"Crazy Bernie" to introduce socialized medicine bill

[rafta_rafta]

How exactly are the dems planning to push this through without control of the House, Senate and WH?

They aren't.  It's just political theater.  The opposition party always introduces bills that are just destined to die in committee.  It's not necessarily a bad thing either, but it'd be nice if they focused more time on finding ideas that might actually get through congress.

FWIW even moderate republicans aren't able to get their bills through right now. Dems getting their way is a distant dream

[Ebowed]

How do you know who does or does not work harder than me?

You referred to taxation as a disincentive to work, so you seem to think you work harder than people who pay lower taxes.  Are you saying that low-paid teachers, nurses, carers, people in the service industries, etc. either a.) don't work hard or b.) choose not to get better-paying jobs?  And more to the point, do you think you deserve health care more than these people?  Just because you can afford to pay an extra $3,000 in taxes a year and not see a personal benefit from it?  Sorry, pal, but without everyone else toiling underneath you, holding you up, there is no universe where you can enjoy that level of comfort and self-absorption.

Medical care is a service like any other, in which you must pay for.  Doctors do not work for free.  I pay for my health insurance.  So are you saying it is fair that those of us who do not derive any personal benefit from Obamacare should have had our taxes increased a few years ago?

Obviously, yes, otherwise how would the programs be funded?  The benefit, by the way, is that people don't die on the streets.  Since the well-being of these people doesn't matter to you, look at it this way: you let that sort of thing fester for long enough and there will be a revolt.

Regarding your argument that I would pay for catastrophic care, etc. I was already doing that before Obamacare, when my taxes were lower, so I'm not sure how that factors into the discussion at all.  

So you are stating that it is preferable for uninsured people to remain that way and then just get fixed up, potentially, in emergency care, assuming they don't die first?

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Ugh this is such a dumb idea if we want to win stuff in 2018 and 2020

Winning on a platform of vice is called losing. This is the only acceptable platform for the Democratic Party. Anything else is cowardice giving in to rent-seeking influencers at every turn. Leave that to the Republicans, if they are still willing to be the Party of Special Interests, and better yet, if Scumbag Ryan succeeds in his malicious attempts to spread doom, leave it to no one at all.

[rafta_rafta]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's an absurd argument. You can make this sort of strawman argument against any government entitlement.

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. All government programs to help the poor. Supporting them doesn't mean you support the same for citizens of other countries receiving the same benefits.

[Ebowed]

LMAO to your first point.  Lets take this ridiculous argument to its logical extreme.  We live in a global economy, in fact many multinational corporations exist right here in the US.  So I think it's fair that you should be paying for the health insurance of people in the third world who need emergency care... right?  After all, they are human too.

As to your last points - tell me how this doesn't apply to the third world, since these are human beings as well.  Since you argue that it is not about my personal benefit, then shouldn't I as a taxpayer be funding health care for everyone regardless of border?  After all, I may have more in common with someone in China or India than say West Virginia.  

To your point about a revolt... only the reverse is true.  You keep pushing absurd fiscal policies and a welfare state and you get a revolt in the opposite direction, which is basically what you see now with Republicans cutting free lunches for poor kids.  The socialist agenda is actually pushing Republicans to just cut whatever they can as a backlash.

That was a very sloppy diversion tactic.  Your attempt to change the terms of this discussion aside, virtually every other industrialized country offers universal healthcare to its people.  Where did you get this false idea that the only option is US-style slavery to huge industries or nothing at all?

The government can, does, and should fund foreign aid programs, the focus of which often revolves around basic health and nutrition.  It is my view that wealthy nations such as the USA should increase their foreign aid spending.

Just because there are other people in the world who are struggling badly to survive, does not make it more okay that you are greedy and self-absorbed.  It actually makes it worse.

But the point still stands that you are already paying significant portions of your income towards a grossly inefficient health care delivery system.  Instead of defending it to the death on the grounds that you deserve a better standard of living than others, why not restructure it?  People who pay less taxes than you are still paying for the same health care system.  In fact, they generally pay a higher amount proportional to their overall income.  Your only gripe is that you didn't see a 'personal benefit' from the ACA.  Other people have to choose between health insurance and basic necessities.

