New Reuters Poll: 70% of Americans want Medicare for All

[Globalise Operation Rising Lion]

These types of polls are really bad news for Democrats. They show that even though the public overwhelmingly supports Democratic positions, many continue to vote GOP for cultural reasons and racial resentment. These people are unwinnable

[Sic Semper Fascistis]

These types of polls are really bad news for Democrats. They show that even though the public overwhelmingly supports Democratic positions, many continue to vote GOP for cultural reasons and racial resentment. These people are unwinnable

[darklordoftech]

Chances are they aren’t thinking about the cost when they’re answering these polls

Republicans only think about cost when the person in the White House has a D next to their name.

[Cory]

I didn't think I was moving the goal posts, but perhaps you're right.  He should chose better words next time he wants to make whatever point he was trying to make there.  If someone says, "people shouldn't make money off of the health needs of others" I'm going to assume they mean what they say.

Yeah fair enough. But I do think you may have been being obtuse for the sake of argument.

And it IS going to become a huge problem if/when you guys get your wish.....there won't be enough medical professionals to handle the people wanting care.  Millions of people will still be going without needed health care.

Is that so? Is there any data to back this up or is this just your assertion?

Will it be better?  Of course, for some, and worse for others.  If you think you know it will be better for more than it will be worse for, well, you probably don't know what you're talking about.

This is your assertion.

Did you think health insurance premiums were going to go up 3 or 4 times what they were before the ACA passed?  If you did, why didn't you warn us?

I figured premiums would continue to rise but that the ACA could mitigate the impact with greater coverage. Unfortunately those pussies didn't keep the Public Option in the bill so we got gipped.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

These types of polls are really bad news for Democrats. They show that even though the public overwhelmingly supports Democratic positions, many continue to vote GOP for cultural reasons and racial resentment. These people are unwinnable

Maybe if the Democratic establishment didn't take a position to the right of the average Republican on this issue, they could benefit from it.

[Starry Eyed Jagaloon]

The issue with America's healthcare is it's insanely high cost. It doesn't matter if the money comes from employers or citizen's wallets or taxes. America's healthcare system will never work until that is changed. Medicare for all is entirely secondary (and a questionable proposition as opposed to something like Obamacare for all)

[dead0man]

I didn't think I was moving the goal posts, but perhaps you're right.  He should chose better words next time he wants to make whatever point he was trying to make there.  If someone says, "people shouldn't make money off of the health needs of others" I'm going to assume they mean what they say.

Yeah fair enough. But I do think you may have been being obtuse for the sake of argument.

I was being obtuse to make a point.  Lots of people make money off of the sh**tty health of others, that alone shouldn't be enough to claim someone has no morals.  There is nothing wrong with making money off of the misfortune of others.  As long as they aren't instigating that misfortune.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is that so? Is there any data to back this up or is this just your assertion?[/quote]plenty, cite-Washington Post-U.S. faces 90,000 doctor shortage by 2025, medical school association warns don't you think more people receiving care will make us need even more.  The case is the same for nurses and other medical professionals too. (and those are more ways kids can earn middle class money without having to have tons of student debt)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is your assertion.

Did you think health insurance premiums were going to go up 3 or 4 times what they were before the ACA passed?  If you did, why didn't you warn us?

I figured premiums would continue to rise but that the ACA could mitigate the impact with greater coverage. Unfortunately those pussies didn't keep the Public Option in the bill so we got gipped.
[/quote]All I know is I'm paying as much per month for my healthcare as I am a for my mortgage.  5 years ago it was a quarter of it.

The issue with America's healthcare is it's insanely high cost. It doesn't matter if the money comes from employers or citizen's wallets or taxes. America's healthcare system will never work until that is changed. Medicare for all is entirely secondary (and a questionable proposition as opposed to something like Obamacare for all)

indeed.  It's the same problem in higher education.  Way too many people pushing papers and not doing any actual work.  I thought computers was going make sure our administrators had more time, why does it seem to have increased their number by an order of magnitude instead?

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

If Trump signs a Democratic health-care bill, he would be impeached. The red line for Congressional Republicans isn't any scandal, it's him no longer signing their bills.

[Badger]

They very much would have words with someone suggesting they are morally abhorrent for profiting from their work.

Private health insurance companies are not morally abhorrent per se, but in a proper public policy context, largely redundant compared to their current dominance in the health insurance field.

[Badger]

Chances are they aren’t thinking about the cost when they’re answering these polls

Chances are they are thinking about the tremendous cost of not having Universal Health Care.

Furthermore, I'm sure hey significant majority are considering that if this country can reportedly afford the near blank check Trump has been writing the Pentagon, plus the doing nothing for economic growth and Trump recently signed into law that they and their family / friends personally profit most from, and by God we can absolutely afford Universal Health Care.

