Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bernie is the ONLY one up there I believe and trust. He's honest, been singing the same song for 40 years, and calls Clinton out on taking the money from everyone. I'm over Wall Street, big banks, lobbyists, etc. If this make me a democratic socialist, so be it, titles mean nothing to me. Maybe I'll finally get something for the 40K I pay in taxes.
That's a big tax bill. I suspect what you'll be getting is a bigger tax bill with even less benefits. Maybe you'll get an Uncle Bernie Thank You Note printed straight from the Money Fairy Union or maybe he'll cop a feel when you finally get to meet him. Then you'll truly have gotten something for your money!
Because the GOP has balanced one? How balanced was the spending bill Ryan and the (R)'s just passed?
No Republicans suck at balancing the books too. I'm just pointing out the obvious fact that Sanders is making promises, but he hasn't a clue how he'll pay for it.
Big two parties 101. They'll promise anything if it gets them elected and then just throw it on the ole credit card. That's why the debt is $19 Trillion and counting. And if you call one party out for it, proxies like yourself will point out the stupidly obvious: "Yeah but the other guys are doing the same thing!!"
Yeah that's what the big two parties are like. It'd be hilarious if it wasn't hurting us so badly.
I will credit the Republicans with at least offering lip service to fiscal responsibility. But ultimately, they just shift the money from social programs to military spending.
No Republicans suck at balancing the books too. I'm just pointing out the obvious fact that Sanders is making promises, but he hasn't a clue how he'll pay for it.
And yet he has presented a plan to pay for it.
Quote:
I will credit the Republicans with at least offering lip service to fiscal responsibility. But ultimately, they just shift the money from social programs to military spending.
May said this is plan that Obama should have pursued between 2008-2010 when DNC had full control of congress. Instead Obama gave amnesty to TBTF banksters and handed America cash for clunkers as way to revive America.
What we got was Obamacare which guarantees profits for big Insurance and AMA members, and Drug companies.
Too bad Bernie's plan will never see light of day.
DNC has rigged primary so that Hillary Clinton will win.
King Hillary loves Obamacare. Those who profit from it have given her campaign 10s of millions.
The sheer popularity of the Snow Queen (Clinton) among the clueless masses is too big. I don't think Sanders can actually win the nomination, so the points Sanders makes may be moot. But I do like much of what I've heard to be honest. "Having the balls to take on insurance companies and big pharmaceuticals" is how you actually get to a functional single-payer without quadrupling the debt. Trick is, that's what you do first. You knock some heads amongst the elements of healthcare that are ripping off America. You go after the nutters that want to charge $23 for a single alcohol swab or $15 for a single Tylenol. The medical industry is ripe for a modern day Teddy Roosevelt to come in and shake things up. I have real doubts trusting Sanders to be that guy, but he seems to be your best bet for it.
Then Hillary chuckles and mutters something about how awesome she is and the point seems to get lost. Sanders seems a lot more genuine than Hillary -- which is like saying that a wild rat seems like a safer thing to keep around than a poisonous cobra.
Quote:
Sanders voted no on the unfunded spending bill.
Good for him but I don't think any Democrat is remotely capable of balancing the budget. They're too busy falling all over each other promising free college, free internet, free cellphones, free food, free everything. Somebody's gotta pay for all that. An honest Democrat would come out and tell you, "Hey Middle Class America, your taxes are going way up cuz we gotta pay for all this crap I promised you." But they don't do that during the campaign. That happens later.
The sheer popularity of the Snow Queen (Clinton) among the clueless masses is too big. I don't think Sanders can actually win the nomination, so the points Sanders makes may be moot. But I do like much of what I've heard to be honest. "Having the balls to take on insurance companies and big pharmaceuticals" is how you actually get to a functional single-payer without quadrupling the debt. Trick is, that's what you do first. You knock some heads amongst the elements of healthcare that are ripping off America. You go after the nutters that want to charge $23 for a single alcohol swab or $15 for a single Tylenol. The medical industry is ripe for a modern day Teddy Roosevelt to come in and shake things up. I have real doubts trusting Sanders to be that guy, but he seems to be your best bet for it.
Then Hillary chuckles and mutters something about how awesome she is and the point seems to get lost. Sanders seems a lot more genuine than Hillary -- which is like saying that a wild rat seems like a safer thing to keep around than a poisonous cobra.
Good for him but I don't think any Democrat is remotely capable of balancing the budget. They're too busy falling all over each other promising free college
Sanders has presented a way to pay for higher education.
