Bernie Sanders Unveils his Medicare for All Plan

[Broke Wave]

You keep posting this article. The actual survey is that people think that Medicare and Veteran's health benefits are overwhelmingly important.

Despite being seen as important 2/3 of those same people surveying it says it need overhaul.

Of course they need overhaul... who is suggesting otherwise? What they need is expansion. Medicare is the second most popular program after SS. I have free health care and people in Canada still pay for insurance for accessory care. No system is perfect and nobody here is saying that. The fact is that one system us vastly superior to the other in terms of coverage and costs.

 

[Pressure]

Of course they need overhaul... who is suggesting otherwise? What they need is expansion. Medicare is the second most popular program after SS. I have free health care and people in Canada still pay for insurance for accessory care. No system is perfect and nobody here is saying that. The fact is that one system us vastly superior to the other in terms of coverage and costs.

The problem right now is that medicare and social security both are currently unsustainable both cost and coverage and they take up a large portion of the overall budget.

Defense spending is increasing.
The debt is increasing.
People being taxed at or over 40% don't want to pay more.

As much as I agree that some from of UHC or single payer is the correct way to go I don't see how you can get the votes to pull it off and justify the increased spending for the government.

 

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

The problem right now is that medicare and social security both are currently unsustainable both cost and coverage and they take up a large portion of the overall budget.

Defense spending is increasing.
The debt is increasing.
People being taxed at or over 40% don't want to pay more.

As much as I agree that some from of UHC or single payer is the correct way to go I don't see how you can get the votes to pull it off and justify the increased spending for the government.

Gotta give it to you though...the ratio of "serious" buzzwords to overall post count is

 

[Pressure]

Gotta give it to you though...the ratio of "serious" buzzwords to overall post count is

I'm liberal and support UHC. Nice try though.

 

[Pressure]

My position is if you're going to overhaul healthcare in America then do it and not as some shortsighted compromise because it seems reasonable.

 

[GnauzBookOfRhymes]

My position is if you're going to overhaul healthcare in America then do it and not as some shortsighted compromise because it seems reasonable.

Breh you're approach dead7 levels of meaningless political sloganeering lol

 

[Pressure]

Breh you're approach dead7 levels of meaningless political sloganeering lol

what's the problem? If I bring up the issues that come with Bernie's proposal it's political sloganeering.

Bernie Stans...


things I've said:

The government is going to have to prove they can handle running healthcare in order for these to work.

You responses: what about medicare?

My response: I didn't view 62 percent approval of how it's being ran as an overwhelming success. Despite how important people view the VA and Medicare they're suffering from failures that you wouldn't or shouldn't want from the healthcare provider of the Entirety of the US. That's without looking at Medicaid which has an approval rating which I believe may be lower than ACA.

other issues I brought up that will need to be answered:

people who make good money or have good healthcare, as well as their families are going to ask why you're taxing them more on areas they already oppose (e.g. capital gains) and then provide them with a healthcare plan that they will then have to pay additional money out of pocket to reach that same level.

How do you justify adding to record level of debt? What's your plan to tackle debt?

Is this feasible with defense spending going up? How you propose bringing it down?

How are you going to phase out the other federal and state health care systems? How will that transition look? Will we have the same issues that came up with ACA and people having to switch providers,doctors, etc?

These are real questions. If you aren't willing to answer them with someone who supports UHC how do you ever expect to do so with those who don't?


Or was this just supposed to be a Bernie circle jerk thread?

:bernielol:

 

[88m3]

Bernie Sanders cured cancer but you neoliberal shills are too busy with your globalism to even care.


amidoingthisrite

 

[tru_m.a.c]

John Conyers has introduced a Medicare for All Act every year since 2003. This is just political manuvering and a way to get Dems on record with regards to where they stand on this. The tax hikes are probably whats going to sink this thing, besides a Republican house and Senate. A good step forward however. But this can't be some sort of national litmus test if the party wants to regain footing in some of those deep red districts. Regaining ground means more Joe Manchins and Claire McCaskills I'm afraid.

Conyers works in the House. Bernie introduced a Senate bill. You need 2 versions of the plan at both levels to begin negotiations for each respective chamber. The problem is that we never got a universal plan at the senate level because Dems in the senate have historically compromised for an ACA type of bill.

Now that the hybrid republican/dem ACA bill is the law, compromising dems have a hard time arguing from the standpoint of maintaining the status quo or making modest improvement.

Essentially the devil is in the details for both chambers. However once you establish the levers in the Senate and the levers in the House, your party can go line by line and set aside what they agree on and what they don't agree on.

The most important takeaway from actions like these is that democratic lawmakers don't have to wait for Republicans to hop on the bandwagon to present workable plans to the American public. Force the conversation at take it to the people during the election cycle. If republicans are against this, while their base is for it, then you use it against them at the polls.

The bills don't have to be 100% fool proof. They do have to establish a rallying cry for the base. Most people don't pay attention to bills that pass in the House. But if you say something is in the works that 40+ democratic senators agree on, you've just pushed the national conversation to your side.

