I'm not a supporter of Bernie by any means but the way is being treated by the Democrats and their media lackeys is really terrible. First they steal the nomination from him in 2016 and now Elizabeth Warren, CNN, Hillary Clinton all jumping and creating this narrative that he is anti-women!! Wow. These people are vicious. The identity politics wing is just a virus that is now eating its own. What this shows is that Bernie and Trump are outside the norms of politics. All these Washington types rant and rave but then all end up at the same cocktail parties, bars and fundraisers laughing at the public for believing they're D or R fight. They only get together when outsiders that want to take the power from them come in. Its not Republican or Democrat, Black or White, its Insider versus Outsider. This is their arena and how dare Trump or Bernie come in as in Hillary's words "Nobody likes him!"
M4A does nothing to address obesity and exploding costs of dealing with a population that hasn’t took care of itself. You think covering older folks is expensive (Medicare) add obesity related illnesses to old.... Bringing up car insurance.... I much prefer we start off by having everyone covered with some sort of basic catastrophic policy.
What do Sanders' supporters think about Our Revolution? The political non-profit org spun off from his 2016 campaign and is heavily promoting Sanders' 2020 presidential run by A watchdog group has filed a FEC complaint about Our Revolution, which doesn't disclose its donors and has accepted more than $5k from individual donors (5k is the limit for PACs). As a 501(c)(4) corporation, Our Revolution is technically legally allowed to exceed this threshold, as long as it doesn't coordinate with the official Sanders campaign. But just look at the many ties between the group and Sanders himself: It feels a bit hypocritical for Sanders to benefit from this group's actions, while chastising other candidates for their fundraising actions.
I don't care what he did 20 years ago but why is Biden and others judged on what he said and did 20 years ago? My point is nobody can pass these purity test.
99.9% of small businesses are not indicative of the average person who has medical insurance, so why use that as an example. I agree the current system is not sustainable but using numbers from small business owners is at the far end of the spectrum.
What the hell is this supposed to mean? This is Mojo level bad. And what the hell does Obama have to do with this?
49% have employer subsidized insurance. 16% are "Direct Pay" / out of pocket. That's no small number. As for M4A .... I think it is the logical answer. Look , we've made this decision as a society that healthcare is a right , not access to care but actual care itself , whether you can pay for it or not and that everyone who is capable of contributing is going to be forced to contribute. In making that decision , we have to find the most cost effective way to provide that. The "insurance man" as a collection agent who takes 45% of the total proceeds off the top is far from efficient at all much less the most efficient. The most logical way to eliminate that middle man is to have the gubmint as the collection agent. It could cut everyone's cost literally in half. I don't particularly care to give the gubmint any power / authority at all much less what amounts to 18% of the entire GDP but .... what other solutions can you come up with that is anywhere close to being as cost effective as removing the insurance company from the equation ?
Are you ready? I think this was wrong of Sanders to accept that money, I'm not sure if it was from individuals in the NRA or if it was checks directly from the NRA, if the later he should have returned it. I would be for the Brady bill, I don't know enough about gun manufacturing and lawsuits to comment. Bernie's most recent position is being for comprehensive background checks and banning assault weapons, which is good by me. I understand that being in a very rural state in Vermont that really enjoys hunting, has to take care of pest/preditors on farms, and probably doesn't have the same police response time to the average house hold as city dwellers like I enjoy, that his positions on guns may be a little different considering the context.
Never said its a small number and everybody that pays out of pocket does not pay the amount you quoted. Why do you keep saying things we both agree on it has nothing to do with you using a figure that maybe 10% of the insurance population incurs. There are other solutions to the problem its not only M4A and nobody knows exactly how M4A would work. What about the people that a fine with their insurance and have worked hard to get it, what about them?
I think the same way you do about Bernie I can understand why he would do it and his positions have changed, so why can't you do the same for Biden his positions have changed also and he was instrumental in getting some medicare protections in Obamacare. Why does Sanders past sins get washed away but everything Biden has done in the past is what we should judge him by?
I'm "Fine" with my insurance ... but I sure wouldn't mind cutting out that middle man / collection agent who's taking 45% off the top if it meant my rates would decline in proportion. My only apprehensions on M4A / Socialized Healthcare is the potential for rationing by the gubmint or telling me no to some potential life saving experimental treatment because "its too expensive" or it isn't worth it ...
Your insurance is not gonna be the same with M4A and that is what some people are wary of. its' much more complicated than just cutting out the middle man, I don't know why this talking point has such resonance.
Sorry, but these numbers are literal nonsense. Insurance isn't 45% of the cost of health care. It's both a laughable thing to say and a laughable thing for you to actually believe. The fact that you believe this means that everything you think about healthcare is simply completely wrong.
I wonder how many people see Steyer on a list and think it is actually Slayer? about 2-3% based on polling.
You'll have to explain to me how its more complicated than cutting out the middle man .... they add absolutely no value other than being a collection agent. You can have a centralized collection agency for a hell of a lot less than 45%. Why does this point have such resonance ?! Because of the cost - 45% of your healthcare dollars go to the insurance company who again , adds no value. Funnier yet , they are piss poor negotiators .... you ever seen an itemized bill for the ER ? .... Tylonel $300 .... a Q-Tip $100. Doesn't it seem logical to cut that middle man who adds absolutely nothing to the "product" out in an effort to control costs ? It also should eliminate all this "in the network" crap where you can only certain doctors , one of the primary complaints of ACA. I can see the potential negatives - some doctors wanting no part of the system , possible rationing of care .... and I don't particularly like the idea of socialized anything as a fiscal conservative but the social liberal side understands the benefits to society as a whole. If I can keep my doctor , get the care I need and save some significant portion of that 45% that currently goes to the insurance man , I call it a win. You say there are alternatives ? Such as what ? I'd really like to hear them ....
Even if its 25% .... that's far too much for absolutely NO value added. Realize that both my wife and son are insurance agents / executives.
