Sherrod Brown 2024 is Dems best and only hope...CALLS ON BIDEN TO LEAVE RACE!!!!
- Thread starter GnauzBookOfRhymes
- Start date
gotta say, i like brown more and more for this. the right cant smear him as a 'socialist', which is HUGE (
im not saying it's right, but people are idiots and take fox seriously)
i hope he runs. he has my vote in the primary, easily
im not saying it's right, but people are idiots and take fox seriously)i hope he runs. he has my vote in the primary, easily
Sherrod Brown might be legit. Heard him speak tonight.
might have the best campaign by far with this emphasis on workers. kind of worried the large field this year could hurt him though, i think in a smaller field he could probably draw more attention. but im excited to see what his campaign does
intra vires
Glory to Michigan
Please read the article before you attack Brown
Read it, and still disappointed.
Unfortunate. If he is stating it's only practical in a mixed house and Senate without a 60 senator majority, I can agree. However, at this point there is no reason why we cant look to join other nations in universal coverage and if Democrats have the clout and numbers to pass it they better fukking do it. A lot of wind in his sails that I had for him was sucked out by this. I can see the argument for how this would be easier to get a majority of people off all stripes signed on to this but I'm tired of the baby steps when the other side has no interest in doing the same.
I might have to join the Bernie train at this rate .
Last edited:
Read it, and still disappointed.
Unfortunate. If he is stating it's only practical in a mixed house and Senate without a 60 senator majority, I can agree. However, at this point there is no reason why we cant look to join other nations in universal coverage and if Democrats have the clout and numbers to pass it they better fukking do it. A lot of wind in his sails that I had for him was sucked out by this. I can see the argument for how this would be easier to get a majority of people off all stripes signed on to this but I'm tired of the baby steps when the other side has no interest in doing the same.
I might have to join the Bernie train at this rate .
:bernielaugh: got seats for you
good, he's right. another reason to vote for him :jaymelo:
i dont wanna hear shyt about medicare for all until someone tells me ONE AREA of government spending that we're going to start cutting
Berniewood Hogan
IT'S BERNIE SANDERS WITH A STEEL CHAIR!
We're already spending a lot of government money on healthcare. Nearly 65% of healthcare spending in the USA is by the federal government ($2.2 trillion)! The other 35% is private sector and that's $1.1 trillion on premiums and $350 billion on out of pocket expenses.
Medicare For All should be about consolidating existing federal healthcare spending into one MEDICARE. Then, using rate setting to lower prices by providers and drug companies. Actually the feds can do that RIGHT NOW with regards to prices but no one has the balls or guts.
Jon Walker in the thread I posted, said you can get the money that employers are paying for premiums right now through an employer mandate which would be like how Japan and Germany fund much of their health care system. Other countries began this way and then went to more straight payroll taxing later on. You'd have to repeal the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 because that's what's making talk of such mandates null and why people keep putting up a bigger payroll tax.
Medicare-for-all is cheaper
In 2016, Canada's single-payer system cost about $4,500 per person. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services say that same year, just directly tax-supported health-care programs — Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Affairs health programs, and the Children's Health Care Program — cost together $1.929 trillion, or $5,972 per person. Add in the cost of the employer-based insurance tax exclusion ($268 billion) and ObamaCare tax subsidies ($48 billion), both figures courtesy of the Congressional Budget Office, and total government spending on health care rises to $2.245 trillion, or $6,950 per person.
So not only does our government health spending easily exceed that of Canada, it's not even close. And that's still leaving some stuff out!
Not feeling this statement. Medicare at 55 does nothing for people that are younger than that. We would still have the same problems of raising premiums, high deductibles, and people going into debt because of healthcare. He didn’t even propose a public opinion/Medicare buy in program. Also the fact that he said this in front of a Chamber Of Commerce chapter gives me even more pause. He has a good record, but this definitely makes me look at him differently.
winning the general is different than winning the democratic primary, and hes sounding the most like the one to have the best shot at it
if you want medicare for all, the country is gonna have to be eased into it. lets not be incredibly fukkin naive
GnauzBookOfRhymes
Superstar
I can definitely see this pissing a lot of people off. One thing I would say in his defense is that at least his stance is informed more by political realities than outright hostility to the idea of covering everyone. Remember that he was pushing the public option back in 2009.
That being said, I'd rather win the election and be able to push our president to a policy than run the chance of losing and not implementing shyt.
Medicare for all polls well depending on how it is explained. But besides that my main point was that Medicare at 55 is not good enough. At a bear minimum we need a public opinion/Medicare buy in. The ACA would of fared better if a public opinion was included.winning the general is different than winning the democratic primary, and hes sounding the most like the one to have the best shot at it
if you want medicare for all, the country is gonna have to be eased into it. lets not be incredibly fukkin naive
