Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-06-2017, 12:14 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBeisbol View Post
No. It's your interpretation of what you think they said, that they didn't actually say.
Read it yourself. /shrug

The Urban Institute, a liberal think tank, analyzed the cost of single payer health care for all. It would cost the Fed Gov an additional $3.2 trillion per year:

Quote:
"The increase in federal expenditures would be considerably larger than the increase in national health expenditures because substantial spending borne by states, employers, and households under current law would shift to the federal government under the Sanders [Medicare for All] plan. Federal expenditures in 2017 would increase by $1.9 trillion for acute care for the nonelderly, by $465.9 billion for those otherwise enrolled in Medicare, and by $212.1 billion for long-term services and supports.

In total, federal spending would increase by about $2.5 trillion (257.6 percent) in 2017. Federal expenditures would increase by about $32.0 trillion (232.7 percent) between 2017 and 2026. The increase in federal spending is so large because the federal government would absorb a substantial amount of current spending by state and local governments, employers, and households."
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/...-Care-Plan.pdf

At the current annual US consumer spending level of $11.7 trillion, a 25% national VAT tax will raise $2.93 trillion in tax revenue. Almost enough, currently, to pay for single payer national health care for all. Adjust the VAT tax rate up or down as needed according to actual health care costs.

Cost-shifting to the Fed Gov has to be paid for somehow.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-09-2017, 04:00 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
6,354 posts, read 3,657,563 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsonkk View Post
Its well known and well documented that republicans are more generous than democrats when it comes to charity or donating to those in need. Al gore and Joe Biden have been particularly stingy when it comes to giving their rich income to those that need.

https://www.rt.com/usa/193952-charit...religion-utah/
As your source states regular American conservatives give lots of money to charity, but their conservative billionaire leaders don't.

Donald Trump: The Least Charitable Billionaire In The World - News Examiner - Examine Your World


And the problem with the average conservative is in government matters they vote to give money to their conservative billionaire leaders (instead of those in need.)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetno.../#4c35993065b9

https://thinkprogress.org/romneys-ec...s-52314de0d724

Bush Tax Cuts After 2002: June 2002 CTJ Analysis
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 09:30 PM
 
Location: U.S.
9,511 posts, read 9,096,362 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Many people would love that. California has 34% of the US Welfare population. Let California fund that without Federal aid.
Maybe California democrats can help fund the search for our new FBI director. Don't mess with the bull or the horns will hurt ( said Comedy today)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 09:57 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,029 posts, read 14,219,965 times
Reputation: 16752
The leftist / collectivist is not interested in donating his own time, talent, and treasure, but using the government to compel others to donate their time, talent and treasure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 09:58 PM
 
6,115 posts, read 3,093,279 times
Reputation: 2410
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
This really baffles me. We have loads and loads of rich liberals including Warren Buffett, Tim Cook, Bill Gates, Emma Stone, Patricia Arquette, Meryl Streep etc. etc. etc.

Why don't they just pool their money together and create a fund to pay for all their liberal ideas such as health care, refugees, illegal immigrants, equal pay etc. etc. etc.?

Wouldn't that solve more problems than all the bickering?
Why don't tell all Trump Supporters to pool their money for the wall ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 09:59 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
15,088 posts, read 13,458,676 times
Reputation: 14266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones View Post
Because that's how the Government, Democrats included in a big way here, have made things. Why do you support the Democrats who continually support open borders and Globalism which is the MAIN DRIVER in what you are complaining about?
Yeah... Because big business types like Donald had to be convinced by the Democrats to go make their stuff cheap overseas and pocket bigger profits... You're funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 11:16 PM
 
Location: 89434
6,658 posts, read 4,750,634 times
Reputation: 4838
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCardinals View Post
Why don't tell all Trump Supporters to pool their money for the wall ?
Why don't we make the anti-wall/pro illegal immigration people pay 113 billion dollars that illegals cost us each year?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 11:20 PM
 
6,115 posts, read 3,093,279 times
Reputation: 2410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevdawgg View Post
Why don't we make the anti-wall/pro illegal immigration people pay 113 billion dollars that illegals cost us each year?
And you are going to mow their lawns?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 11:21 PM
 
5,705 posts, read 3,674,713 times
Reputation: 3907
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer View Post
This really baffles me. We have loads and loads of rich liberals including Warren Buffett, Tim Cook, Bill Gates, Emma Stone, Patricia Arquette, Meryl Streep etc. etc. etc.

Why don't they just pool their money together and create a fund to pay for all their liberal ideas such as health care, refugees, illegal immigrants, equal pay etc. etc. etc.?

Wouldn't that solve more problems than all the bickering?
You mean higher taxes for the rich? Interesting concept.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-09-2017, 11:58 PM
 
319 posts, read 199,316 times
Reputation: 370
Why don't conservatives pool their guns together to kill everyone, thus ending crime?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:28 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top