In 2020. America will not get BERNED again

[Padawanbater2]

Sanders himself says there is no agreement on how to pay for it.

::shows the exact section(s) Sanders bill explains how to pay for it::

LOL

Such false confidence.

Check out Title X, too. The transition to the Medicare for all system. It might enlighten you a little bit about your unsubstantiated belief about how nobody supports it

The arguments you're making come from someone who clearly has not read the bill

Read it here;

Sanders 2019 Medicare for all Bill

 

[Unclebaldrick]

Is it 160 million or is it "probably more" who oppose medicare for all?

Post whatever poll you're citing here so I can see it

OK, here it is...

https://www.moonofalabama.org/

https://caitlinjohnstone.com/

https://twitter.com/telesurenglish?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

All four of those sources agree that Bernie's Medicare For All plan is half - baked and will be unpopular. The same way Tty proved that Rachel Maddow is on record for supporting American intervention in Iran and Venezuela. Anybody can clearly see that as long as I just keep saying it is true.

 

[Fogdog]

Is it 160 million or is it "probably more" who oppose medicare for all?

Post whatever poll you're citing here so I can see it

I already posted the one from politifacts. To you I posted it, mental midget can't remember? Oh that's right, you have shit for memory. Scroll back to page five if you are able to.

Regarding the percentage of people who like their healthcare, that one was posted on page four of this thread. I won't ask you to exhaust yourself looking for it so here it is:

https://news.gallup.com/poll/245195/americans-rate-healthcare-quite-positively.aspx

You should just accept that I never say something like that without having the source.

YOU don't hold yourself to that standard, though . Not only are you Sanders supporters Authoritarian left but you are clueless liars too. Like that post where you cited section and paragraph of Bernie's health care plan that details how it will be paid for. Except it doesn't exist. You didn't post a link either. Yet you have the gall to tell ME to cite my sources.

No problem. When I say something is a fact, I can back it up. That's how I roll.

You? Not so much. I've kind of lost patience with your BS. The difference is when I get fired up, I'm able to stick to facts. You just start dropping the eff bomb. LOL

Why don't you deny once again that you called pnny the fg word? Homophobic bigot.

 

[Fogdog]

::shows the exact section(s) Sanders bill explains how to pay for it::

Check out Title X, too. The transition to the Medicare for all system. It might enlighten you a little bit about your unsubstantiated belief about how nobody supports it

The arguments you're making come from someone who clearly has not read the bill

Read it here;

Sanders 2019 Medicare for all Bill

You lying sack of shit.

Bernie even posted on his own senate website a list of options for how to pay for it. He says right in that working document that details for paying for it aren't threshed out. I even posted that just a few pages ago. If you can't find it, crawl back to me and I'll spoon feed your sorry ass the information.

The words copied directly from the white paper on how to pay for the Medicare for all plan, document accessed from Sanders' own Senate website:

"In my view, there needs to be vigorous debate as to the best way to finance our Medicare for All legislation. This paper explains just some of the policies that could provide revenue to finance Medicare for All."

 

[UncleBuck]

::shows the exact section(s) Sanders bill explains how to pay for it::

Check out Title X, too. The transition to the Medicare for all system. It might enlighten you a little bit about your unsubstantiated belief about how nobody supports it

The arguments you're making come from someone who clearly has not read the bill

Read it here;

Sanders 2019 Medicare for all Bill

hey pada

bernie sucks. and so do you

 

[Padawanbater2]

I already posted the one from politifacts.

You posted a politifact fact checking article by Lori Robertson that didn't include the Pew poll you originally cited that claimed that people oppose Medicare for all. Post the poll from Pew Research you're citing

Sanders supporters Authoritarian left

Like that post where you cited section and paragraph of Bernie's health care plan that details how it will be paid for. Except it doesn't exist. You didn't post a link either.

Yes it does, yes I did. Read the bill, not just summaries of the bill from political pundits you support. Stop making a fool of yourself.

Yet you have the gall to tell ME to cite my sources.

It doesn't take gall to tell someone to cite their sources of information, and those with the evidence to back up their opinions don't tend to get offended when they're asked to cite their sources

also..

80 million people who say they like the health care plan

Is forcing a hundred million people from plans they like onto Medicare a Progressive thing?

112 million people aren't going to be happy with being forced into Medicare.

Can we settle on one number?

Let's make sure our propaganda is consistent at least..

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You posted a politifact fact checking article by Lori Robertson that didn't include the Pew poll you originally cited that claimed that people oppose Medicare for all. Post the poll from Pew Research you're citing

Yes it does, yes I did. Read the bill, not just summaries of the bill from political pundits you support. Stop making a fool of yourself.

It doesn't take gall to tell someone to cite their sources of information, and those with the evidence to back up their opinions don't tend to get offended when they're asked to cite their sources

also..



Can we settle on one number?

Let's make sure our propaganda is consistent at least..

