• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:59 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Ok good, you seem pretty convinced and confident, how about raising taxes on anyone who makes more than 29K?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HreWAip ... tion=share

You think this is a winning argument? Its a tough sell.


It's not a tough sell at all - it's just missing context the way the clip is cut. This is exactly how things work in Japan, Germany, France etc - anywhere with a Medicare system. Instead of paying $500/month for premiums, in a $60K job, you'd pay a $200/month healthcare tax. Employers will love it once more people opt into the system, as they'll have dramatic savings. If people hear they'll be saving $250 month on average, and will be able to choose any provider or clinic they want instead of negotiating deductibles and comparing 'networks' AND that nothing will change when they change jobs, it'll quickly become more popular, especially among young workers.

And people like me who have used such systems when living abroad will spread the word. All Sanders needs to do on the debate stage is ask Trump: how much does a family of four pay in premiums now? He won't know the answer, and people will see who on the stage is actually interested in their lives.


Nice way to sell it, when voters know that you are raising taxes also to pay for illegal immigrants health care, college debt forgiveness and free housing and still ballooning the debt, you will put them off instantly.


As long as the law stipulates how the Medicare tax is to be used, that’s not a concern at all.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 12:15 am

Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

It's not a tough sell at all - it's just missing context the way the clip is cut. This is exactly how things work in Japan, Germany, France etc - anywhere with a Medicare system. Instead of paying $500/month for premiums, in a $60K job, you'd pay a $200/month healthcare tax. Employers will love it once more people opt into the system, as they'll have dramatic savings. If people hear they'll be saving $250 month on average, and will be able to choose any provider or clinic they want instead of negotiating deductibles and comparing 'networks' AND that nothing will change when they change jobs, it'll quickly become more popular, especially among young workers.

And people like me who have used such systems when living abroad will spread the word. All Sanders needs to do on the debate stage is ask Trump: how much does a family of four pay in premiums now? He won't know the answer, and people will see who on the stage is actually interested in their lives.


Nice way to sell it, when voters know that you are raising taxes also to pay for illegal immigrants health care, college debt forgiveness and free housing and still ballooning the debt, you will put them off instantly.


As long as the law stipulates how the Medicare tax is to be used, that’s not a concern at all.



If you think the medical industry is gonna take Medicare reimbursements without a fight, you need to study their political power.

WRT to wage growth

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:35 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:

Nice way to sell it, when voters know that you are raising taxes also to pay for illegal immigrants health care, college debt forgiveness and free housing and still ballooning the debt, you will put them off instantly.


As long as the law stipulates how the Medicare tax is to be used, that’s not a concern at all.



If you think the medical industry is gonna take Medicare reimbursements without a fight, you need to study their political power.

WRT to wage growth

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/wage-growth


Nominal wage growth is a completely useless KPI outside of context, probably why the WH loves it because 4% sounds amazing. Real wages are what matter to people improving their situation, and they are crap.

Real average weekly earnings for all employees on nonfarm payrolls now show ZERO growth over the past year, which is largely due to the rise in the CPI and decline in average hours worked, as can be seen below. If YOUR inflation rate is higher than 2.3% and you earn hourly wages, then it is very likely you are realizing a decline in purchasing power. That's not a good sign for consumer spending moving forward.

https://seekingalpha.com/amp/article/43 ... age-growth

Real average weekly earnings for all employees have been at 1% growth for most of this administration and more recently are zeroed out:

Image

The chart for average hourly real wage for nonsupervisory workers doesn’t look that great either:

Image
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:41 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

It's not a tough sell at all - it's just missing context the way the clip is cut. This is exactly how things work in Japan, Germany, France etc - anywhere with a Medicare system. Instead of paying $500/month for premiums, in a $60K job, you'd pay a $200/month healthcare tax. Employers will love it once more people opt into the system, as they'll have dramatic savings. If people hear they'll be saving $250 month on average, and will be able to choose any provider or clinic they want instead of negotiating deductibles and comparing 'networks' AND that nothing will change when they change jobs, it'll quickly become more popular, especially among young workers.

And people like me who have used such systems when living abroad will spread the word. All Sanders needs to do on the debate stage is ask Trump: how much does a family of four pay in premiums now? He won't know the answer, and people will see who on the stage is actually interested in their lives.

Except what Sanders is selling is NOT how it works in Japan, Germany, France etc. In almost all developed or Western countries with universal healthcare, you will not find that the vast majority of them: 1) Ban all private insurance 2) Cover dental, vision, long-term care, mental health, drugs, hospital stays and primary care for all 3) All with zero co-pays or deductibles. His plan is radical even by universal healthcare standards.


The starting point for discussion is obviously neither here nor there - it’s to galvanize debate. This guy has been in the Senate a long time and knows full well that what could actually get passed will be a medium-rare version more similar to what other countries have.

I could not disagree more. Setting aside the fact that Sanders has never shown himself to be anything resembling a pragmatist or comprising individual, how exactly is "galvanizing debate" productive when it's centered around complete falsehoods and disingenuousness? He's selling people on something wholly different from reality, and it's going to breed nothing but distrust around anything that actually may get passed...say nothing of galvanizing the opposition.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:44 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Except what Sanders is selling is NOT how it works in Japan, Germany, France etc. In almost all developed or Western countries with universal healthcare, you will not find that the vast majority of them: 1) Ban all private insurance 2) Cover dental, vision, long-term care, mental health, drugs, hospital stays and primary care for all 3) All with zero co-pays or deductibles. His plan is radical even by universal healthcare standards.


The starting point for discussion is obviously neither here nor there - it’s to galvanize debate. This guy has been in the Senate a long time and knows full well that what could actually get passed will be a medium-rare version more similar to what other countries have.

I could not disagree more. Setting aside the fact that Sanders has never shown himself to be anything resembling a pragmatist or comprising individual, how exactly is "galvanizing debate" productive when it's centered around complete falsehoods and disingenuousness? He's selling people on something wholly different from reality, and it's going to breed nothing but distrust around anything that actually may get passed...say nothing of galvanizing the opposition.