 

[Broke Wave]

The problem right now is that medicare and social security both are currently unsustainable both cost and coverage and they take up a large portion of the overall budget.

Defense spending is increasing.
The debt is increasing.
People being taxed at or over 40% don't want to pay more.

As much as I agree that some from of UHC or single payer is the correct way to go I don't see how you can get the votes to pull it off and justify the increased spending for the government.

That they are unsustainable is not entirely accurate, because minor adjustments to tax policy ie lifting the cap on the payroll tax would make them solvent for a century. The Debt increasing is also kind of irrelevant in this case... what does the debt have to do with healthcare coverage? The deficit was decreasing while Obama was increasing access to healthcare, and Bush exploded the deficit while doing nothing of the sort.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Hey Obama got the ACA pushed through when no one thought that was possible. I think it can happen

We also need to remember that it required a 60-39 vote: U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 111th Congress - 1st Session

So if every current Democrat that is currently in the senate isn't on board, it's dead on arrival (which is what republicans can plan on)

It also means that if democrats voting in states like Montana and Nebraska don't wake the fukk up and pull their weight, we'll never improve anything in this country.

It's a point that really needs to be conveyed across the country. A President signs bills, he doesn't write them. If you don't give the next president 60 dems in the Senate, don't expect shyt to change. No 60, still shytty.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

As it currently stands Medicare doesn't negotiate drug prices directly.

Any medicare for all proposal should fundamentally change how medicare operates.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but medicare under it's current permutation is wholly insufficient in regards to what it offers compared to what most people making good money currently receive as a part of their employee based insurance or pay on their own.

Medicare has the same satisfaction rate or less than military/veterans.

We all accept VA coverage is wholly insufficient.

The most popular and satisfied Medicare beneficiaries are those who use medicare advantage.

Those programs are purchased through private companies.


You all don't know what you're talking about. But it's a great time to learn.

The barometer is if you're going to tax people who are satisfied more what do they gain?

If the answer is nothing this just becomes a tax hike that won't pass.

The private market is a failure for the majority of people who have healthcare.

That's why we're having this conversation.

Most people with medicare have some type of supplemental insurance in order to afford healthcare. That makes it no better than what we have now with deductibles, premiums and limited options.

The VA is a total disaster. :camdup:

A lot of wrong/disingenuous information here. I'll edit this post in the am with my response. I'm tired.

 

[Pressure]

That they are unsustainable is not entirely accurate, because minor adjustments to tax policy ie lifting the cap on the payroll tax would make them solvent for a century. The Debt increasing is also kind of irrelevant in this case... what does the debt have to do with healthcare coverage? The deficit was decreasing while Obama was increasing access to healthcare, and Bush exploded the deficit while doing nothing of the sort.

They are unsustainable in their current permutation is the only point I made.

WRT to taxes, that was a major talking point for conservatives even during the terrible AHCA that was something they championed.

But I don't to get too far off topic. Taxes and the debt are always important because if the democrats will need to maintain control in order to get any kind if UHC or MCE through.

 

[Pressure]

A lot of wrong/disingenuous information here. I'll edit this post in the am with my response. I'm tired.

Not really. I pulled them from the KFF survey and what medicare offers.

1.) Medicare compared to the coverage I currently have from my employer is terrible. There would be a mutiny.

2.)people who are beneficiaries of medicare and the VA have similar satisfaction rates.

3.)Medicare is viewed as important. It is. We should provide healthcare for our senior citizens and it goes hand in hand with social security. However, people with employee healthcare don't care about medicare at all. Similarly VA is considered important because it's a no brained that you should take care of veterans.

4.)affordable, but just okay insurance is better than no insurance. This is the same argument being posed by conservatives who favor choice and young people who feel they don't need healthcare and for seniors who wouldn't be able to afford healthcare if medicare wasn't there as well as the families who wouldn't be able to afford their parebts/grandparents healthcare without medicare. That's where you find you 80 percent favorable numbers for people who've had it. You also find around a 58 percent favorable or so for those who've found financial shortcomings with medicare.

5.)As someone with fantastic healthcare I don't see any value in paying more if the system is just going to be okay and subject to partisan push/pull every congress/senate.

6.)the private market has shown itself to be something Americans don't love. That's why we're having these conversations. It's also why the AHCA failed because the private market strips 20 million people of healthcare.

7.)The VA has a long history of delayed care, insufficient care, poor research, and lack of accessibility.

8.)Obamacare drastically improved medicare. Any medicare for all scenario that also has an Obama care repeal will need to relegistlate the improvements obamacare added. Off the top of my head I think they adjusted risk pools. Lowering premiums for Medicare Advantage, added support for name brand drugs and also included the mandated preventative screening services for for men and women.


Please respond. I look forward to it.

 

[Pressure]

Don't confuse me saying what Medicare for all supporters will see with how I personally feel regarding medicare for all.

A lot of the trolls are bushed, but anyone who's taken a philosophy course understands the importance of being able to argue and respond to the opposite position.