[MasterJedi]

Even 41% of Republicans support it. Policy implementation aside, it's a winning issue.

Now ask them to define single-payer.

They also think Obamacare and the ACA are two different things. Most aren't smart.

[Ebowed]

LOL, I was waiting for the personal attacks of "greediness" - I'm just surprised you didn't add "scum" in there.  Sorry, but it's not greedy to want to keep a reasonable portion of the money I earn and that mentality of yours is exactly why successful people are turned off by the Democratic party.

You don't strike me as successful at all.  You seem to think that you are more important than everyone else, which isn't the same thing.

Again, my question stands, why should you not pay significantly more in taxes to fund universal health care for foreigners?

No, that point doesn't stand, because it's been addressed.  The health care system we are talking about is paid for by everyone in the USA, not just you.  Nor is anyone here arguing against foreign aid programs.

But I suppose, if you really want to stay on this point, can you explain why Americans, if they opted to pay for the world's healthcare, wouldn't need to pay for health care in Canada?  France?  New Zealand?  Can you pinpoint any particular reason for that?

Do you think it's fair that you have internet access and a computer and probably a new cell phone when these individuals do not have health insurance?

Of course I don't think it's fair that I have a better standard of living than most people in the world.  You seem to think so, though!

I'm not sure why you think bragging about donating a portion of your apparently vast disposable income to the administrative workers at charities makes you look good.  I actually brought up charities earlier, noting that they are unable to address the number of people affected by unemployment and homelessness.  Are you arguing otherwise?

[rafta_rafta]

And why not?  Why should I pay for full health care for someone in Kentucky versus someone in India?  I find both notions equally absurd.  The progressive argument to the contrary appears to be: a) they are human beings, b) I should not be greedy, c) it helps everyone in the long run... The same arguments apply to paying for healthcare for foreigners.  

Also, the difference between social security is that it benefits everybody, including the people who pay into it.

lolwut. So universal healthcare doesn't benefit people who pay into it? Medicare also eventually benefits people are paying into it. Medicaid also *will* benefit people who pay into it but then fall onto hard times for some reason. That's the whole point of the social safety net. It's subsidised by people earning more or are younger since they also get the benefits of the same safety net later in life if they need it.

[Ebowed]

Typical... instead of actual debate, ad hominem attacks.  I never claimed I was personally successful, nor do I care if some random person on the internet thinks so.  I find it amusing that you vilify me for being greedy yet won't even answer how much you donated to charity.  This "debate" is not worth my time.

You seem not to understand how proportions work.  You haven't told anyone how much you donate to charity either, but you are complaining about an extra $3,000 in taxes so that people don't die from preventable diseases.  I guess if you hadn't paid that extra $3k, it would all be going to charity?  Is that what you're so upset about?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

[Ebowed]

Typical... instead of actual debate, ad hominem attacks.  I never claimed I was personally successful, nor do I care if some random person on the internet thinks so.  I find it amusing that you vilify me for being greedy yet won't even answer how much you donated to charity.  This "debate" is not worth my time.

You seem not to understand how proportions work.  You haven't told anyone how much you donate to charity either, but you are complaining about an extra $3,000 in taxes so that people don't die from preventable diseases.  I guess if you hadn't paid that extra $3k, it would all be going to charity?  Is that what you're so upset about?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

I think you should really donate 95% of your income to people who are starving in Africa because they need it more than you need it.  Anything less would be non-progressive.

This is humiliating for you.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Typical... instead of actual debate, ad hominem attacks.  I never claimed I was personally successful, nor do I care if some random person on the internet thinks so.  I find it amusing that you vilify me for being greedy yet won't even answer how much you donated to charity.  This "debate" is not worth my time.

You seem not to understand how proportions work.  You haven't told anyone how much you donate to charity either, but you are complaining about an extra $3,000 in taxes so that people don't die from preventable diseases.  I guess if you hadn't paid that extra $3k, it would all be going to charity?  Is that what you're so upset about?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

I think you should really donate 95% of your income to people who are starving in Africa because they need it more than you need it.  Anything less would be non-progressive.