The discussion is being had around the country - moreso than in 2016 and definitely moreso than when the 44 admin went courting private insurers on what they’d need to get to make ACA work.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:58 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

The starting point for discussion is obviously neither here nor there - it’s to galvanize debate. This guy has been in the Senate a long time and knows full well that what could actually get passed will be a medium-rare version more similar to what other countries have.

I could not disagree more. Setting aside the fact that Sanders has never shown himself to be anything resembling a pragmatist or comprising individual, how exactly is "galvanizing debate" productive when it's centered around complete falsehoods and disingenuousness? He's selling people on something wholly different from reality, and it's going to breed nothing but distrust around anything that actually may get passed...say nothing of galvanizing the opposition.


The discussion is being had around the country - moreso than in 2016 and definitely moreso than when the 44 admin went courting private insurers on what they’d need to get to make ACA work.

It's been a perennial topic that's ebbed and flowed for decades, nothing really earth-shattering this time around that hasn't already been hashed out in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 90s except Sanders has some hyped up Millennial and GenZers actually thinking "Medicare for All" is a thing and that tons of other countries do it.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:09 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
I could not disagree more. Setting aside the fact that Sanders has never shown himself to be anything resembling a pragmatist or comprising individual, how exactly is "galvanizing debate" productive when it's centered around complete falsehoods and disingenuousness? He's selling people on something wholly different from reality, and it's going to breed nothing but distrust around anything that actually may get passed...say nothing of galvanizing the opposition.


The discussion is being had around the country - moreso than in 2016 and definitely moreso than when the 44 admin went courting private insurers on what they’d need to get to make ACA work.

It's been a perennial topic that's ebbed and flowed for decades, nothing really earth-shattering this time around that hasn't already been hashed out in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 90s except Sanders has some hyped up Millennial and GenZers actually thinking "Medicare for All" is a thing and that tons of other countries do it.


Arguably little debate has been had in the public about what we actually want since the 1973 HMO Act.

As for the hype, he is promoting awareness that better ways are already out there:

https://youtu.be/X9XZcgFZdi0

https://youtu.be/MHzUCToycks

https://youtu.be/1d3QLPdHysc
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:29 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

The discussion is being had around the country - moreso than in 2016 and definitely moreso than when the 44 admin went courting private insurers on what they’d need to get to make ACA work.

It's been a perennial topic that's ebbed and flowed for decades, nothing really earth-shattering this time around that hasn't already been hashed out in the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 90s except Sanders has some hyped up Millennial and GenZers actually thinking "Medicare for All" is a thing and that tons of other countries do it.


Arguably little debate has been had in the public about what we actually want since the 1973 HMO Act.

Single-payer has always been floating around, the debate has percolated up in rounds several times over the decades...and "what we want" has always been pretty clear actually, with little change: We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.

Aaron747 wrote:
As for the hype, he is promoting awareness that better ways are already out there:

https://youtu.be/X9XZcgFZdi0

https://youtu.be/MHzUCToycks

https://youtu.be/1d3QLPdHysc

Not really. These other systems have been around for quite some time, and the knowledge has been out there for decades and decades and decades. What Sanders is promoting is deceptive and fantasy.
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:57 am

flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:11 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image


The money that is spent in US health care goes somewhere and “somewhere” isn’t gonna give it up without a fight. The idea that there’s “waste “ that easy pickings is a pipe dream just like there’s “waste” on government. One man’s waste is another woman’s pay check.

GF
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 11027
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:16 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image


The money that is spent in US health care goes somewhere and “somewhere” isn’t gonna give it up without a fight. The idea that there’s “waste “ that easy pickings is a pipe dream just like there’s “waste” on government. One man’s waste is another woman’s pay check.

GF


We should welcome that fight because the data is out there and the discussion needs to be had. At least we're not talking about misleading wage growth claims anymore.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
 
Thunderbolt500
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:01 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:24 am

I'm tired of seeing all the Mike Bloomberg ads on tv.
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:55 am

I haven't seen any but I don't watch T.V. but I've seen a lot of Tom Steyer ads on the internet so I get it.
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:56 am

I haven't seen any but I don't watch T.V. but I've seen a lot of Tom Steyer ads on the internet so I get it.
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:04 am

Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:17 am

flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:39 am

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.

No, Seb. The snake oil is Sanders telling people that implementing a universal healthcare system covering everyone and all services with zero copays or deductibles is possible/feasible. It's not and that's NOT how it works in all the other countries he likes to point to as examples. He's just straight-up lying.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 1866
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:16 am

apodino wrote:

A lot of establishment Democrats are worried about the down ballot effect on their own races because of Bernie, and this is also a part of it. People like Ilhan Omar and AOC are the ones who get all the media attention from the last election where the Democrats came back into power, but they were also elected from dark Blue districts. Where the House was won was in swing districts and with more moderate candidates, one of whom has already changed parties. There is concern that a Sanders ticket would turn off voters in these districts and send them across the aisle, possibly even with the Republicans taking back the house. (Nancy Pelosi would be a dead woman if this happens which is why I think she is trying to stop Bernie behind the scenes even with the Squad supporting him) On the senate side, Doug Jones is pretty much a dead man walking (Roy Moore is not going to get the nomination this time), Maine is not quite as liberal as other parts of New England (Trump did get an electoral vote here four years ago, and the democrats won a seat despite getting fewer votes than the Republican because of the Ranked Choice Voting system), and Susan Collins has won tough battles here before. I don't think Sanders is going to be much help to Mark Kelly in Arizona as he tries to unseat McSallay.

And then with the house races, who knows? If the GOP keeps the senate, a President Sanders would have an impossible task trying to get the judges he wants confirmed, so he is going to have to compromise there. And anything he promotes on the campaign trail is DOA in a GOP senate. So the biggest question is, what would a Sanders Cabinet look like? I suspect it would not be a lot of Washington insiders, which is another reason the establishment fears Sanders. And also, would Sanders cabinet even be able to be confirmed by the Senate?