Lol, the old "political compass" chart again? Are you serious? So you answered a bunch of questions in an online poll, it produced a graph and you brandish this as proof of something? Lol. You even believed in it enough to previously ask if he felt stupid now? OMG, that's funny. Gee, that could mean something if you weren't such a dishonest person with yourself and others. Ok, you are Left-Libertarian - and Trump is a stable genius. Tty is too, even though he gets off on having power over and exploiting disadvantaged women.

I love you guys. You make me laugh.

 

[TacoMac]

Yes it does, yes I did.

No, you didn't. If you had, you would have read section 601 and seen this:

(1) IN GENERAL.—By not later than September 1 of each year, beginning with the year prior to the date on which benefits first become available as described in section 106(a), the Secretary shall establish a national health budget, which specifies the total expenditures to be made for covered health care services under this Act.

Now, for anybody with even half a brain (you're excluded of course, or you wouldn't have boasted about reading this so-called "plan" of Bernies and not understood this section) this is a huge problem.

In a nutshell, it means that the government each year can cut benefits to the program without cutting what you pay for it. In other words, it turns them into a capitalist insurance company more so than they already are.

That one sentence dooms the plan before it even begins. (Again, to anybody with a brain. You're excluded.)

Medicare for all is an excellent idea, but Bernie's vision of it is not.

 

[Jimdamick]

They are all too old

Are your parents too old, so old that you would disregard their advice, advice they give with years of experience?
I like wisdom that comes with experience personally, kinda like growing pot.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Medicare for all is an excellent idea, but Bernie's vision of it is not.

This is the new talking point

The reality is, there is no Medicare for all plan detractors would support because they don't actually support Medicare for all

Any plan is bad, regardless of who proposes it, because Medicare for all is bad

We pay more now than Sanders plan would cost. I don't hear anybody crying about how we'll pay for what we pay for right now

 

[TacoMac]

We pay more now than Sanders plan would cost.

That's not the problem.

The problem is that Sander's plan does not guarantee what coverage you will get whatever the costs. In fact, that one line DICTATES that you essentially will not get what you pay for. Ever.

But again, you're exempt from understanding because you're brainless. We get that. That's what's so sad about you: you don't.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Sander's plan does not guarantee what coverage you will get whatever the costs. In fact, that one line DICTATES that you essentially will not get what you pay for. Ever.

You don't know what you're talking about

Show me a single dead body in any nation that employs universal healthcare due to lack of coverage or restrictions due to wait times

Show me a single dead body here in the states from someone who had Medicare but couldn't get healthcare because of costs or coverage

You can't, because they don't exist. Meanwhile we stack up 45,000 bodies a year because of costs

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You don't know what you're talking about

Show me a single dead body in any nation that employs universal healthcare due to lack of coverage or restrictions due to wait times

Show me a single dead body here in the states from someone who had Medicare but couldn't get healthcare because of costs or coverage

You can't, because they don't exist. Meanwhile we stack up 45,000 bodies a year because of costs

If people want what Bernie is pitching, they will elect him. And if they don't... "RIGGED! BERNIE DESERVES TO BE PRESIDENT! UNFAIR OFFERING ALTERNATIVES AND RUNNING OTHER CANDIDATES! I KEEP TELLING YOU!"

Because you idiots are left-libertarian. Lol.

 

[TacoMac]

You don't know what you're talking about

It's not me. It's the plan YOU POSTED by YOUR MAN BERNIE that you CLAIMED YOU READ THAT YOU CLEARLY DID NOT that's saying it. Not me.

Show me a single dead body in any nation that employs universal healthcare due to lack of coverage or restrictions due to wait times

There are, literally, millions. You Google it and this is the first on the list:

TORONTO — When Sharon Shamblaw was diagnosed last summer with a form of blood cancer that could only be treated with a particular stem cell transplant, the search for a donor began. A Toronto hospital, 100 miles east of her home in St. Mary's, Ontario, and one of three facilities in the province that could provide the life-saving treatment, had an eight-month waiting list for transplants.

Four months after her diagnosis, Shamblaw headed to Buffalo, New York, for treatment. But it was too late. She died at the age of 46, leaving behind a husband and three children, as detailed by the Toronto Star.
​

That's just one. I stopped counting pages of examples at 54.

Show me a single dead body here in the states from someone who had Medicare but couldn't get healthcare because of costs or coverage

There are, again, millions. Medicare only covers 80%. You have to pay the other 20, and if you can't afford it, well, you're fucked. Use Google. Quit making shit up and then denying it when we prove you wrong. Here's the first one in the list:

John, 67, has end-stage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and only a 10th of his lung capacity. For him, hospice care has meant weekly visits from a nurse, equipment to aid his breathing and allow him to move around, and powerful painkillers to help ease his eventual passing.

That may now be going away, something the Tagtmeirs didn't even think was possible. They have no plans in place for other types of care.

"I haven't had time to look into it," Krissy says. "I didn't think this was going to happen."

Hope Healthcare determined that John does not qualify for a continuation of hospice benefits, something Medicare allows if a patient continues worsening.

