"Medicare for all who want it"

[Sdh777]

Hmmmmmmm who should I trust an abundance of data proving socialized healthcare costs less and gets better results or an Internet trumptard pretending to play nurse

So tough

I’m neither a nurse nor a Trumptard & I didn’t ask you to trust me. I simply shared my personal experience & you respond with accusations. Why do immediate resort to ridicule & calling people liars & racists?
Actually, never mind.

 

[UncleBuck]

I’m neither a nurse nor a Trumptard & I didn’t ask you to trust me. I simply shared my personal experience & you respond with accusations. Why do immediate resort to ridicule & calling people liars & racists?
Actually, never mind.

I didn’t call you a racist, nurse trumptard

You must get that a lot

 

[hanimmal]

Why not VA for all? I too don't see how Medicare for all will work either, since it doesn't get rid of how they still pay the outrageous prices pharmaceutical companies demand, and Medicare pays anyway.

VA is pretty specialized, and while they may have a positive impact for some people that deal with the same issues that some vets have, the vast majority of the population won't need this specialized care.

I work with physicians in numerous countries in OR’s & Cath-Labs so I’ve seen, 1st hand, how different healthcare systems play out. Obviously, some countries do better than others, but I have not been real impressed with socialized medicine overall. I would rather be on Medicaid or Obamacare in the U.S. than have free healthcare in most other countries.

In countries, like Argentina, that have both private hospitals & socialized medicine, no one there in their right mind would go to a government-owned hospital if they had the choice.

And in the U.S., although there are plenty of great physicians in the VA system, patients just don’t have access to the same standard of care. You will typically wait much longer for treatment & have fewer treatment options. The V.A. system is overburdened & less efficient because it’s funded by taxpayers & a government-run program.

I think everyone should have access to healthcare & I hate to sound like a selfish prick, but I don’t feel bad for wanting the very best healthcare for me & my family.

I am not sure comparing a medical system in the wealthiest nation in the land to countries without our resources is realistic though. We will not lose our buildings/medical personal etc.

I just worry that we won't keep up with the innovation that will be needed dealing with however nature changes to our medicine with things like super bacteria. Our allowing incentivizing of innovation has brought many medical breakthroughs that we subsidize for the entire planet.

 

[BurtMaklin]

Every argument against socialized healthcare is dumb.

 

[abandonconflict]

Every argument against socialized healthcare is dumb.

Except for that one where there isn't enough money to entirely nationalize the country's biggest industry in one fel swoop. So the argument that we should first expand the public option to get everyone covered and start bringing the costs down, yeah that's a very good argument.

That's why the liberals are doing better than Bernie-Liz. They have better arguments.

 

[BurtMaklin]

Except for that one where there isn't enough money to entirely nationalize the country's biggest industry in one fel swoop. So the argument that we should first expand the public option to get everyone covered and start bringing the costs down, yeah that's a very good argument.

That's why the liberals are doing better than Bernie-Liz. They have better arguments.

No, politicians that collect and decide where your tax dollars go owes every American affordable, socialized healthcare before anything else, especially tax cuts for the rich and corporate welfare. It's pretty basic stuff.

Like I said, dumb argument.

 

[abandonconflict]

No, politicians that collect and decide where your tax dollars go owes every American affordable, socialized healthcare before anything else, especially tax cuts for the rich and corporate welfare. It's pretty basic stuff.

Like I said, dumb argument.

OK, but numbers have actual values. I agree with the principals you are describing. Spend more on healthcare, less on war etc...

Repealing the Trump tax cuts to the rich won't even cover the deficit. So if you are suggesting money should be spent, you should also suggest how that money will be raised, otherwise it's a dumb argument.

 

[BurtMaklin]

OK, but numbers have actual values. I agree with the principals you are describing. Spend more on healthcare, less on war etc...

Repealing the Trump tax cuts to the rich won't even cover the deficit. So if you are suggesting money should be spent, you should also suggest how that money will be raised, otherwise it's a dumb argument.

It's obvious where the money is going to come from, it's going to come from Americans and their businesses. You're paying for it now, and people are getting mega rich off of it. So instead of private healthcare insurers collecting your money and keeping a tidy profit, you could use that savings and build yourself a healthier America.

You could institute a high end consumption tax on big ticket items over a certain amount, you could add a fee to every trade for every stock traded on the stock market, you could plug the holes in your tax code and stop letting people hide their money offshore, you could do lots of things to pay for it, you just prefer to keep the privilege you're used to. If America is going to right its past wrongdoings, equal access to socialized healthcare is part of that equation. It just is.

 

[abandonconflict]

It's obvious where the money is going to come from, it's going to come from Americans and their businesses. You're paying for it now, and people are getting mega rich off of it. So instead of private healthcare insurers collecting your money and keeping a tidy profit, you could use that savings and build yourself a healthier America.

You could institute a high end consumption tax on big ticket items over a certain amount, you could add a fee to every trade for every stock traded on the stock market, you could plug the holes in your tax code and stop letting people hide their money offshore, you could do lots of things to pay for it, you just prefer to keep the privilege you're used to. If America is going to right its past wrongdoings, equal access to socialized healthcare is part of that equation. It just is.

There are many novel ideas for taxation but even if you add up everything in bernie's rough draft you still have not paid for half of the low end estimate of the cost. There is no way around the middle class tax hikes.