Bernie showed that he could almost get 50% of the pledged delegates against Hillary & the Empire, imagine running against that machine. But that really means that 25% of the total voters were in for Bernie (D + I + R). Can Bernie bring those Hill16 voters out in 20 and vote for him, if 10% or more of the Hill16 voters stay home. If Bernie is shut out this time and runs 3rd party, it will split the vote.

My big question is where is the enthusiasm, it feels quite low key this year, what happens a month after super Tuesday.

With 4 or more still in the race @ super Tuesday and with proportional delegates. After 2 races were are at 22 Buttigieg 21 Bernie 8 Warren 7 Amy 6 Biden It could be a race with no one getting even 40% of delegates in the first half so they must get 60% in the 2nd Half. Will Bloomie get many, who knows - I wouldn't vote for a bazillionaire who is buying his way in vs fighting.

There are worries that the Nevada Caucus is having software problems also, what happened to spread sheets and faxed forms. As long as the official sheets are signed and controlled, minor and moderate corrections can be made to the rapid tabulation. But folks, we have done caucuses before, it is not rocket science.
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:24 am

flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.

No, Seb. The snake oil is Sanders telling people that implementing a universal healthcare system covering everyone and all services with zero copays or deductibles is possible/feasible. It's not and that's NOT how it works in all the other countries he likes to point to as examples. He's just straight-up lying.


And that is the lie Republicans keep pushing. Free. Republicans keep saying "we can not afford free (health care, housing, college, food, etc)" but Republicans are the only ones saying free. Other developed countries that have universal health care never said it was free. They said health care covers all citizens. So, stop with that lie.

universal =/= free
affordable =/= free

Only Republicans think and say that.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:45 am

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.

No, Seb. The snake oil is Sanders telling people that implementing a universal healthcare system covering everyone and all services with zero copays or deductibles is possible/feasible. It's not and that's NOT how it works in all the other countries he likes to point to as examples. He's just straight-up lying.


And that is the lie Republicans keep pushing. Free. Republicans keep saying "we can not afford free (health care, housing, college, food, etc)" but Republicans are the only ones saying free. Other developed countries that have universal health care never said it was free. They said health care covers all citizens. So, stop with that lie.

universal =/= free

Only Republicans think and say that.

Oh lord, I swear you're just as bad as a MAGA supporter in your uncanny ability to read straight past the point and only argue what you want :roll:

First of all, not a Republican here. Secondly, nowhere did I use the word "free," that's not what we're even talking about so I don't know what lie you're implying. Third, please point to an example of a developed nation with a universal healthcare system that, as Sanders is proposing, a) bans all private insurance b) covers every single person not just for basic medical but also dental, vision, drugs, long-term care, mental health and hospital stays c) does all of that with zero copays or deductibles on-top of whatever income tax is levied to fund it. Go ahead, I'll wait...

The point is: almost all the healthcare systems in other countries Sanders like to point to as examples don't at all resemble what he's proposing: they co-exist with private insurance, they cover a narrower set of services, have some element of "user pays" copay or deductible associated with care, and don't in fact force everyone into the public system (i.e. those who can afford private care can opt to do so). What Sanders is proposing is more comprehensive, disruptive, and more expensive than any other system...you couldn't raise taxes high enough on anyone to pay for it.
 
AirWorthy99
Posts: 773
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2020 7:57 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:53 pm

I think a good point about Bernie Sanders getting anything done is a good one, considering the man has been for a long time in congress and not a single significant piece of legislation authored by him has been made law. That speaks volume about this capacity of getting all sides together on anything really.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ers/400357
“In my experience eloquent men are right every bit as often as imbeciles.” Tyrion Lannister
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:00 pm

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.


As if depositing the money in a bank to use for small business loans is “.wasted” or using it to fund a start-up venture is wasted. Ever hear of Apple, Microsoft or Amazon. Investing money is better than spending it, something about giving fish or teaching fishing.
 
NIKV69
Posts: 13205
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:24 pm

AirWorthy99 wrote:
I think a good point about Bernie Sanders getting anything done is a good one, considering the man has been for a long time in congress and not a single significant piece of legislation authored by him has been made law. That speaks volume about this capacity of getting all sides together on anything really.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ers/400357


Here in lies the issue. Bernie does not what to even talk to the other side. He loathes them and constantly calls them racist etc. It's this "our way or the highway" and vilifying that turns a lot of independents off. The fringe has and will be rejected again this November. high tax, open borders and weak on defense is a non starter but Nancy and the rest of the Dem fringe just don't get it. They will probably blame Russia and us stupid voters again.
I am the Googlizer!!!
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:56 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
No, Seb. The snake oil is Sanders telling people that implementing a universal healthcare system covering everyone and all services with zero copays or deductibles is possible/feasible. It's not and that's NOT how it works in all the other countries he likes to point to as examples. He's just straight-up lying.


And that is the lie Republicans keep pushing. Free. Republicans keep saying "we can not afford free (health care, housing, college, food, etc)" but Republicans are the only ones saying free. Other developed countries that have universal health care never said it was free. They said health care covers all citizens. So, stop with that lie.

universal =/= free

Only Republicans think and say that.

Oh lord, I swear you're just as bad as a MAGA supporter in your uncanny ability to read straight past the point and only argue what you want :roll:

First of all, not a Republican here. Secondly, nowhere did I use the word "free," that's not what we're even talking about so I don't know what lie you're implying. Third, please point to an example of a developed nation with a universal healthcare system that, as Sanders is proposing, a) bans all private insurance b) covers every single person not just for basic medical but also dental, vision, drugs, long-term care, mental health and hospital stays c) does all of that with zero copays or deductibles on-top of whatever income tax is levied to fund it. Go ahead, I'll wait...

The point is: almost all the healthcare systems in other countries Sanders like to point to as examples don't at all resemble what he's proposing: they co-exist with private insurance, they cover a narrower set of services, have some element of "user pays" copay or deductible associated with care, and don't in fact force everyone into the public system (i.e. those who can afford private care can opt to do so). What Sanders is proposing is more comprehensive, disruptive, and more expensive than any other system...you couldn't raise taxes high enough on anyone to pay for it.