Their situation exposes some uncomfortable, and largely unknown, truths about the limits of Medicare coverage, the veracity of terminal diagnoses and the reliability of hospice care for people in their final stages of life.
​

Medicare can cut your ass off completely when they determine you're getting worse. But you wouldn't know that because you make shit up rather than actually READING.

You can't, because they don't exist.

I just did. Several times.

AGAIN.

And it's getting old proving you an idiot, Ron.

 

[Padawanbater2]

I just showed you examples.

You claimed millions of people die under universal healthcare systems

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You claimed millions of people die under universal healthcare systems

You asked for one example. Now you want to argue numbers.

 

[TacoMac]

You claimed millions of people die under universal healthcare systems

You said:

they don't exist.

I'm guessing millions because the numbers are endless. It could be 10's of millions. I'm not altogether sure.

But you said "THEY DON'T EXIST" in bold type.

And then I showed them to you. And now you're once again making shit up again to detract from the fact that you once again, as always, talked out of your ass and got proven completely wrong.

How you still even post after being proven wrong pretty much every single time is beyond me. And it's not just here. It's EVERYWHERE you post.

 

[travisw]

You don't know what you're talking about

Show me a single dead body in any nation that employs universal healthcare due to lack of coverage or restrictions due to wait times

Show me a single dead body here in the states from someone who had Medicare but couldn't get healthcare because of costs or coverage

You can't, because they don't exist. Meanwhile we stack up 45,000 bodies a year because of costs

You think millions of people die because of lack of healthcare or wait times under universal healthcare programs in other countries?

You are a retarded person

Speaking of not knowing what the fuck you're talking about:

The Fraser Institute published a study on waiting times and mortality in Canada between 1993 and 2009 which estimated that approximately 44,000 (median value) Canadians (confidence interval of between 25,000 and 63,000 Canadians) died due to waiting times.

Since it's you, I'll do the math.

Over a 16 year period, between 1600 and 4000 Canadians died each year due to wait times in Canada.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/sites/default/files/effect-of-wait-times-on-mortality-in-canada.pdf

 

[Unclebaldrick]

You said:


I'm guessing millions because the numbers are endless. It could be 10's of millions. I'm not altogether sure.

But you said "THEY DON'T EXIST" in bold type.

And then I showed them to you. And now you're once again making shit up again to detract from the fact that you once again, as always, talked out of your ass and got proven completely wrong.

How you still even post after being proven wrong pretty much every single time is beyond me. And it's not just here. It's EVERYWHERE you post.

Those three feebs say a lot of things. In practice, the bolder the type and the more vociferously they assert something, the less it should be believed.

It is all part of the attack on the left by Putin and Trumpian allies. They didn't need to infiltrate the left, all they needed to do was motivate the worst elements of the left into action. Why bother with the cost and risk of organizing a false flag operation like Putin did to gain power when you have so many useful idiots right here in America? If they succeed wildly, things like firebombings of mansions will begin (right @ttystikk?) to happen and Trump will gain re-election just through appeals to "law and order". Thankfully, the domestic useful idiots are also pretty feckless and cowardly - they seldom are actually motivated to leave mom's basement to throw a firebomb so it probably won't go that far. They are a persistent little group of assholes though. Even when they get the living shit kicked out of them in argument after argument, they will continue to insist that they are right.

They are of literally no use in any political coalition because if they don't get their way 100% they will pout, not vote and continue to foment their insidious propaganda. If they do get 100% of what they want, their candidate will be unelectable. There is no point of even bothering to compromise with them.

Sad.

 

[Fogdog]

You posted a politifact fact checking article by Lori Robertson that didn't include the Pew poll you originally cited that claimed that people oppose Medicare for all. Post the poll from Pew Research you're citing

Yes it does, yes I did. Read the bill, not just summaries of the bill from political pundits you support. Stop making a fool of yourself.

It doesn't take gall to tell someone to cite their sources of information, and those with the evidence to back up their opinions don't tend to get offended when they're asked to cite their sources

also..



Can we settle on one number?

Let's make sure our propaganda is consistent at least..

I misspoke, it was not a pew poll. It was a Gallup poll and you have the link.

I read the bill. What do you want me to do, post the words that aren't there? Like you do? I posted Bernie's own words from a document on HIS senate website where HE says:

In my view, there needs to be vigorous debate as to the best way to finance our Medicare for All legislation. This paper explains just some of the policies that could provide revenue to finance Medicare for All."

That chart makes me laugh. You fill out a questionnaire and it spits out that chart. All it says is what you think about yourself. People are awful at spotting their own deficiencies that others can see as glaringly obvious.

From an objective point of view, anybody who supports a plan that forces all 160 million people out of their existing coverage that most of them say they like is an authoritarian. Anybody who shrilly defends such. Anybody who just reads the shit that agrees with him while offhandedly discounting information from reputable sources. Anybody who lies to try to browbeat others into submission on the subject -- is a fucking authoritarian.

You are making yourself look ridiculous.