Quote:
free internet, free cellphones, free food, free everything. Somebody's gotta pay for all that. An honest Democrat would come out and tell you, "Hey Middle Class America, your taxes are going way up cuz we gotta pay for all this crap I promised you." But they don't do that during the campaign. That happens later.
Why do they need to do that but the GOP candidates don't have to tell people how they plan on paying for the wars?
Current annual salary x 8.4% tax increase (2.2% personal and 6.2% payroll tax which comes from employee's total compensation) - cost of current annual premium, copays and Rx's = higher annual cost for lesser quality policy.
For our family that will be about $6,000.00 more per year over what we're paying in 2016. Which is already 15% more than what we paid in 2015.
When is enough enough? Should middle class Americans be required to lower their standard of living in order for poorer Americans to enjoy a better one?
So you are saying that cost would be a flat tax rate of 8.4% which would be applicable no matter what your taxable income was?
That confuses me because here in Canada, the more taxable income you earn, the higher the income tax rate. I know that in the U.S. The top 20% of earners pay 84% of all income tax so I had assumed that they would pay about 84% of health care cost of a single payor system.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 27 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,573 posts, read 16,560,540 times
Reputation: 6044
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics
Perhaps, if Mr Sanders is insane or delusional.
HOW CAN WE PAY FOR "FREE" HEALTHCARE?
(Not everyone has a job, nor a "good job"!)
18+ Trillion Dollar Public Debt
Pursuant to the Coinage Act of 1792, et seq, that debt computes to over 900 billion ounces of gold, stamped into coin.
❏ Problem #1 : Fort Knox depository (allegedly) holds 147.4 million ounces of gold.
❏ Problem #2 : World wide supply (est) is 5.6 billion ounces of gold.
❏ Problem #3 : At current mining rates, it would take over 8000 years to mine enough bullion IF the debt and interest were frozen right now.
❏ Problem #4 : The validity of this insane public debt cannot be questioned, pursuant to clause 4, 14th amendment, USCON.
Remember, the dollar bill (Federal Reserve Note) is a debt, and has minus value. It cannot pay off the national debt - being part of it. (See: Title 12 USC Sec. 411)
So "where" does all that money come from?
To authorize spending more, Congress has to go deeper into (impossible) debt, borrowing FRNs (dollar bills) to pay for it.
WHO IS OBLIGATED TO PAY OFF THIS DEBT?
Our children?
Our grandchildren?
what does Public debt have to do with whether or not we as a country can pay for healthcare for all ?
this looks like a copy and paste post where you simply changed the title.
We are capatlists, and this healthcare abortion is making someone lots of money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove
Not true. The free market based system is the most efficient and the most free. Socialism is dead.
You haven't had a Free Market System in healthcare since 1933
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove
You are in denial. Insurance companies whether auto, health, life, etc all, provide a pool, so costs can be shared among the subscribers.
Insurance is not about pooling, contrary to the rantings and musings of the ignorant and uneducated.
DEFINITIONS
Pooling is a risk-management process under which similar actuarial risks are combined.
The definition of pooling does not imply that it will always be beneficial.
Source: PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING ACTUARIAL SCIENCE Mark Allaben, Christopher Diamantoukos, Arnold Dicke, Sam Gutterman, Stuart Klugman, Richard Lord, Warren Luckner, Robert Miccolis, Joseph Tan Copyright 2008 by the Society of Actuaries.
4.2 PRINCIPLE (Pooling). If the actuarial risk associated with a risk classification system displays statistical regularity, it is possible to combine risk classes so as to ensure that there is an actuarial model associated with the new set of risk classes that is valid within a specified degree of accuracy.
DISCUSSION. It is clear from Principle 4.2 that there is a trade-off between pooling and homogeneity in insurance systems. Moreover, increased homogeneity generally leads to increased cost of information. . . .The ability to make such temporary distinctions (based on current health status, etc.) is useful, because it decreases the degree of uncertainty regarding current status and allows insureds to be charged more appropriate initial considerations. Thus, the knowledge that all members of a class had normal blood pressure on a certain day might allow that class to be offered lower considerations for life and health insurance.
Source: TRANSACTIONS OF SOCIETY OF ACTUARIES, Vol XLIV
Pooling does not decrease the cost of medical care or health plan coverage.
Pooling may or may not decrease operating costs for the insurer.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