You said "free" when you said "zero deductibles, zero copays". And, no, no one is suggesting getting rid of private insurance for those who can afford it. Only your Republican boogieman. We need to have a basic level of care that everyone can access. Right now, that is going to the emergency room to find out a person has end stage cancer or is in organ failure because they can not afford to see a doctor on a regular basis, much less pay for treatment. Literally none of that is "get rid of all private insurance" at all. No where close.

The biggest reason you Republicans think it will cost so much is because Republicans believe private insurance companies must turn a huge profit every single quarter. Republicans keep going on and on about how they are the party of the everyman but take and take from us to give to the few very wealthy. Republicans go on and on about how life is sacred and precious then blame those of us with jobs for not being able to afford health care. Just work more, you all say. Just make more money, you all say. Don't get sick, you all say. That is the Republican way.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:34 pm

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

And that is the lie Republicans keep pushing. Free. Republicans keep saying "we can not afford free (health care, housing, college, food, etc)" but Republicans are the only ones saying free. Other developed countries that have universal health care never said it was free. They said health care covers all citizens. So, stop with that lie.

universal =/= free

Only Republicans think and say that.

Oh lord, I swear you're just as bad as a MAGA supporter in your uncanny ability to read straight past the point and only argue what you want :roll:

First of all, not a Republican here. Secondly, nowhere did I use the word "free," that's not what we're even talking about so I don't know what lie you're implying. Third, please point to an example of a developed nation with a universal healthcare system that, as Sanders is proposing, a) bans all private insurance b) covers every single person not just for basic medical but also dental, vision, drugs, long-term care, mental health and hospital stays c) does all of that with zero copays or deductibles on-top of whatever income tax is levied to fund it. Go ahead, I'll wait...

The point is: almost all the healthcare systems in other countries Sanders like to point to as examples don't at all resemble what he's proposing: they co-exist with private insurance, they cover a narrower set of services, have some element of "user pays" copay or deductible associated with care, and don't in fact force everyone into the public system (i.e. those who can afford private care can opt to do so). What Sanders is proposing is more comprehensive, disruptive, and more expensive than any other system...you couldn't raise taxes high enough on anyone to pay for it.


You said "free" when you said "zero deductibles, zero copays".

No I didn't, that is not what zero deductibles or zero copay means. Deductibles and copays are payments made by beneficiaries for care on-top of whatever premiums or taxes for the base insurance. And for the record, it's your dude Sanders claiming there will be zero deductibles and zero copays.

Seb146 wrote:
And, no, no one is suggesting getting rid of private insurance for those who can afford it. Only your Republican boogieman.

Wrong again. Literally Bernie Sanders: "Let us all be very clear about this. If you support Medicare for All, you have to be willing to end the greed of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. That means boldly transforming our dysfunctional system by ending the use of private health insurance, except to cover non-essential care like cosmetic surgeries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... insurance/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/these-2 ... rance.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1VV13A

Also a good summation:

In defending Medicare for All on the campaign trail, Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and their allies frequently point to the many other developed countries that have successfully implemented a universal health care regime. But Sanders’ bill -- which makes every health service available to every U.S. resident free of charge -- would create a system more generous and far-reaching than any other country in the world. Its ban on nearly all forms of private health insurance other than for niche procedures like cosmetic surgery is also unlike anywhere else on earth.

Denmark, the United Kingdom and Germany, for example, all charge patients for some pharmaceuticals and hospital stays. Australia charges copays for visits to a specialist. In the Netherlands, residents have to pay down a nearly $500 deductible before their insurance kicks in. In Canada, the country Sanders points to most frequently as a model, supplemental private insurance is widely used to cover things not covered by the government, including mental health, vision, dental care and many prescription drugs.

Every country with some form of universal health care either requires some out-of-pocket costs or puts a limit on the benefits available in order to make the system work. And many, if not most of them, still have thriving parallel private insurance industries.

https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/20 ... ren-072161
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:57 pm

Health Insurance providers’ margins are anything like “fat”; around 4%

https://naic.org/documents/topic_insura ... report.pdf
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:11 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Oh lord, I swear you're just as bad as a MAGA supporter in your uncanny ability to read straight past the point and only argue what you want :roll:

First of all, not a Republican here. Secondly, nowhere did I use the word "free," that's not what we're even talking about so I don't know what lie you're implying. Third, please point to an example of a developed nation with a universal healthcare system that, as Sanders is proposing, a) bans all private insurance b) covers every single person not just for basic medical but also dental, vision, drugs, long-term care, mental health and hospital stays c) does all of that with zero copays or deductibles on-top of whatever income tax is levied to fund it. Go ahead, I'll wait...

The point is: almost all the healthcare systems in other countries Sanders like to point to as examples don't at all resemble what he's proposing: they co-exist with private insurance, they cover a narrower set of services, have some element of "user pays" copay or deductible associated with care, and don't in fact force everyone into the public system (i.e. those who can afford private care can opt to do so). What Sanders is proposing is more comprehensive, disruptive, and more expensive than any other system...you couldn't raise taxes high enough on anyone to pay for it.


You said "free" when you said "zero deductibles, zero copays".

No I didn't, that is not what zero deductibles or zero copay means. Deductibles and copays are payments made by beneficiaries for care on-top of whatever premiums or taxes for the base insurance. And for the record, it's your dude Sanders claiming there will be zero deductibles and zero copays.

Seb146 wrote:
And, no, no one is suggesting getting rid of private insurance for those who can afford it. Only your Republican boogieman.

Wrong again. Literally Bernie Sanders: "Let us all be very clear about this. If you support Medicare for All, you have to be willing to end the greed of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. That means boldly transforming our dysfunctional system by ending the use of private health insurance, except to cover non-essential care like cosmetic surgeries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... insurance/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/these-2 ... rance.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1VV13A

Also a good summation:

In defending Medicare for All on the campaign trail, Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and their allies frequently point to the many other developed countries that have successfully implemented a universal health care regime. But Sanders’ bill -- which makes every health service available to every U.S. resident free of charge -- would create a system more generous and far-reaching than any other country in the world. Its ban on nearly all forms of private health insurance other than for niche procedures like cosmetic surgery is also unlike anywhere else on earth.