Jesus you really are shortminded.

[heatcharger]

Alright, NSV has to a troll and/or a parody at this point. Credit to Ebowed for actually maintaining a rational argument though. On another note:

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

Moral sloganeering is the easy part. Nobody cares about the defense budget when they think about their healthcare costs, even if they should.

[rafta_rafta]

lolwut. So universal healthcare doesn't benefit people who pay into it? Medicare also eventually benefits people are paying into it. Medicaid also *will* benefit people who pay into it but then fall onto hard times for some reason. That's the whole point of the social safety net. It's subsidised by people earning more or are younger since they also get the benefits of the same safety net later in life if they need it.

Not if they opt for their own private insurance it doesn't.  Since Obamacare was enacted I've been paying into it every year even though I have private health insurance that has remain unchanged in terms of benefits, etc.

Private Insurance (without the mandate) just makes costs artificially seem low for people who can afford them. Patients who are unable to afford preventative care , wait till their condition is an emergency and visit an ER where they can't legally be turned away. ER care costs many times of general inpatient/outpatient hospital visits. Since those folks are without insurance, hospitals jack rates up to compensate for their unpaid ER bills.

This sort of care system is both expensive and inefficient. Universal Healthcare or at least a private mandate creates large risk polls where enough healthy people pay into the system to pay for  the sick.  It is efficient since preventative diagnostic scans can be arranged early to avoid the problem becoming more expensive to treat later.  It also relieves the pressure from hospital emergency rooms making them better equipped to deal with actual emergencies.

There is no magic bullet on healthcare. It's expensive and will get progressively more expensive because of aging populations. The only solution is to have better regulation and enforced insurance so every healthy person pays into the system to be covered.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Alright, NSV has to a troll and/or a parody at this point. Credit to Ebowed for actually maintaining a rational argument though. On another note:

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

Moral sloganeering is the easy part. Nobody cares about the defense budget when they think about their healthcare costs, even if they should.

What was his credible argument?  That he deserves free health care?  It was hard to find in between all his personal insults.

I honestly don't blame him for insulting you. You speak in arrogance stating that how dare the little man get the same coverage as you. Seems that it's you who is the selfish one. Everyone deserves free healthcare it's your HEALTH. If you don't care about people's coverage to health it's shows how despicable of a character you are.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Alright, NSV has to a troll and/or a parody at this point. Credit to Ebowed for actually maintaining a rational argument though. On another note:

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

Moral sloganeering is the easy part. Nobody cares about the defense budget when they think about their healthcare costs, even if they should.

What was his credible argument?  That he deserves free health care?  It was hard to find in between all his personal insults.

I honestly don't blame him for insulting you. You speak in arrogance stating that how dare the little man get the same coverage as you. Seems that it's you who is the selfish one. Everyone deserves free healthcare it's your HEALTH. If you don't care about people's coverage to health it's shows how despicable of a character you are.

I, like the majority of people in this country, support each person being entitled to pay for their own health care unless they suffer from some medical disorder that makes it impossible for them to work.  Like the majority of this country, I do not support socialized medicine.  I am unapologetic about the fact that I do not want to pay for your health care.

Your wrong and you need to find polls to back this up. Even when the question is framed as government being in control of Health care 60% of America still supports it. I bet that number is even higher in Virginia. It seems that you are delusional that Medicare and Social Security is... Socialism. Using isims' to scare voters is a right wing tactic, go ahead and change your avatar to blue.

[Ebowed]

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

I agree that we should cut the military budget, but I don't see how that's relevant to the fact that I don't want to pay for ebowed's health insurance simply because he thinks it's unfair that I make more money than him and that wealth needs to be redistributed to those that do not earn it.

You don't.  I live abroad and pay into a Medicare-for-all system through taxation.

That's probably the least relevant thing that you got wrong in this thread, though.  You couldn't address a single point that anyone made in rebuttal to you, and when you began to flail uncontrollably with incredibly poor argumentation, you tried to change the terms of the debate.  I strongly doubt that you managed to succeed in persuading anyone here that you deserve medical care more than anyone else.

