PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 I think it's way too early to jump on any ticket. I have a list of my "those people would be great" and i have another list of "they're fine" and another list of "I can't stand them, but they aren't Trump." All 3 lists are fluid right now. The last time there was an open primary with a bunch of candidates (the Republican primary in 2015) the leader at this point was Scott Walker (who did not even make it to the primaries) followed by Jeb! and Trump was literally viewed as a joke candidate. A lot is going to happen over the next year. People will rise and fade, people will have great days and gaffes, surprises will come to light, debates will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 1 minute ago, dfitzo53 said: I'd be happy to hear you elaborate on the specifics of what you don't like. Like PB, I'm not on the Mayor Pete bandwagon. I think "Mayor of South Bend" to "President of the United States" is a huge jump. But I would love for us to talk specifics if you're going to say he (or any candidate) has red flags. I am different. I don't care that he is going from Mayor of South Bend to the President. That's actually something I dig about him. Too many people get stuck on this "wait your turn" thing when its nonsense. If you feel you are ready, why not jump into it. However, he isn't for Medicare for All or some form of universal healthcare. He is very weird on race issues (the displacement of Black and LatinX residents in his city, the police racist tapes, "all lives matter") He seems very much from that Obama/Clinton/Biden school of Democratic Party centrism that doesn't move the needle on anything but it makes us all feel good to hear them talk. I am an adult and I want the government to do something good and make our lives better, not talk good while continue to eff over the common man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 7 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: However, he isn't for Medicare for All or some form of universal healthcare. Why do you think this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Just now, PleaseBlitz said: Why do you think this? Because he said it. Are you going to tell me what positions Buttigieg has taken? I been waiting. If imma be real, Buttigeg, and Beto, sound like guys who won't take positions until their donors tell them which one to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Just now, BenningRoadSkin said: Because he said it. Are you going to tell me what positions Buttigieg has taken? I been waiting. I promise I will, but first I would really appreciate it if you can show me where he said it, and what he said exactly. I'm just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: I promise I will, but first I would really appreciate it if you can show me where he said it, and what he said exactly. I'm just curious. I will, after you share me those positions you told me to google yesterday. I asked first. 🙂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Llevron Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Yall are funny lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 8 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: I will, after you share me those positions you told me to google yesterday. I asked first. 🙂 Fine, here we go. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/sxsw-town-hall-delaney-gabbard-buttigieg/h_e35ba57f801696200371ff713baa8951 Quote Buttigieg wants to make Medicare for all available for those who want it Pete Buttigieg is not opposed to Medicare for all, but he said it should be an option. "The best way to do that is a medicare for all who want it. We take some flavor of Medicare, you make it available on the exchange as a public option. And you invite people to buy into it," he said. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/22/this-is-where-the-2020-presidential-hopefuls-stand-on-health-care.html Quote Medicare for All, or Medicare for More? Here’s where the Democratic presidential candidates stand on health care South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg has also launched a 2020 exploratory committee, and offers yet another route to reforming health care: a Medicare for All-type proposal that keeps private health insurance providers in the equation. In a recent interview with CNBC, Buttigieg said, “The simplest way to think about it is: If Medicare today includes Medicare supplemental, why wouldn’t Medicare for All include a Medicare supplement for all who want it?” https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/03/pete-buttigieg-medicare-for-all-1144293 Quote Buttigieg: 'Medicare for all' wouldn't end private insurance South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg, a declared 2020 presidential candidate, on Sunday said a single-payer health care system is "the right place for us to head as a country," while saying a "Medicare for All" program doesn’t necessarily require doing away with private insurance. Buttigieg responded to questions from ABC host George Stephanopoulos about whether Medicare for all means an end to private insurance. "I don't see why it requires that," the 37-year-old said. "If the framework we're using is Medicare, a lot of people who have Medicare also have Medicare supplements, Medicare Advantage, something like that," Buttigieg added. "So if we want to make Medicare available to everybody, whether it's as a public option to buy in or simply establishing that as how the payer structure works in this country, that's going to be the center of gravity." https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/south-bend-mayor-pete-buttigieg-medicare-all-will-be-center-gravity Quote South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg: Medicare for All Will Be ‘The Center of Gravity’ South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg – the first openly gay man to run for president – told ABC’s “This Week with George Stephanopolous” on Sunday that he supports having a single payer health care system. When asked whether Medicare for all – which Buttigieg supports – means doing away with private insurance, the mayor said, “I don't see why it requires that. I mean, after all, if the framework we're using