DO NOT ACCEPT Medicare patients, due to the small reimbursement rates. The only way a practice can take ANY Medicare patients is to cost shift the expenses to insurance-paying customers—that is, they must OVER-charge insurance customers to make up for the Medicare patients shortfalls. If everyone is Medicare, there are NO insurance customers to do so. The impact to the entire medical industry, all the way from medical school to patient care, cannot be underestimated.
Source: https://www.nationalpriorities.org/budget-basics/federal-budget-101/spending/?fbclid=IwAR2hcGDQLkslITQ72gVAFBb9Xh8XBpQcFNxCDtqPTT5a9NF6CYpf24SPSvc