[Ebowed]

The argument about how it's too expensive is a faulty argument which most Americans would disagree with (and do). You have a +$600 billion budget in defense but you don't have enough to cover all Americans so they can actually see a doctor when they need to and not worry about the costs? People are seeing through the BS and they want what every other civilized nation on the planet has.

I agree that we should cut the military budget, but I don't see how that's relevant to the fact that I don't want to pay for ebowed's health insurance simply because he thinks it's unfair that I make more money than him and that wealth needs to be redistributed to those that do not earn it.

You don't.  I live abroad and pay into a Medicare-for-all system through taxation.

That's probably the least relevant thing that you got wrong in this thread, though.  You couldn't address a single point that anyone made in rebuttal to you, and when you began to flail uncontrollably with incredibly poor argumentation, you tried to change the terms of the debate.  I strongly doubt that you managed to succeed in persuading anyone here that you deserve medical care more than anyone else.

There is a reason less than 2% of the population votes Green... and people like you are precisely why.

Trying to change the terms of debate again - like clockwork!

[Ebowed]

There is no reasoning with you, gave up on your so called "debate" long ago.  Neither of us will change each other's minds and I am not going to support your deplorable positions on socialized medicine so I'd rather not engage with you further.

Yeah, you gave up on the debate basically as soon as you started posting!

[Shadows]

There is no reasoning with you, gave up on your so called "debate" long ago.  Neither of us will change each other's minds and I am not going to support your deplorable positions on socialized medicine so I'd rather not engage with you further.

Yeah, you gave up on the debate basically as soon as you started posting!

How could I possibly match wits with you?  Your theories on why socialism will give everyone a warm fuzzy are groundbreaking.

Dude you are insulting people & fighting with them. Pages full of bickering & rude posts. If you can't respond at the topic or issue, then don't, but you don't have to go on attack mode against others.

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Geez NSV is still rambling about not covering people? Must be a slow night for him...

[Shadows]

I'd advise the Democrats against this. It could harm them to the extent that they might even lose the presidency an obnoxious political novice, lose both the House and Senate and decline to controlling only 1/4 of state legislatures, say.

lol... so true.  

but come on democrats, lets double down on this... we need more Millennials positioned in key precincts reminding hard working people why their tax dollars should be paying for your health care.  Maybe we can get Republicans up to 270 in the House by 2018... and then they can really destroy this country and you'll have far worse issues to think about than not getting free/nearly free health care.

There was guy called FDR. When he came it, the top tax rate was 25%. He gradually increased it to 90%+, introduced Social Security, Minimum Wage, massively expanded government & the welfare state. He was called even a Marxist. He introduced a maximum wage, putting Income tax at 100% beyond a certain limit which inflation adjusted would be around 300K today. Congress vetoed it & settled at 90% odd.

He is known as possibly one of the greatest Presidents in human history for fundamentally changing political economics because of Keynesian economics which he implemented before Keynes proved it statically. FDR had the highest growth rate, lowest unemployment, etc in possibly history of the USA.

Then there was Truman, Eisenhower (90% tax rate). And then JFK, LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, etc - The top tax rate was 70% odd. And taxing people above 200/250K a little more is very good for the economy. These people have a lower Marginal Propensity to Consume (MPC) in economic terms. So there is nothing abnormal about 70% to 90% tax, that was the norm. Bernie's top marginal tax rate was 52% which was way lower than most. I will also add the number of 200K+ earners is very low compared to the overall people & most people support raising taxes on the wealthy - Around 68% in the latest poll.

And then let's talk about Economics -

As you can see with these tax cuts, the Top 1% odd is cornering most of the wealth & the bottom 50-60% of the population either has a lower standard of living or has stagnated at the same level







Look you don't have to support it but you should atleast understand the reason of why people are asking for something. That & a little bit of empathy rather than so much of a condescending attitude will help !

[Shadows]

There is no reasoning with you, gave up on your so called "debate" long ago.  Neither of us will change each other's minds and I am not going to support your deplorable positions on socialized medicine so I'd rather not engage with you further.