is Medicare, a lot of people who have Medicare also have Medicare supplements, Medicare Advantage, something like that. There can be a role for the private sector, but just leaving people...” Buttigieg proposed gradually switching over to a single payer system by making a version of Medicare available on the health care exchanges for people to opt into. “Well, you had to make sure that it leads to better results, and if we need a road, a gradual way to get there, then we can start with Medicare for all who want it by making some version of Medicare available on the exchanges for people to opt into, as part of the pathway to Medicare for all so that you can try before you buy so to speak as a country,” he said. Buttigieg said most citizens in most developed countries enjoy a single payer kind of health care, and American’s don’t. “It's wrong,” the mayor said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/medicare-for-all/?utm_term=.25f34bad51ba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Allow me to spike the football too, PB. Here's a macro level summary of Beto's viewpoints. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/14/us/politics/beto-on-the-issues.html Where Beto O’Rourke Stands on the Issues Quote Immigration As President Trump’s proposed border wall has become one of the biggest issues in American politics, Mr. O’Rourke has made immigration the centerpiece of his speeches. In addition to supporting the Dream Act and a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, he has called for the closing of private immigrant detention centers, denounced the “militarization” of immigration enforcement and spoken out against the wall. “We are not safe because of walls but in spite of walls,” he said at a rally in El Paso last month held at the same time Mr. Trump was holding his own rally nearby. Far from extending a barrier across the entire border, he has said, he would like to remove the existing fencing in El Paso — one of the country’s largest border cities, and Mr. O’Rourke’s hometown. In his State of the Union address, Mr. Trump held up El Paso as an example of the need for a wall, claiming that the city had been one of the most dangerous in the United States until a border fence was built there. But the crime rate in El Paso actually fell long before the fence was built and rose afterward, and Mr. O’Rourke is holding up the city as an example of the lack of need for a wall. Gun control Mr. O’Rourke arguably first made his name when, after the shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando in 2016, he live-streamed the sit-in he and other Democratic representatives were holding on the House floor in support of stricter gun laws. The Republican-controlled Congress did not pass any gun control legislation then, but Mr. O’Rourke continues to support similar policies, including universal background checks, magazine size limits and restrictions on some semiautomatic weapons. He also opposes concealed carry reciprocity, which would make concealed carry permits granted in any state valid nationwide, forcing states with strict licensing requirements to recognize permits from states with looser standards. It is one of the National Rifle Association’s legislative priorities. Health care While Mr. O’Rourke supports universal health care — increasingly a litmus-test position for Democratic candidates — he hasn’t committed to a specific way to get there. During his Senate campaign, he suggested that universal health care could take the form of a single-payer system or “a dual system,” in which a government-run program would coexist with private insurance. He supports the Paris climate accords, and has also made a point of emphasizing effects that climate change is having: more storms like Hurricane Harvey, for instance, which devastated Texas. Criminal justice Mr. O’Rourke emphasized criminal justice in his 2018 campaign, focusing in particular on racial and economic inequities. In an op-ed in The Houston Chronicle, he described his own criminal record — he was arrested once for attempted forcible entry and once for drunken driving when he was in his 20s; both charges were dismissed — and argued that his success since then had been possible because of his race and economic status. “The chance that I had, and which I have made the most of, is denied to too many of our fellow Texans, particularly those who don’t look like me or have access to the same opportunities that I did,” he wrote. He called for closing private and for-profit prisons, decriminalizing marijuana and expunging the records of people previously convicted of possessing it, eliminating mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent crimes, and reforming the bail system so people charged with misdemeanors would not be incarcerated because of their inability to pay. He also emphasized rehabilitation for offenders released from prison, including the restoration of voting rights. Currently, those rights vary drastically by state. Trade and agriculture Like many of the Democratic candidates, Mr. O’Rourke has criticized Mr. Trump’s trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs, which have hurt some farmers and blue-collar workers. In his Senate campaign, he emphasized the needs of farmers, calling for a stronger crop insurance program and federal investments in rural infrastructure, including high-speed internet, roads and schools. He has also drawn connections between agricultural policy and immigration policy, noting that immigrants — many of them undocumented — make up a large share of farm laborers. On that basis, he has cast immigration reform as an economic issue as well as a social one. “We should treat these individuals with dignity and respect,” he wrote on his website last year, “because they are a critical component of our agriculture communities.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 28 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said: Fine, here we go. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/sxsw-town-hall-delaney-gabbard-buttigieg/h_e35ba57f801696200371ff713baa8951 https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/22/this-is-where-the-2020-presidential-hopefuls-stand-on-health-care.html https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/03/pete-buttigieg-medicare-for-all-1144293 https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-arter/south-bend-mayor-pete-buttigieg-medicare-all-will-be-center-gravity https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/medicare-for-all/?utm_term=.25f34bad51ba Cheers. And Buttigeg's comments on this is why I know he is jive full of it. "MOve in the direction of medicare-for-all but private insurances companies shouldn't be eliminated" is what he said. For you, that sounds like he is definitely on board. For me, and many others who want that program, it sounds like someone who is hedging his bets and isn't committed. Basically flowery, progressive-sounding words that do not actually say anything. This was written just this morning in the LA Times on Buttigeg. https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-buttigieg-campaign-trump-20190417-story.html 1 Quote He argues that as a Rust Belt mayor who has won votes from Trump supporters, he could be the “electable” candidate Democrats yearn for. Maybe. There’s only one element missing from Buttigieg’s potentially meteoric campaign: positions on major issues. That’s not an accident. He says voters aren’t looking for policy papers. They care about values and character, and knowing that a candidate cares about their lives. He’s partly right. Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign offered so many policy proposals that they got in the way of a broader message. But many voters already ask Buttigieg what he would do if elected. At a CNN town hall last month, voters asked his views on healthcare, unemployment, veterans’ benefits, climate change and whether technology companies like Facebook should be regulated. His answers were a blend of generic Democratic positions and suggestions that more venturesome ideas should be considered. On healthcare, Buttigieg says he believes the United States should “move in the direction of a ‘Medicare for all’ system,” but only gradually — not the immediate change to a government-run system proposed by Bernie Sanders. On taxes, he argues that Trump’s tax cuts for higher-income earners should be reversed. He also supports a wealth tax and a financial transaction tax — but he hasn’t offered specific proposals. Like every Democratic candidate, he supports “comprehensive immigration reform,” but he hasn’t offered proposals for stemming the surge of asylum seekers to the border — or explained how he’d get reform through Congress that has repeatedly rejected it. On Facebook, he says the increasing power of big corporations is “probably the biggest challenge for America right now,” but he stops short of calling for those companies to be broken up, as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has proposed. “It’s not how big they are; it’s how they act,” he said. “And that’s the thing I think we need to be regulating.” This sounds like someone who doesn't have a stance. You all may be fine with that because that's what we are used too. Flowery language that doesn't say anything of substance. Unfortunately, we have had 40+ years of candidates who have done this and not delivered and then put their hands up and say "well I never actually said I would do that." I want more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Let's please stop euphemistically referring to single payer as "medicare for all." People pay into medicare for 40+ years, only use it for about 20 (less on average), and yet there is still a shortfall of around $130,000/person. Even in its current form it is unsustainable, but now Sanders et al want people to believe we can go from people paying twice as long into it as they collect to a system where people collect from it for twice as long as they pay into it with no major repercussions. Nationalizing a sixth of GDP can't be paid for by a tax on the one percent anymore than Trump's b.s. about having a super healthcare plan. Does any country have single payer without some form of federal sales/vat tax? Upping the federal budget from around 20% to nearly half of GDP is going to require major consumption taxes. Get ready for a 10% federal sales tax and $2/gallon gas tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 I really think he is waiting on what his benefactor tells him to move, and he will follow. Its wack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 7 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: And Buttigeg's comments on this is why I know he is jive full of it. "MOve in the direction of medicare-for-all but private insurances companies shouldn't be eliminated" is what he said. For you, that sounds like he is definitely on board. For me, and many others who want that program, it sounds like someone who is hedging his bets and isn't committed. Basically flowery, progressive-sounding words that do not actually say anything. It puts him squarely in the mainstream Democrat position. Bernie is the only person who wants to burn down the entire healthcare system and replace it with a single-payer mandatory system. Bernie wants to kick everyone off of the insurance they currently have and forcibly place them into government healthcare, regardless of the outcomes for individuals. Nearly everyone else is taking the stance of, "if you like your employer-provided healthcare, you can keep it" and, if you don't have good, affordable employer-provided healthcare, you have the option of signing up for Medicare. In that scenario, Medicare acts as both a safety net and a competitor to for-profit health insurers. Unlike Bernie, I am an actual Democrat, and I don't want to be forcibly removed from my very good health insurance and possibly not be able to use the doctors we've established good relationships with, and frankly, I should get to make my own healthcare choices. Again, this is the mainstream Democrat position and Bernie is the only person running that wants to eliminate private healthcare in all respects. So yes, it does not sound like Mayor Pete is committed to kicking everyone off of their current insurance and forcing them to enroll in Medicare. This is a feature, not a bug. 10 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: I really think he is waiting on what his benefactor tells him to move, and he will follow. Its wack. You are one of my favorite people on this board, but this is some QAnon bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 You can still have private health insurance companies in a medicare for all system or single payer. It just means private insurance would be used to cover different things and not primary care. Not sure if that is what Buttigieg is meaning though. Another big question I would have if we shifted away from employer-based insurance, what happens to the crazy amount that companies currently have to contribute to insurance, would that translate into possibly higher wages for employes or would employers just say "thank you very much" and pocket that eliminated expense? I am not sure a most people realize how much companies have to pay into the insurance pool for employees' plans, especially those on family plans. One aspect I find about the entire health insurance/health care discussion that seems to continually be ignored is the desperate need to get the population more healthy & fit in the first place. We still seem to ignore a lot of reasons people get sick in the first place. Being able to access health care is one piece to the puzzle, but only one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Another problem with going to a simpler healthcare system all at once: what do you do with all the people employed in the current system? Those who deny/approve claims? Those in the offices who file the claims? That's a multi-million personnel problem where millions will end up unemployed all at once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LD0506 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 I am loving this Benning/PB ping pong match............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, LD0506 said: I am loving this Benning/PB ping pong match............. I feel like: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 I didn’t really like the answer Beto gave last night on his donations. I don’t think it’s a huge issue but he didn’t articulate what he was trying to say as well as he could have. This is better. But this isn’t the discussion I want to have with any candidate when they release 10 years of tax returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 2 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: Another problem with going to a simpler healthcare system all at once: what do you do with all the people employed in the current system? Those who deny/approve claims? Those in the offices who file the claims? That's a multi-million personnel problem where millions will end up unemployed all at once. I am assuming a large majority would be swallowed by the new healthcare system/infrastructure. If suddenly every single citizen can go to the doctor, you'd think it is going to suddenly create a whole lot more work on the administration side to where currently employee levels couldn't handle it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 3 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said: It puts him squarely in the mainstream Democrat position. Bernie is the only person who wants to burn down the entire healthcare system and replace it with a single-payer mandatory system. Bernie wants to kick everyone off of the insurance they currently have and forcibly place them into government healthcare, regardless of the outcomes for individuals. Nearly everyone else is taking the stance of, "if you like your employer-provided healthcare, you can keep it" and, if you don't have good, affordable employer-provided healthcare, you have the option of signing up for Medicare. In that scenario, Medicare acts as both a safety net and a competitor to for-profit health insurers. Unlike Bernie, I am an actual Democrat, and I don't want to be forcibly removed from my very good health insurance and possibly not be able to use the doctors we've established good relationships with, and frankly, I should get to make my own healthcare choices. Again, this is the mainstream Democrat position and Bernie is the only person running that wants to eliminate private healthcare in all respects. So yes, it does not sound like Mayor Pete is committed to kicking everyone off of their current insurance and forcing them to enroll in Medicare. This is a feature, not a bug. What exactly does he want to do with M4A? Moving to a direction is a hedge to me. My frustration with this thinking is that "move into the direction" is what Dems have told us about every major policy for hte last 40 years only not to actually do anything. Thats why his lack of a stane on matters is frustrating. He should tell us how that will happen. I rock with Elizabeth Warren more than anyone and she isn't totally on board for M4A, but she at least gives an idea of how to get there. Buttigeg is basically winking and smiling his way through the polls. 5 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said: You are one of my favorite people on this board, but this is some QAnon bull****. I take great offense to this. We know money has a significant influence in politics. I hope we could have publicly financed elections to get rid of all this nonsesne. I dont think its crazy to think dude is playing it coy for donors. They all do it. Also, I rock with you too homie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 53 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: I am assuming a large majority would be swallowed by the new healthcare system/infrastructure. If suddenly every single citizen can go to the doctor, you'd think it is going to suddenly create a whole lot more work on the administration side to where currently employee levels couldn't handle it. That's not necessarily true if the administrative side is simplified, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Just now, LadySkinsFan said: That's not necessarily true if the administrative side is simplified, I think. Over the long term I think you are correct, but in the immediate future I could see it creating a huge backlog and needing to beef up staff dramatically. The likelihood of the transition being smooth is low. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 41 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said: What exactly does he want to do with M4A? Moving to a direction is a hedge to me. My frustration with this thinking is that "move into the direction" is what Dems have told us about every major policy for hte last 40 years only not to actually do anything. Thats why his lack of a stane on matters is frustrating. He should tell us how that will happen. I rock with Elizabeth Warren more than anyone and she isn't totally on board for M4A, but she at least gives an idea of how to get there. Buttigeg is basically winking and smiling his way through the polls. There are different "flavors" of what is generally described as Medicare for All. https://www.vox.com/2018/12/13/18103087/medicare-for-all-explained-single-payer-health-care-sanders-jayapal Every single Democrat running does not want to rip up the system that we have in place, start completely over, and force everyone onto single-payer government healthcare. Non-Democrat Bernie is the only one that wants that. Most everyone else wants everyone to be eligible for Medicare if they want to go that route, but not be forced to give up what they currently have if they like it. The problem with Bernie's plan, and your frustration (which I get), is that forcing everyone off of what they currently have and forcing them into a single payer system is not universally popular even among Democrats. Therefore, there is no realistic way to get there legislatively. At least, Bernie hasn't said how he'd get there, that I am aware of. A whole bunch of Democrat Senators are already on record saying they would not support eliminating private insurance. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/29/18283875/senate-democrats-medicare-for-all-bernie-sanders Quote So I asked nine Democratic senators, none of whom are running for president, if they could support eliminating private health insurance. “No,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) said, point blank. He’s not alone. “I think there is a role for private insurance as well as public insurance,” Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), who has a bill lowering the Medicare age to 50, said. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT): “Let [private insurance] compete against Medicare and see who wins in the marketplace.” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH): “I don’t think we are in a position yet where we can get rid of private insurance.” Tim Kaine (D-VA): Medicare X. Which is putting a really powerful nonprofit option on the exchanges. So that wouldn’t eliminate private insurance, you could go buy private insurance if you wanted to. But you would give them a nonprofit option that I think many people would find very attractive. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD): “Oh goodness.” What Tim Kaine is talking about is the standard, popular Democrat position. Bernie's plan is pie-in-the-sky, hope the voters don't figure out that it cannot pass but vote for me because i fight [just like Trump]. Quote I take great offense to this. We know money has a significant influence in politics. I hope we could have publicly financed elections to get rid of all this nonsesne. I dont think its crazy to think dude is playing it coy for donors. They all do it. Also, I rock with you too homie. I'm definitely not trying to offend. Yes, money has a huge influence in politics. I wish we could overturn Citizens United and get the corporate money out. That is not the same thing as saying that anyone is "waiting on what his benefactor tells him" without providing a lick of evidence and, rather, is just a bad faith argument. If they all do it, why are you singling anyone out for doing it? According to 538, Mayor Pete got 64% of his fundraising from donations of less than $200. Bernie got 74% from donors of less than $200. Is 10% that big of a deal to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 6 hours ago, Riggo-toni said: Let's please stop euphemistically referring to single payer as "medicare for all." People pay into medicare for 40+ years, only use it for about 20 (less on average), and yet there is still a shortfall of around $130,000/person. Even in its current form it is unsustainable, but now Sanders et al want people to believe we can go from people paying twice as long into it as they collect to a system where people collect from it for twice as long as they pay into it with no major repercussions. Nationalizing a sixth of GDP can't be paid for by a tax on the one percent anymore than Trump's b.s. about having a super healthcare plan. Does any country have single payer without some form of federal sales/vat tax? Upping the federal budget from around 20% to nearly half of GDP is going to require major consumption taxes. Get ready for a 10% federal sales tax and $2/gallon gas tax. There's absolutely no way we can afford medicare for all unless prices come down, has to be done same time. And one thing that does bother me about this idea even though I support it is lack of dialogue about what would happen if private insurance industry was wiped out. Let's say its done in way medicare part D is unnecessary, that could mean a serious amount of unemployed people. What is the plan for them? Retraining via federal subsidies? People like Sanders can't keep talking about all the good they plan to do without being clear on how to cover for full ramifications of the changes they want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 9 minutes ago, Renegade7 said: There's absolutely no way we can afford medicare for all unless prices come down, has to be done same time. And one thing that does bother me about this idea even though I support it is lack of dialogue about what would happen if private insurance industry was wiped out. Let's say its done in way medicare part D is unnecessary, that could mean a serious amount of unemployed people. What is the plan for them? Retraining via federal subsidies? People like Sanders can't keep talking about all the good they plan to do without being clear on how to cover for full ramifications of the changes they want. I find it funny that we cast off the whole coal industry and the workers it employs yet when it comes to the health care industry we are all like “what about their jobs?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.