bearrock Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, Springfield said: Hint: They’re ALL socialists according to the right wing. Tbf, Sanders is the only one agreeing with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Excuses Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 This is a country full of low information voters. They elected a fascist wanna be dictator in 2016 because he said things that tickled their anger. The largest voting bloc in the country absolutely gives zero ****s about the label “socialist”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 11 minutes ago, Springfield said: Hint: They’re ALL socialists according to the right wing. There is definitely a "boy who cried wolf" dilemma caused by the GOP constantly decrying Obama as a socialist... including when he implemented the GOP Heritage Foundation health plan and financed it partly through the McCain campaign's proposed tax on "Cadillac" health plans. Now millennials associate socialism with competent governance, whereas free markets are mega deficits and handouts to farmers. Bernie is a genuine socialist, a pathological ideologue, which worries the hell out of me, but calling him out as such no longer has any sting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 https://www.npr.org/2020/02/21/808289804/the-indicator-the-candidates-should-be-talking-about it would be nice to have more discussion about the savings rate and what it does/could mean about how well people are actually doing. People with more money are doing a better job while people without money can’t seem to get ahead on something basic like saving money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 I thought the Dems had a pretty good chance at unseating Trump after seeing the 2018 mid-terms. Now all this Bernie nonsense has me thinking Trump is going to easily win if Bernie is the Dem candidate. Also you can't just pull the super delegate switcheroo or the Bernie supporters will take there ball and go home which again leaves Trump winning. Such a mess and I'm not sure how you get out of it now. As for me I'm against a lot Bernie supports. I can't stand Trump. I'd probably end up voting Bernie and trying to find a moderate Dem for the down ballot. I just hate the position I'll be in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Renegade7 said: Jazz, that makes me want to vote for him more, someone with balls in that conversation over there. We probably did need a Jewish president to stand up to them, every other candidate "needed the Jewish vote", bro is like "I'm already Jewish, next question". A Jewish man with family that was killed by the Nazis during WW2. He's the perfect person to finally stand up to Israel's bull****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 I always hear about employer based health coverage being equated to people having a choice, however, every employer I've worked for is the one making the choice for the employees. Sure, you might have a couple options to choose from, but this false idea of having choice through employer health coverage rings a little bit false.. I work for one of the bigger employers in my city and the most recent open enrollment the hammer dropped that one of the major vendors is no longer considered "in network" so anyone using them will either have to pay out of network costs as of Jan 1st 2020, or switch to a completely different plan. People are pretty upset, they will no longer be able to use doctors they have been going to for quite some time. Again, employees had zero choice in that decision. They also were told the HSA employer contribution was being reduced by nearly half the amount. (I say "they" because I am lucky enough that my wife works in the medical industry and we utilize her benefits.) THAT is what people are holding up as choice? If you have employer-based healthcare they can "take it away" or modify it at any time, and with costs constantly going up, it is pretty much guaranteed that if you work at a company long enough, it is going to happen, multiple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDoyler23 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: If you have employer-based healthcare they can "take it away" or modify it at any time, and with costs constantly going up, it is pretty much guaranteed that if you work at a company long enough, it is going to happen, multiple times. Yep. factor in wage stagnation, there are lots of people making less year after year, even with cost of living bumps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 Bernie Castro (heh) has one or two things that I strongly agree with...two being health care and student loan debt shouldn't be a life sentence. I may not agree with him on how to tackle those issues but they imo definitely appeal to the post gen x voting block. It will be interesting should he get the nomination how much I realize BC isn't the putz that his rabid base makes him seem. 😁 4 minutes ago, TheDoyler23 said: Yep. factor in wage stagnation, there are lots of people making less year after year, even with cost of living bumps. Not to mention the whole pre-esisting conditions flip flop this current administration has unleashed (or wants too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 13 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: THAT is what people are holding up as choice? If you have employer-based healthcare they can "take it away" or modify it at any time, and with costs constantly going up, it is pretty much guaranteed that if you work at a company long enough, it is going to happen, multiple times. Exactly, there is no current choice in healthcare. My employer has changed health insurance providers 3x in the last 5 years. They also went from offering 1 plan option to 2 and then back to 1 plan option. Nobody had a say in that except the owner who made the decision based on some idea he has of what he wants to pay versus what coverage we are provided. And the health insurance is listed as part of my salary package as if it's negotiable or something. Imagine if some of that money was freed up to actually provide increased wages to people. There is no choice. And i'd be happy with no choice if I had all my basic needs covered without insurance premiums, copays, deductibles, waiting for the bill in the mail without ever knowing exactly how much it will be, trying to find in-network hospitals and individual doctors, completing endless paperwork for claims, having to decode paperwork to determine if you are covered each time you go etc. its's ridiculous and I consider that I have fairly decent insurance from what i've seen and I still hate it. It's purposely made difficult and confusing because they don't want you to use your insurance they want you to get sick and not file a claim while continuing to pay premiums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 hours ago, bearrock said: You can address medical bankruptcies without going all the way to a Sanders version of a single payer. Heck, even an expanded version of cost