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.
Actually, the Thorpe analysis might be right. The point being twofold. One can't immediately reject analysis that is contrary to your viewpoint, and; if the revenue Mr. Sanders claims will be needed for his universal plan is too small, that just means that maybe we have to increase the tax a little more or scale back benefits until it meets the funding envelope. The universal health care idea itself is a sound one. So tweak the details.
The bolded portion of your post is exactly why so many middle-class voters (myself included) will not vote for Sanders. Mission creep will turn his healthcare plan into a boondoggle worse than the ACA, with even more increased taxes once the true cost becomes evident along with decreased benefits becoming common-fold into the plan. That reality is exactly what citizens of other nations already deal with, and it's why many Americans don't want government-sponsored wait-in-line-and-be-rejected care.
The analysis they use by Kenneth Thorpe, a former Clinton official, has already been dismissed by David Himmelstein, Professor of Public Health at CUNY and Lecturer in Medicine at Harvard Medical School and Steffie Woolhandler, Professor in the CUNY School of Public Health at Hunter College; Lecturer in Medicine at Harvard Medical School
That CNN segment was very one-sided with no contrarian view at all. Clearly meant to scare people.
And yet you cant cite for us what these "projected" savings are, nor how the difference is being paid for..
His taxes proposed, barely covers the amount the states pay for Medicaid, but we've seen absolutely NO proposal on where the extra, nor how this money from the state, will be transferred to the feds..
you keep ignoring this, pretending it doesnt exist.
That makes no sense given the left constantly uses small tiny nations as examples as to how it'll work here..
Exactly. The system is cratering in Canada, with just a NINTH of our population. And we can't even get it to work for our VA system, or in small-pop states like Vermont and Massachusetts.
Actually, the Thorpe analysis might be right. The point being twofold. One can't immediately reject analysis that is contrary to your viewpoint, and; if the revenue Mr. Sanders claims will be needed for his universal plan is too small, that just means that maybe we have to increase the tax a little more or scale back benefits until it meets the funding envelope. The universal health care idea itself is a sound one. So tweak the details.
There is no "little more" in taxes needed.
We spend about $10K per citizen on health care in this nation.. a 2% personal tax, and a 4-6% corporate tax wont generate anywhere near enough..
The median income would have to be about $150K in order for that to be enough, but we all know that isnt true. Add into the left wings notion that the poor, shouldnt pay a dime, and this increases the lack of enough by a lot..
Exactly. The system is cratering in Canada, with just a NINTH of our population. And we can't even get it to work for our VA system, or in small-pop states like Vermont and Massachusetts.
As I said the other day.. its not that I'd object to a national healthcare program, its how the left proposes it, and the lack of funding I call into question.
The whole idea that it can be passed and paid for by a "small" tax is ridiculous and I cant stand their lies..
If they really wanted such a system, they should merge Medicare and Medicaid, and figure out how to pay for it, and then gradually increased it to the population stages, based upon income.
None of their current proposals are even closed to paid for, and their lies about claimed savings etc, is disingenuous.
Exactly. The system is cratering in Canada, with just a NINTH of our population. And we can't even get it to work for our VA system, or in small-pop states like Vermont and Massachusetts.
how fun would that be if it was Bernie pushing for a Canadian system vs Cruz the ex-Canadian that wants to push private insurance?
If the US cut military spending by a third, released harmless drug users from prisons, and legalized and taxed marijuana and sex work, there'd be quite a bit more money to put to better use, such as the things Bernie suggests. And that's without increasing income tax.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motion
Here's the thing about free universities. According to this video U.S colleges would have to eliminate many extra curricular activities that many American college students are accustomed to in order to make them more affordable. Those free colleges in Europe are very stripped down to mainly academics but Americans will want more from their college experience. What in the World: Free college tuition for all? - CNN Video
As they should be. Baseball teams and fraternities are not necessities.
The bolded portion of your post is exactly why so many middle-class voters (myself included) will not vote for Sanders. Mission creep will turn his healthcare plan into a boondoggle worse than the ACA, with even more increased taxes once the true cost becomes evident along with decreased benefits becoming common-fold into the plan. That reality is exactly what citizens of other nations already deal with, and it's why many Americans don't want government-sponsored wait-in-line-and-be-rejected care.
But single payer is overwhelmingly popular in all our closest allies, which is much, much cheaper than the current American system and almost 60% of the American people including over 80% of Democrats want a single payer, medicare-for-all system in America.
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.