Once the government becomes a healthcare industry and nothing else, how are we going to implement a green new deal? How will we recover if a crisis arises?

The obvious answer is that we should get everyone covered first by expanding Medicare to all who want it with small tax hikes (or some of these other novel ideas for taxation) which will introduce competition. This will begin to bring costs down as well, theoretically.

The cost reducing feedback loop this creates should cause more people to opt in or for private premiums to come down. This is the way to achieve socialized medicine in America. Incrementally, beginning with the needy, without taxing people like myself, with very low healthcare costs and low income, into starvation.

Not everyone wants Medicare, but they might, when costs come down.

 

[BurtMaklin]

There are many novel ideas for taxation but even if you add up everything in bernie's rough draft you still have not paid for half of the low end estimate of the cost. There is no way around the middle class tax hikes.

Once the government becomes a healthcare industry and nothing else, how are we going to implement a green new deal? How will we recover if a crisis arises?

The obvious answer is that we should get everyone covered first by expanding Medicare to all who want it with small tax hikes (or some of these other novel ideas for taxation) which will introduce competition. This will begin to bring costs down as well, theoretically.

The cost reducing feedback loop this creates should cause more people to opt in or for private premiums to come down. This is the way to achieve socialized medicine in America. Incrementally, beginning with the needy, without taxing people like myself, with very low healthcare costs and low income, into starvation.

Not everyone wants Medicare, but they might, when costs come down.

Without your health, you have nothing. It's worth the cost, period. You just think you have no responsibility to those who can't afford to pay, but you're wrong.

 

[abandonconflict]

Without your health, you have nothing. It's worth the cost, period. You just think you have no responsibility to those who can't afford to pay, but you're wrong.

This is a logical fallacy. You're arguing a principal with which I already agree and accusing me of holding a malice that I don't.

You're clearly not understanding what I am arguing.

 

[abandonconflict]

It's worth the cost to extend coverage to those who lack it. Beyond that, it is necessary to reduce the cost before its worth it for the rest of the country.

Most of the people on this forum, even many Republicans, are absolutely opposed to leaving 27 million Americans with no access to health care.

 

[BurtMaklin]

Beyond that, it is necessary to reduce the cost before its worth it for the rest of the country.

I think I'm reading you loud and clear, it's not worth it to you, so 27 million people can go fuck themselves and a percentage of the rest can go bankrupt trying to stay alive to raise their children.

How noble of you. No rush, take your time. Whenever you're ready.

 

[abandonconflict]

I think I'm reading you loud and clear, it's not worth it to you, so 27 million people can go fuck themselves and a percentage of the rest can go bankrupt trying to stay alive to raise their children.

How noble of you. No rush, take your time. Whenever you're ready.

No, you're completely wrong. I'm arguing in favor of expanding Medicare to all who want it. This is to be paid for by (small) tax hikes, out of my meager wages also.

This will theoretically lead to the same end goal of single payer healthcare once costs come down. Failing that, it will still reduce costs by introducing competition. Increasing supply reduces prices, as the law of supply and demand states.

So please stick with arguments and not emotional pleas and accusations. There are a lot of people like me who prefer not to be taxed for more coverage than we need.

 

[Padawanbater2]

You're clearly not understanding what I am arguing.

You're arguing exactly what every moderate/conservative argues..

"We just can't afford it!"

..without providing any evidence

Evidence has been provided that shows we can indeed afford it, and in fact, what we pay for now costs more than what Sanders proposes because a M4A system eliminates the middleman that equates to 22% of healthcare spending

You don't agree with the evidence because you don't like Sanders or his supporters, not because the evidence isn't valid

 

[Padawanbater2]

We can afford $7 trillion endless wars, $1.5 trillion tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, billions in annual subsidies by way of corporate welfare...

It's funny, we can always seem to find the money to pay for the things that benefit corporations and the wealthy, or increase the military budget by $131 billion, but can't afford the things that would actually benefit the country and benefit the American people...

 

[abandonconflict]

You're arguing exactly what every moderate/conservative argues..

"We just can't afford it!"

..without providing any evidence

Evidence has been provided that shows we can indeed afford it, and in fact, what we pay for now costs more than what Sanders proposes because a M4A system eliminates the middleman that equates to 22% of healthcare spending

You don't agree with the evidence because you don't like Sanders or his supporters, not because the evidence isn't valid

Your argument is unremarkable. Do you think that 32 trillion dollars in health care costs can be nationalized with no increase in taxes?

 

[Padawanbater2]

Your argument is unremarkable. Do you think that 32 trillion dollars in health care costs can be nationalized with no increase in taxes?

No, Sanders admits taxes will increase for a small number of middle class Americans. While their taxes will increase, their overall net cost will decrease because they won't pay premiums, copays, or deductibles

 

[abandonconflict]

No, Sanders admits taxes will increase for a small number of middle class Americans.

He is incoherent and his rough draft includes about half of the funding for the low end estimate.

Numbers matter, bro.

 

[Padawanbater2]

He is incoherent and his rough draft includes about half of the funding for the low end estimate.

Numbers matter, bro.

That's false, you should actually read the bill

If numbers mattered to you, you would see the error in claiming we can't afford M4A when it's cheaper than what we currently pay for healthcare