Denmark, the United Kingdom and Germany, for example, all charge patients for some pharmaceuticals and hospital stays. Australia charges copays for visits to a specialist. In the Netherlands, residents have to pay down a nearly $500 deductible before their insurance kicks in. In Canada, the country Sanders points to most frequently as a model, supplemental private insurance is widely used to cover things not covered by the government, including mental health, vision, dental care and many prescription drugs.

Every country with some form of universal health care either requires some out-of-pocket costs or puts a limit on the benefits available in order to make the system work. And many, if not most of them, still have thriving parallel private insurance industries.

https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/20 ... ren-072161


Thank you for finally posting links to your assertions. Sanders still does not say "free" health care, which is what Republicans keep saying he says. He did not say that. Even your point about medical care for all makes a great point: those in Holland, Australia, Canada all pay less than Americans pay for health care. Plus, citizens of those countries have preventive care. We only have preventive care if we can afford it.

Republcians also keep screaming about being a Christian nation. So, where did Christ ever demand proof of payment, insurance card, income requirements, and deductible to heal the sick? I swear there is a new Bible out there that replaces my grandmother's from 1921.....
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:15 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Health Insurance providers’ margins are anything like “fat”; around 4%

https://naic.org/documents/topic_insura ... report.pdf


They made a total of $23 BILLION last year. Including over charging for things like aspirin and bandages and "administrative costs" and denying care for people in need, so, yeah, let's all feel sorry for those poor, poor health insurance companies.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 10:30 pm

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

You said "free" when you said "zero deductibles, zero copays".

No I didn't, that is not what zero deductibles or zero copay means. Deductibles and copays are payments made by beneficiaries for care on-top of whatever premiums or taxes for the base insurance. And for the record, it's your dude Sanders claiming there will be zero deductibles and zero copays.

Seb146 wrote:
And, no, no one is suggesting getting rid of private insurance for those who can afford it. Only your Republican boogieman.

Wrong again. Literally Bernie Sanders: "Let us all be very clear about this. If you support Medicare for All, you have to be willing to end the greed of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. That means boldly transforming our dysfunctional system by ending the use of private health insurance, except to cover non-essential care like cosmetic surgeries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... insurance/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/these-2 ... rance.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1VV13A

Also a good summation:

In defending Medicare for All on the campaign trail, Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and their allies frequently point to the many other developed countries that have successfully implemented a universal health care regime. But Sanders’ bill -- which makes every health service available to every U.S. resident free of charge -- would create a system more generous and far-reaching than any other country in the world. Its ban on nearly all forms of private health insurance other than for niche procedures like cosmetic surgery is also unlike anywhere else on earth.

Denmark, the United Kingdom and Germany, for example, all charge patients for some pharmaceuticals and hospital stays. Australia charges copays for visits to a specialist. In the Netherlands, residents have to pay down a nearly $500 deductible before their insurance kicks in. In Canada, the country Sanders points to most frequently as a model, supplemental private insurance is widely used to cover things not covered by the government, including mental health, vision, dental care and many prescription drugs.

Every country with some form of universal health care either requires some out-of-pocket costs or puts a limit on the benefits available in order to make the system work. And many, if not most of them, still have thriving parallel private insurance industries.

https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/20 ... ren-072161


Thank you for finally posting links to your assertions. Sanders still does not say "free" health care, which is what Republicans keep saying he says. He did not say that. Even your point about medical care for all makes a great point: those in Holland, Australia, Canada all pay less than Americans pay for health care. Plus, citizens of those countries have preventive care. We only have preventive care if we can afford it.

Republcians also keep screaming about being a Christian nation. So, where did Christ ever demand proof of payment, insurance card, income requirements, and deductible to heal the sick? I swear there is a new Bible out there that replaces my grandmother's from 1921.....

What on ever living earth are you arguing exactly? No one on this board has claimed Sanders said he was going to offer "free" care. The argument is that what he's proposing is way more expensive than any other universal healthcare system, and basically unfundable in the scheme he has offered up.
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8917
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:13 pm

seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:

You said "free" when you said "zero deductibles, zero copays".

No I didn't, that is not what zero deductibles or zero copay means. Deductibles and copays are payments made by beneficiaries for care on-top of whatever premiums or taxes for the base insurance. And for the record, it's your dude Sanders claiming there will be zero deductibles and zero copays.

Seb146 wrote:
And, no, no one is suggesting getting rid of private insurance for those who can afford it. Only your Republican boogieman.

Wrong again. Literally Bernie Sanders: "Let us all be very clear about this. If you support Medicare for All, you have to be willing to end the greed of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. That means boldly transforming our dysfunctional system by ending the use of private health insurance, except to cover non-essential care like cosmetic surgeries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics ... insurance/

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/18/these-2 ... rance.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1VV13A

Also a good summation:

In defending Medicare for All on the campaign trail, Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and their allies frequently point to the many other developed countries that have successfully implemented a universal health care regime. But Sanders’ bill -- which makes every health service available to every U.S. resident free of charge -- would create a system more generous and far-reaching than any other country in the world. Its ban on nearly all forms of private health insurance other than for niche procedures like cosmetic surgery is also unlike anywhere else on earth.

Denmark, the United Kingdom and Germany, for example, all charge patients for some pharmaceuticals and hospital stays. Australia charges copays for visits to a specialist. In the Netherlands, residents have to pay down a nearly $500 deductible before their insurance kicks in. In Canada, the country Sanders points to most frequently as a model, supplemental private insurance is widely used to cover things not covered by the government, including mental health, vision, dental care and many prescription drugs.