Yeah, you gave up on the debate basically as soon as you started posting!

How could I possibly match wits with you?  Your theories on why socialism will give everyone a warm fuzzy are groundbreaking.

Dude you are insulting people & fighting with them. Pages full of bickering & rude posts. If you can't respond at the topic or issue, then don't, but you don't have to go on attack mode against others.

Would you say being called "greedy" and "self-absorbed" is an insult?  Kindly stop talking to me now.

Yes it is. But you have to understand why other people are talking about Healthcare of Education -

Healthcare - Guaranteed by every major country as a right. And the reason why people talk about it is, because it is different from another product or service. It is necessary to live & live a healthy life. Human civilization has progressed & it is not nomadic. Should people go bankrupt or die because they can't afford healthcare? Should people chose between food & medicines? You may think so, but it is also perfectly rational for people to think that should be a basic human right. And certainly every major country has implemented it, Capitalist, Socialist, Communist, Weirdo-ist & Islamist & any other ist you can add.



Education - Do you agree with Universal K-12? You do know the effect of high costs of student debt. Well a K-12 is no longer good enough for a decent job anymore. A college degree is worth as much as K-12 was worth 50 ot 60  years ago. That is why people are asking for Tuition free college.

And it would be paid by a Financial Transaction Tax (very small likely 0.001% odd) which is there in most countries. It is one of the cheapest proposals & costs around 70-80B when Trump's military increase would only be 55B odd. So it is an inexpensive plan, easy to pay for.

I hope you atleast understand the logic behind these. You may not life it, you will hate it if your taxes increase. But atleast there will not be so much hatred & animosity if you understand the logic !

[Shadows]

There is no reasoning with you, gave up on your so called "debate" long ago.  Neither of us will change each other's minds and I am not going to support your deplorable positions on socialized medicine so I'd rather not engage with you further.

Yeah, you gave up on the debate basically as soon as you started posting!

How could I possibly match wits with you?  Your theories on why socialism will give everyone a warm fuzzy are groundbreaking.

Dude you are insulting people & fighting with them. Pages full of bickering & rude posts. If you can't respond at the topic or issue, then don't, but you don't have to go on attack mode against others.

Would you say being called "greedy" and "self-absorbed" is an insult?  Kindly stop talking to me now.

Yes it is. But you have to understand why other people are talking about Healthcare of Education -

Healthcare - Guaranteed by every major country as a right. And the reason why people talk about it is, because it is different from another product or service. It is necessary to live & live a healthy life. Human civilization has progressed & it is not nomadic. Should people go bankrupt or die because they can't afford healthcare? Should people chose between food & medicines? You may think so, but it is also perfectly rational for people to think that should be a basic human right. And certainly every major country has implemented it, Capitalist, Socialist, Communist, Weirdo-ist & Islamist & any other ist you can add.



Education - Do you agree with Universal K-12? You do know the effect of high costs of student debt. Well a K-12 is no longer good enough for a decent job anymore. A college degree is worth as much as K-12 was worth 50 ot 60  years ago. That is why people are asking for Tuition free college.

And it would be paid by a Financial Transaction Tax (very small likely 0.001% odd) which is there in most countries. It is one of the cheapest proposals & costs around 70-80B when Trump's military increase would only be 55B odd. So it is an inexpensive plan, easy to pay for.

I hope you atleast understand the logic behind these. You may not life it, you will hate it if your taxes increase. But atleast there will not be so much hatred & animosity if you understand the logic !

I understand the logic of socialism.  I do not agree with it. 

The mentality that you can hurl insults at someone who disagrees with socialism or whatever you espouse and not expect them back is what I further disagree with, which was the subject of your post.

That is not "Socialism" btw as many Capitalist nations follow the same. But I get your point & the blame goes both ways since you lost your mind & hurled insults too. Anyone can have his/her point & disagree vehemently and yes, you don't deserve to be insulted either.

Can everyone move on & be cordial with each other & disagree like adults ?

[Blue3]

For those saying it's Un-American Socialism... they said the same thing about Social Security.