sharing subsidies that is both income and asset tested would get that done. It can be a public option or a more balanced single payer. Sanders' single payer has never been close being implemented elsewhere in a developed economy. If it doesn't work like we expected, then what? Warren has shown in the past with the CFPB that she can be an ideologue on the outside, but pragmatist inside. She's also discussed how she would handle compromises on legislative policies. So far it's radio silence from Sanders on what he will do if proposals are DOA and he's offered compromise bills. Hillary 2.0 vs socialist. They are all got gonna get branded and labeled (Trump will make something up if necessary). Like Sanders wont get tarred and feathered with Castro, Isreal, and all the stupid things he should've just stayed away from? Your's and those with opinions like yours are exactly why 45 will be re-elected and the corporate elite and military establishment will stay in power. Let's trash the person left with a legitimate chance at the nomination who wants real change, label him as unrealistic and crazy and nominate a "safer" choice. The rich stay rich, the poor get poorer and nothing really changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsFan44 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 15 minutes ago, goskins10 said: Your's and those with opinions like yours are exactly why 45 will be re-elected and the corporate elite and military establishment will stay in power. Let's trash the person left with a legitimate chance at the nomination who wants real change, label him as unrealistic and crazy and nominate a "safer" choice. The rich stay rich, the poor get poorer and nothing really changes. Nothing changes if Sanders loses in the general. You can turn a blind eye to his vulnerabilities because you like what he's selling, but don't cast unfounded aspersions on people for pointing them out. Add: The concern is what Trump will be able to do with these facts. If you find what the left is doing to Bernie offensive wait till October. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/bernie-sanders-campaign-russia-bots-trolls-bros-2020-election-a9352026.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 50 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: I always hear about employer based health coverage being equated to people having a choice, however, every employer I've worked for is the one making the choice for the employees. If you have employer-based healthcare they can "take it away" or modify it at any time, and with costs constantly going up, it is pretty much guaranteed that if you work at a company long enough, it is going to happen, multiple times. This is why we need to switch from employer provided healthcare to employer subsidized healthcare. Employees get paid a supplemental untaxed benefits wage in addition to salary, which they can then use to purchase health insurance, retirement, dental, etc. Doesn't matter if you are part time or full time, or whether your company has 2 or 2000 employees - there would be a minimum benefits wage just like a minimum wage. You change jobs, you take your health insurance with you. You get laid off and your unemployment benefits include helping to pay for your insurance. This was essentially the Crux of the bipartisan Wyden Bennett bill, which both W and Obama chose not to pursue because they didn't think it would get passed. I hate that everyone is presented with a binary choice of either sticking to a 1940s system based on a time when people seldom changed jobs or a government run single payer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 4 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said: Nothing changes if Sanders loses in the general. You can turn a blind eye to his vulnerabilities because you like what he's selling, but don't cast unfounded aspersions on people for pointing them out. Add: The concern is what Trump will be able to do with these facts. If you find what the left is doing to Bernie offensive wait till October. Of course nothing changes if he loses. No one is saying anything different. And I am not turning a blind eye. He is not even my favorite candidate. Bernie has flaws for sure, hence why he is not my favorite candidate. But medical care for all is just not one of them. All the so called "reasons" are excuses. Again, if we can find enough money to kill people we can find enough money to keep people healthy. This is really one of the many problems with the Democratic party right now in general. If it's not my candidate I am going to find anything I can to tear the other candidates down to justify my choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 The “we have money to kill people” cliche bores me. Feels like virtue-signaling. Some people need to be hustled up by our military and some people need to pay for their own lap-band surgery and Valium. I’d much rather focus on wage-stagnation and separation of wealth. Get that tightened up first and our health care problems will be much easier to tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, TryTheBeal! said: The “we have money to kill people” cliche bores me. Feels like virtue-signaling. Some people need to be hustled up by our military and some people need to pay for their own lap-band surgery and Valium. I’d much rather focus on wage-stagnation and separation of wealth. Get that tightened up first and our health care problems will be much easier to tackle. It's not any less cliche than "How will we pay for health for all?" Let me be clear - I of course see the need for a military. But there is a lot of waste, especially as we insist on being involved in these regime change wars. We keep playing cop to protect big corporation interest and things not in the best interest of the American people as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 10 minutes ago, goskins10 said: It's not any less cliche than "How will we pay for health for all?" Let me be clear - I of course see the need for a military. But there is a lot of waste, especially as we insist on being involved in these regime change wars. We keep playing cop to protect big corporation interest and things not in the best interest of the American people as a whole. War is a revolving door of money courtesy of the tax payer. Tax payers fund the soldiers going in, and then turn around and pay for the hand-picked contractors to do the rebuilding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PF Chang Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 Military expenditures are less than $1 trillion. Yes, the military budget is a problem, but you can't point to it every time Bernie wants to spend trillions on something. Handwaving away trillions in spending with some vague appeal to the military budget doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, PF Chang said: Military expenditures are less than $1 trillion. Yes, the military budget is a problem, but you can't point to it every time Bernie wants to spend trillions on something. Handwaving