Every country with some form of universal health care either requires some out-of-pocket costs or puts a limit on the benefits available in order to make the system work. And many, if not most of them, still have thriving parallel private insurance industries.

https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/20 ... ren-072161


Thank you for finally posting links to your assertions. Sanders still does not say "free" health care, which is what Republicans keep saying he says. He did not say that. Even your point about medical care for all makes a great point: those in Holland, Australia, Canada all pay less than Americans pay for health care. Plus, citizens of those countries have preventive care. We only have preventive care if we can afford it.

Republcians also keep screaming about being a Christian nation. So, where did Christ ever demand proof of payment, insurance card, income requirements, and deductible to heal the sick? I swear there is a new Bible out there that replaces my grandmother's from 1921.....

Can you stop saying "what Republicans say" and engage the man? He already says he isn't a Republican and clearly disagrees with some of what they say and Trump.

Not everyone fits in a neat little box of "Republican" or "Democrat." Stop stereotyping.

You brought up free, he's talking about the unrealistic fiscal nature of his plan. Those aren't mutually exclusive but one doesn't necessarily mean the other either. (And for the record, I personally am pro-'some kind of healthcare for all', there are many ways to implement that, not just Bernie's)
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:20 pm

NIKV69 wrote:

Here in lies the issue. Bernie does not what to even talk to the other side. He loathes them and constantly calls them racist etc.



No, that is not the issue. But you are close. When you people choose to be loathsome racists, it is reasonable to expect that eventually, people will will work around you and not with you. To independents, this is an appeal, not a liability. Bernie is not different to an other non-45 candidate in that regard.



GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Health Insurance providers’ margins are anything like “fat”; around 4%

https://naic.org/documents/topic_insura ... report.pdf


Regardless, it is still bloat. I do take your point that they will not go quietly; villainy seldom does. In any case, as it now stands, they are adding a layer of cost that has no real need to exist.

I would also agree that such a systemic overhaul will be neither easy nor fast. But if that is the reason, or even the biggest part of it, to object, it is not much of one. Some things are just hard to do.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:46 pm

So, your doctor and nurse are villains? US doctors are paid multiples of those in Europe, for example. They’re not giving that up. My state has a large shortage of PCPs due to RomneyCare cutting reimbursements.
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 2526
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:59 pm

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
So, your doctor and nurse are villains?


Neither said nor implied. This is evident based on the fact that one here is discussing the removal of Doctors or Nurses.
"Nous ne sommes pas infectés. Il n'y a pas d'infection ici..."
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:02 am

seb146 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Health Insurance providers’ margins are anything like “fat”; around 4%

https://naic.org/documents/topic_insura ... report.pdf


They made a total of $23 BILLION last year. Including over charging for things like aspirin and bandages and "administrative costs" and denying care for people in need, so, yeah, let's all feel sorry for those poor, poor health insurance companies.


Do you understand math, $23 billion is about $115 per person covered by private insurance in the US. It’s pocket change in a $4.5 Trillion industry.
 
DLFREEBIRD
Posts: 1247
Joined: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:07 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 12:07 am

your misleading the 4% margin built into ACA that's as much as they are allowed to make, but they get around it by giving big bonus to staff to CEO, etc.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:01 am

DLFREEBIRD wrote:
your misleading the 4% margin built into ACA that's as much as they are allowed to make, but they get around it by giving big bonus to staff to CEO, etc.


No, you don’t understand the ACA’s Medical Loss Ratio requirement aka 80/20 (small group) or 85/15 (lathe group). There’s no 4% rule, just 80% (85%) of premiums must cover medical benefits or there’s a rebate paid.
 
GalaxyFlyer
Posts: 4920
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 4:44 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:05 am

DarkSnowyNight wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
So, your doctor and nurse are villains?


Neither said nor implied. This is evident based on the fact that one here is discussing the removal of Doctors or Nurses.


If you going to reduce medical costs, you’re not doing it on “waste” or trimming insurance companies overhead. The big money is in medical professionals, hospitals, pharmaceuticals. Just the MLR ration says if you cut all the non-medical costs, we’d still spend much more than anyone else.
 
kalvado
Posts: 2497
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 4:29 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:19 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
So, your doctor and nurse are villains?


Neither said nor implied. This is evident based on the fact that one here is discussing the removal of Doctors or Nurses.


If you going to reduce medical costs, you’re not doing it on “waste” or trimming insurance companies overhead. The big money is in medical professionals, hospitals, pharmaceuticals. Just the MLR ration says if you cut all the non-medical costs, we’d still spend much more than anyone else.

besides, money will still need to be collected and redistributed - so the bureaucracy still in place. Government or non-profit?
From what I heard, VA hospitals - which are sort of government-run single-payer - are not terribly efficient to say the least.
 
User avatar
DL717
Posts: 2028
Joined: Wed May 23, 2018 10:53 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 3:35 am

Thunderbolt500 wrote:
I'm tired of seeing all the Mike Bloomberg ads on tv.


That’s called FU money, and yeah. Jesus. :white:
Welcome to Nothingburgers. May I take your order?
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:43 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
seb146 wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
Health Insurance providers’ margins are anything like “fat”; around 4%

https://naic.org/documents/topic_insura ... report.pdf


They made a total of $23 BILLION last year. Including over charging for things like aspirin and bandages and "administrative costs" and denying care for people in need, so, yeah, let's all feel sorry for those poor, poor health insurance companies.


Do you understand math, $23 billion is about $115 per person covered by private insurance in the US. It’s pocket change in a $4.5 Trillion industry.


Private insurance either refuses to cover those with preexisting conditions, thanks to the Republicans taking the teeth out of ACA and replacing it with nothing, or private insurance simply does not offer coverage. The number of sick people with insurance is shrinking because they can not afford insurance. If we were given the chance to pay $115 a year, we gladly would. However, that is not the case. We have to decide between housing or health care. Food or health care. But, yeah, let's all feel sorry for those suffering medical companies barely scraping by.

Where is all that money going? We are not being covered so it is not going to health care!
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:44 am

DL717 wrote:
Thunderbolt500 wrote:
I'm tired of seeing all the Mike Bloomberg ads on tv.


That’s called FU money, and yeah. Jesus. :white:


We have Republican courts upholding Citizens United to thank for that!
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:46 am

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
So, your doctor and nurse are villains?