[Badger]

I didn't think I was moving the goal posts, but perhaps you're right.  He should chose better words next time he wants to make whatever point he was trying to make there.  If someone says, "people shouldn't make money off of the health needs of others" I'm going to assume they mean what they say.

Yeah fair enough. But I do think you may have been being obtuse for the sake of argument.

I was being obtuse to make a point.  Lots of people make money off of the sh**tty health of others, that alone shouldn't be enough to claim someone has no morals.  There is nothing wrong with making money off of the misfortune of others.  As long as they aren't instigating that misfortune.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is that so? Is there any data to back this up or is this just your assertion?

plenty, cite-Washington Post-U.S. faces 90,000 doctor shortage by 2025, medical school association warns don't you think more people receiving care will make us need even more.  The case is the same for nurses and other medical professionals too. (and those are more ways kids can earn middle class money without having to have tons of student debt)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is your assertion.

Did you think health insurance premiums were going to go up 3 or 4 times what they were before the ACA passed?  If you did, why didn't you warn us?

I figured premiums would continue to rise but that the ACA could mitigate the impact with greater coverage. Unfortunately those pussies didn't keep the Public Option in the bill so we got gipped.
[/quote]All I know is I'm paying as much per month for my healthcare as I am a for my mortgage.  5 years ago it was a quarter of it.

The issue with America's healthcare is it's insanely high cost. It doesn't matter if the money comes from employers or citizen's wallets or taxes. America's healthcare system will never work until that is changed. Medicare for all is entirely secondary (and a questionable proposition as opposed to something like Obamacare for all)

indeed.  It's the same problem in higher education.  Way too many people pushing papers and not doing any actual work.  I thought computers was going make sure our administrators had more time, why does it seem to have increased their number by an order of magnitude instead?
[/quote]

Did you actually read that Washington Post article, dead man? It indicates that in addition to the increased medical coverage caused by Obamacare, that apparently at least as much is due to individuals living longer and requiring increase Medical Care as they age. This should be considered a good thing.

Also, the article indicates the organization noting the potential shortfall isn't decrying the expansion of medical care, but rather calling for increased funding for more doctors and internships. It's not like we're going to have to let in every C+ undergrad student in the med school. Far from it. Right now med school really has a strict cap on the number of admissions to where accredited schools largely have to choose between the incredibly excellent over the merely excellent, and even turn away a number of incredibly excellent applicants as well.

So while your point is factually correct, your underlying assertions and assumptions about why the problem is growing, let alone what to do about it, are fundamentally flawed.

[dead0man]

So while your point is factually correct, your underlying assertions and assumptions about why the problem is growing, let alone what to do about it, are fundamentally flawed.

as far as I can see, I made 3 points:
1.the people that work in the healthcare industry make money off of the health needs of others and that's not a bad thing
2.there aren't enough of them
2a.the more people receiving care, the bigger that problem is going to be
3.the rise in healthcare costs went through the roof at the same time the number of medical administrators rose through the roof, same the universities.  Maybe it's a coincidence.  Maybe it's only part of the problem.  Lets find out.

[Jeffster]

So while your point is factually correct, your underlying assertions and assumptions about why the problem is growing, let alone what to do about it, are fundamentally flawed.

as far as I can see, I made 3 points:
1.the people that work in the healthcare industry make money off of the health needs of others and that's not a bad thing
2.there aren't enough of them
2a.the more people receiving care, the bigger that problem is going to be
3.the rise in healthcare costs went through the roof at the same time the number of medical administrators rose through the roof, same the universities.  Maybe it's a coincidence.  Maybe it's only part of the problem.  Lets find out.

Maybe it's time we prioritize what majors get subsidized at universities. Simply throwing more money at students, without any input on what they are going to study, will not solve this problem. We should give greater aid to STEM majors, and even more if they go into medical fields, investing in occupations that are needed and that will generate greater economic bang for our buck, and give less to students who major in crap like intersectional underwater basket weaving or women's studies. That way students will have to weigh the choice between a fully government funded education towards a STEM degree and possibly Med School, vs a partially government funded education for a liberals arts major.

[Progressive Pessimist]

If Trump signs a Democratic health-care bill, he would be impeached. The red line for Congressional Republicans isn't any scandal, it's him no longer signing their bills.

Nah. That line doesn't exist. They'll praise Trump for his embrace of bipartisanship even as they disagree with the policy that he signed into law.

[Kyle Rittenhouse is a Political Prisoner]

If Trump signs a Democratic health-care bill, he would be impeached. The red line for Congressional Republicans isn't any scandal, it's him no longer signing their bills.

Nah. That line doesn't exist. They'll praise Trump for his embrace of bipartisanship even as they disagree with the policy that he signed into law.

They've pretty explicitly said that they put Trump in power to sign their bills. That's their motive for this whole sham.

[Badger]

So while your point is factually correct, your underlying assertions and assumptions about why the problem is growing, let alone what to do about it, are fundamentally flawed.

as far as I can see, I made 3 points:
1.the people that work in the healthcare industry make money off of the health needs of others and that's not a bad thing
2.there aren't enough of them
2a.the more people receiving care, the bigger that problem is going to be
3.the rise in healthcare costs went through the roof at the same time the number of medical administrators rose through the roof, same the universities.  Maybe it's a coincidence.  Maybe it's only part of the problem.  Lets find out.

Maybe it's time we prioritize what majors get subsidized at universities. Simply throwing more money at students, without any input on what they are going to study, will not solve this problem. We should give greater aid to STEM majors, and even more if they go into medical fields, investing in occupations that are needed and that will generate greater economic bang for our buck, and give less to students who major in crap like intersectional underwater basket weaving or women's studies. That way students will have to weigh the choice between a fully government funded education towards a STEM degree and possibly Med School, vs a partially government funded education for a liberals arts major.

Spoken like a true no nothing afraid of more voters having a college education.

Quick news flash. For decades, as in going back to the 80s at least, 90-plus percent of individuals with bachelor's degrees did not subscribe to get a job in a field directly related to their undergraduate major. There were a few exceptions along the lines of accounting and some chemistry / engineering Majors, but that's it. Nevertheless, people with political science degrees like yours truly were able to get find jobs nevertheless. The problems with college graduates not being able to have to do with much greater structural problems with the economy, not with underwater basket weaving degrees like you say from some stupid internet meme.

The real value of a college education is forcing someone to stick out a four-year program of critical thinking. It teaches you how to think critically, which is invaluable in damn near any profession, rather than what to think.

Methinks you could use a few more years of such education yourself.

[dead0man]

The real value of a college education is forcing someone to stick out a four-year program of critical thinking. It teaches you how to think critically, which is invaluable in damn near any profession, rather than what to think.

do they still teach those things at school these days?

[Jeffster]

So while your point is factually correct, your underlying assertions and assumptions about why the problem is growing, let alone what to do about it, are fundamentally flawed.

as far as I can see, I made 3 points:
1.the people that work in the healthcare industry make money off of the health needs of others and that's not a bad thing
2.there aren't enough of them
2a.the more people receiving care, the bigger that problem is going to be
3.the rise in healthcare costs went through the roof at the same time the number of medical administrators rose through the roof, same the universities.  Maybe it's a coincidence.  Maybe it's only part of the problem.  Lets find out.

Maybe it's time we prioritize what majors get subsidized at universities. Simply throwing more money at students, without any input on what they are going to study, will not solve this problem. We should give greater aid to STEM majors, and even more if they go into medical fields, investing in occupations that are needed and that will generate greater economic bang for our buck, and give less to students who major in crap like intersectional underwater basket weaving or women's studies. That way students will have to weigh the choice between a fully government funded education towards a STEM degree and possibly Med School, vs a partially government funded education for a liberals arts major.

Spoken like a true no nothing afraid of more voters having a college education.

Quick news flash. For decades, as in going back to the 80s at least, 90-plus percent of individuals with bachelor's degrees did not subscribe to get a job in a field directly related to their undergraduate major. There were a few exceptions along the lines of accounting and some chemistry / engineering Majors, but that's it. Nevertheless, people with political science degrees like yours truly were able to get find jobs nevertheless. The problems with college graduates not being able to have to do with much greater structural problems with the economy, not with underwater basket weaving degrees like you say from some stupid internet meme.

The real value of a college education is forcing someone to stick out a four-year program of critical thinking. It teaches you how to think critically, which is invaluable in damn near any profession, rather than what to think.

Methinks you could use a few more years of such education yourself.

That explains why most of your posts on here are useless garbage that offer very little insight and contains a lack of arguments about the topic at hand, and are mostly just petty insults. College education for many majors these days has just become what a high school degree used to be in the past. It doesn't signify the person has critical thinking skills, rather they can just regurgitate the crap they have been spoon fed from their ideologue professors. If our tax money is to be used to subsidize a college education then I don't want mine going to push some crazy marxist analysis of identity groups ideology. Let the students who wish to learn those things do that on their own dime. I want my money to subsidize more Doctors, Scientists, Engineers, etc.

And it's funny that you ignored the context of the debate here, and wanted to tell us all about your poli-sci degree. We were talking about a shortage of Doctors, and I was suggesting a way we could entice more people to go into fields where we have a labor shortage. Do you think you should be able to practice medicine with only your poli-sci degree? I don't care if you claim to have learned how to think critically, I certainly don't want to be treated by such an unqualified Doctor. If we gave greater government subsidized aid to students in priority fields, and less to students in others, it would cause them to choose their majors more carefully, and would reduce shortages in vital fields.