away trillions in spending with some vague appeal to the military budget doesn't make sense. Exactly where did I or anyone say this was the only solution? The military budget is one place to look. Higher taxes on the rich is another. There is also the offset costs to the individual now where you stop paying insurance premiums and deductibles and use some or even all of that money to start to get medical care for all. Those are just a few places to look for money. If anyone is doing the hand waving, it's those people that are exaggerating the financial impact of the social programs that actually help people. The point here is not, nor ever was, that cuts in military are the sole solution to how to pay for things, regardless of your attempt to frame it that way. The point is that very few bat an eye when the government says lets go tell someone how to run their country but dare to provide services for actual American people, that gets high level of financial scrutiny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 1 hour ago, goskins10 said: Your's and those with opinions like yours are exactly why 45 will be re-elected and the corporate elite and military establishment will stay in power. Let's trash the person left with a legitimate chance at the nomination who wants real change, label him as unrealistic and crazy and nominate a "safer" choice. The rich stay rich, the poor get poorer and nothing really changes. Apparently I'm the problem @tshile 😢 Now I know how you feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 13 minutes ago, goskins10 said: Exactly where did I or anyone say this was the only solution? The military budget is one place to look. Higher taxes on the rich is another. There is also the offset costs to the individual now where you stop paying insurance premiums and deductibles and use some or even all of that money to start to get medical care for all. Those are just a few places to look for money. If anyone is doing the hand waving, it's those people that are exaggerating the financial impact of the social programs that actually help people. The point here is not, nor ever was, that cuts in military are the sole solution to how to pay for things, regardless of your attempt to frame it that way. The point is that very few bat an eye when the government says lets go tell someone how to run their country but dare to provide services for actual American people, that gets high level of financial scrutiny. You're right. We should add up the policies, add up the increase source of tax revenue, and savings from the current expenditure and see where we stand. Quote Cooper: Do you know how all -- how much though? I mean, do you have a price tag for -- for all of this? Sanders: We do. I mean, you know, and -- and-- the price tag is -- it will be substantially less than letting the current system go. I think it's about $30 trillion. Cooper: That's just for "Medicare for All," you're talking about? Sanders: That's just "Medicare for All," yes. Cooper: Do you have -- a price tag for all of these things? Sanders: No, I don't. We try to -- no, you mentioned making public colleges and universities tuition free and canceling all student debt, that's correct. That's what I want to do. We pay for that through a modest tax on Wall Street speculation. Cooper: But you say you don't know what the total price is, but you know how it's gonna be paid for. How do you know it's gonna be paid for if you don't know how much the price is? Sanders: Well, I can't -- you know, I can't rattle off to you every nickel and every dime. But we have accounted for -- you -- you talked about "Medicare for All." We have options out there that will pay for it. Oops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 8 minutes ago, bearrock said: Apparently I'm the problem @tshile 😢 Now I know how you feel. Never mind. Not going there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said: Exactly, there is no current choice in healthcare. My employer has changed health insurance providers 3x in the last 5 years. They also went from offering 1 plan option to 2 and then back to 1 plan option. Nobody had a say in that except the owner who made the decision based on some idea he has of what he wants to pay versus what coverage we are provided. And the health insurance is listed as part of my salary package as if it's negotiable or something. Imagine if some of that money was freed up to actually provide increased wages to people. There certainly is choice. You and the rest of the workers could get together and negotiate/demand something better. If it is part of your salary package, you had an opportunity to negotiate that before you signed. You can negotiate a certain compensation for not taking any employer coverage and then go into the marketplace. You can change employers to one who offers better coverage and have a minimum standard put into your contract. There is plenty of choice. You just have to get off your rear end and work for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PF Chang Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 27 minutes ago, goskins10 said: Exactly where did I or anyone say this was the only solution? The military budget is one place to look. Higher taxes on the rich is another. There is also the offset costs to the individual now where you stop paying insurance premiums and deductibles and use some or even all of that money to start to get medical care for all. Those are just a few places to look for money. You didn't say it was the only solution. It's just the main thing Bernie people point to when justifying programs, whether that's MFA, student loan forgiveness, free college, or 0-6 childcare. Bernie's MFA proposal is also more extreme than the universal healthcare of European countries, though he is successfully convincing people that he's just trying to give us the NHS or Canada's system. 27 minutes ago, goskins10 said: If anyone is doing the hand waving, it's those people that are exaggerating the financial impact of the social programs that actually help people. I want to know the actual financial impact. Responding to that by pointing at other expenditures as Bernie does is just deflection. No, i don't want to pay more in taxes to forgive people's student loans, it's a handout to people in the middle class and up. I am fine with paying more in taxes to provide healthcare for everyone in the country. Bernie's MFA program is not the only way to do that. How are people exaggerating the financial impact when there isn't a straight answer on what the actual financial impact will be? And the military scrutiny thing - come on. It is an incredibly popular opinion to say that the military budget is too high and that we shouldn't be Team America World Police. Edit: I also want to make it clear - I will vote for Sanders if he is the nominee. There is nothing more important than getting the worst President in the history of the country out of office. But there are a lot of negatives about this movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.