Neither said nor implied. This is evident based on the fact that one here is discussing the removal of Doctors or Nurses.


If you going to reduce medical costs, you’re not doing it on “waste” or trimming insurance companies overhead. The big money is in medical professionals, hospitals, pharmaceuticals. Just the MLR ration says if you cut all the non-medical costs, we’d still spend much more than anyone else.


Isn't it interesting Republicans honestly believe that by trimming waste, fraud, and abuse that government will work better and save so much money but how dare anyone suggest trimming waste, fraud, and abuse from health insurance because it does not exist? How does that work?
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
DIRECTFLT
Posts: 2185
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 3:00 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:26 am

‘A complete disaster’: Fears grow over potential Nevada caucus malfunction

Volunteers complain of poor training for a vote-reporting system that was adopted on the fly.


Some volunteers who will help run caucuses at precinct locations said they have not been trained on iPads that the party purchased to enter and transmit vote counts. Party officials scrambled to streamline their vote reporting system — settling on Google forms accessible through a saved link on the iPads — after scrapping a pair of apps they’d been planning to use until a similar app caused the fiasco in Iowa two weeks ago.

The volunteers also said the party has not provided sufficient training on how to use the Google form that will compile vote totals, a complicated process in a caucus.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 ... ess-115437
Smoothest Ride so far ~ AA A300B4-600R ~~ Favorite Aviation Author ~ Robert J. Serling
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8917
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:43 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
‘A complete disaster’: Fears grow over potential Nevada caucus malfunction

Volunteers complain of poor training for a vote-reporting system that was adopted on the fly.


Some volunteers who will help run caucuses at precinct locations said they have not been trained on iPads that the party purchased to enter and transmit vote counts. Party officials scrambled to streamline their vote reporting system — settling on Google forms accessible through a saved link on the iPads — after scrapping a pair of apps they’d been planning to use until a similar app caused the fiasco in Iowa two weeks ago.

The volunteers also said the party has not provided sufficient training on how to use the Google form that will compile vote totals, a complicated process in a caucus.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 ... ess-115437

Hopefully the IA and NV caucuses are the two final nails in the caucus coffin and they switch over to primaries. Embarrassing.

Caucuses are so 1700s and ironically we're screwing them up more in 2020 than they did centuries ago
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 5:58 pm

Here is an interesting article on Canada's "single payer" system vs. America's for-profit system

https://www.salon.com/2020/02/15/americ ... WHZXENnvxs

Americans pay almost $2500 in administration costs while Canadians pay just over $550 for the same costs.

Switching gears, I understand concerns about caucusing in Reno and Las Vegas and Henderson but what about places like Austin and Ely and Pioche? The near ghost towns with little technology?
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
StarAC17
Posts: 3713
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 11:54 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 5:59 pm

flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
We all want Medicare for All...until we actually see what it costs.


That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


This is actually a good thing. He has a starting point and can negotiate it down to an efficient system that has a private component which is what many countries have. One where everyone is covered and people have the ability to buy private insurance if they choose to do so.

The UK and Australia have a medicare system and the option to get private coverage and get some of your tax money back. Also this is smartly taken from the conservative playbook, they don't negotiate on anything as usually get far more passed then the democrats do
Obama compromised the option of medicare for all at the start and then had to sacrifice the public option in negotiating the ACA.

flyguy89 wrote:
seb146 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


If every individual in the United States is given an extra $5000 a year, let's say, those in the lower and middle income brackets will spend that immediately. On food, on rent, on utilities, on new shoes, on consumer goods. Immediately. As opposed to the few who get millions per year and just stash it away somewhere. Keep the economy afloat is only "snake oil" to Republicans when "socialist communists" like Sanders brings it up.

No, Seb. The snake oil is Sanders telling people that implementing a universal healthcare system covering everyone and all services with zero copays or deductibles is possible/feasible. It's not and that's NOT how it works in all the other countries he likes to point to as examples. He's just straight-up lying.


It is exactly how it works in Canada if what you need is covered by the system which is most things. I visit the doctor for a checkup or need something done there is no bill or charge to me at all.

The exceptions would be things like prescription drugs, dental, physiotherapy, optometry are covered through private plans.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:
DarkSnowyNight wrote:
GalaxyFlyer wrote:
So, your doctor and nurse are villains?


Neither said nor implied. This is evident based on the fact that one here is discussing the removal of Doctors or Nurses.


If you going to reduce medical costs, you’re not doing it on “waste” or trimming insurance companies overhead. The big money is in medical professionals, hospitals, pharmaceuticals. Just the MLR ration says if you cut all the non-medical costs, we’d still spend much more than anyone else.


Medicare would have the economies of scale to negotiate with drug companies to make those prices much lower and competitive along the lines of what they cost in other developed countries. This does speak to the power of the pharmaceutical lobby in the US as they squash any attempt for medical providers to negotiate with drug companies. Even Trump ran on this.

NIKV69 wrote:
AirWorthy99 wrote:
I think a good point about Bernie Sanders getting anything done is a good one, considering the man has been for a long time in congress and not a single significant piece of legislation authored by him has been made law. That speaks volume about this capacity of getting all sides together on anything really.

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/member ... ers/400357


Here in lies the issue. Bernie does not what to even talk to the other side. He loathes them and constantly calls them racist etc. It's this "our way or the highway" and vilifying that turns a lot of independents off. The fringe has and will be rejected again this November. high tax, open borders and weak on defense is a non starter but Nancy and the rest of the Dem fringe just don't get it. They will probably blame Russia and us stupid voters again.


He isn't negotiating because its a primary, you wouldn't complain if this was a GOP primary and they weren't automatically thinking. How am I going to comprise.

When has Bernie directly called anyone racist? Twitter trolls don't count and the idea of Bernie Bros being white men has been debunked as he polls the lowest with white men of any age.
The most antagonist thing that he has said in recent weeks is that he called James Carville a political hack. Yet Chuck Todd used a very anti-Semitic term, calling Bernie supporters Brown Shirts.

https://www.salon.com/2020/02/09/the-be ... net-works/

Furthermore Bernie polls the highest with independents of the candidates in the field. Independents like him, what they hate is fake an scripted democrats.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ts/606247/
Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
 
flyguy89
Posts: 2658
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 6:30 pm

StarAC17 wrote:
flyguy89 wrote:
Aaron747 wrote:

That's because the forces against it that have fleeced us for five decades are just as disingenuous when decrying 'what it costs'. If we implemented some of the better features of the Australian and German systems, it would cost substantially less than what we have now, freeing up more money for payroll at companies and killing off administrative bloat that could otherwise fund R&D and university programs detractors are always claiming would be lost.

Our highly incentivized system delivers worse outcomes, access, and options at only marginally better quality. That suggests it's time for substantial change.

Image

Image

You aren't going to find an argument from me that the US healthcare system could be performing much better; however, what Sanders is selling is snake oil. If he was merely interested in spurring and growing the debate, he and his supporters wouldn't be attacking some of the more realistic and pragmatic plans some of his rival have put forward. But no, Sanders is demagogue and a Leftist version of Trump (sans the racism).


This is actually a good thing. He has a starting point and can negotiate it down to an efficient system that has a private component which is what many countries have.

Because he and his supporters are known for their compromising approach...

I'd be more inclined to believe this were he not actively attacking and smearing those other more pragmatic proposals. As it is, compromising would be majorly falling on his own sword.

StarAC17 wrote:
It is exactly how it works in Canada if what you need is covered by the system which is most things. I visit the doctor for a checkup or need something done there is no bill or charge to me at all.

The exceptions would be things like prescription drugs, dental, physiotherapy, optometry are covered through private plans.

Well, no you just contradicted yourself. How it works in Canada is not what Sanders is proposing. As you just affirmed. Care is rationed and not all services are covered, for which patients do pay out of pocket costs.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 6:41 pm

DeltaMD90 wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:
‘A complete disaster’: Fears grow over potential Nevada caucus malfunction

Volunteers complain of poor training for a vote-reporting system that was adopted on the fly.


Some volunteers who will help run caucuses at precinct locations said they have not been trained on iPads that the party purchased to enter and transmit vote counts. Party officials scrambled to streamline their vote reporting system — settling on Google forms accessible through a saved link on the iPads — after scrapping a pair of apps they’d been planning to use until a similar app caused the fiasco in Iowa two weeks ago.

The volunteers also said the party has not provided sufficient training on how to use the Google form that will compile vote totals, a complicated process in a caucus.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 ... ess-115437

Hopefully the IA and NV caucuses are the two final nails in the caucus coffin and they switch over to primaries. Embarrassing.

Caucuses are so 1700s and ironically we're screwing them up more in 2020 than they did centuries ago

I'll second that hope - my goodness, what a silly process to begin with and now they gum up the works further with technical FUBARs.

A suggestion to those posting multiple times on the universal healthcare issue - maybe start a new topic as it's sending this one off the rails
It is definitely worth discussing but it seems to be veering off the topic here which is the Democratic primaries
 
User avatar
seb146
Posts: 21705
Joined: Wed Dec 01, 1999 7:19 am

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:25 pm

ER757 wrote:
DeltaMD90 wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:
‘A complete disaster’: Fears grow over potential Nevada caucus malfunction

Volunteers complain of poor training for a vote-reporting system that was adopted on the fly.


Some volunteers who will help run caucuses at precinct locations said they have not been trained on iPads that the party purchased to enter and transmit vote counts. Party officials scrambled to streamline their vote reporting system — settling on Google forms accessible through a saved link on the iPads — after scrapping a pair of apps they’d been planning to use until a similar app caused the fiasco in Iowa two weeks ago.

The volunteers also said the party has not provided sufficient training on how to use the Google form that will compile vote totals, a complicated process in a caucus.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/1 ... ess-115437

Hopefully the IA and NV caucuses are the two final nails in the caucus coffin and they switch over to primaries. Embarrassing.

Caucuses are so 1700s and ironically we're screwing them up more in 2020 than they did centuries ago

I'll second that hope - my goodness, what a silly process to begin with and now they gum up the works further with technical FUBARs.

A suggestion to those posting multiple times on the universal healthcare issue - maybe start a new topic as it's sending this one off the rails
It is definitely worth discussing but it seems to be veering off the topic here which is the Democratic primaries


I get what you are saying about the health care debate. However, affordable health care is one of the things Democrats have been focused on for years and years. There are other topics, as well. Like climate change, the deficit, trade wars, how the current Republican administration has been turning it's back on our long-time allies, affordable education, border security.... All are components of the Democratic and, ultimately, the presidential and Congressional campaigns.
You bet I'm pumped!!! I just had a green tea!!!
 
User avatar
DeltaMD90
Posts: 8917
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:25 pm

Re: 2020 Democratic Primary Thread

Wed Feb 19, 2020 7:06 am

seb146 wrote:
I get what you are saying about the health care debate. However, affordable health care is one of the things Democrats have been focused on for years and years. There are other topics, as well. Like climate change, the deficit, trade wars, how the current Republican administration has been turning it's back on our long-time allies, affordable education, border security.... All are components of the Democratic and, ultimately, the presidential and Congressional campaigns.

Which Democrat actually cares about the deficit!?

Democrats spend spend spend without a care in the world.

Republicans, the majority of them anyway, pretend to care about the deficit but spend spend spend without a care in the world, which makes them worse in my opinion.

Climate change, income inequality, etc... I think our real problem is our out of control, shameless spending. Both sides want to cut spending but only in things they don't like. I'm surprised we've made it this long without serious repercussions. We can't do this forever... the longer we go the worse it's gonna be. We need to finally take the necessary steps.

I'm not gonna vote for Trump, no way... but if he promised he'd balance the budget and I somehow knew he actually would accomplish that... I don't know, I'd actually consider voting for him... flame away. It's probably the issue that concerns me the most

I agree with the rest of your list, besides border security, lol
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: melpax, sebolino and 84 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos