Harris wants the end of private health insurance in favor of govt. run plan...

[jbrownson0831]

Good for her.

It's refreshing to see an American candidate who is not afraid to talk as if they live in the 21st century.

Another unemployed dreg weighs in.....

 

[22lcidw]

Most people can't afford their medical bills when they have to deal with a serious expense, and private insurance can also deny you coverage whenever they feel like it. About 60% of America lives paycheck to paycheck, so telling people to go to hell essentially, isn't the answer. There's no such thing as a "National Debt" in the sense of household debt, so you're quite ignorant.

We can question medical care. The costs you typed for national insurance are low. Way lower than what reality will be. Medicine came a business when government entered it. There will be rationing and limits for people at some point. The elderly will not hang on for a few months at the end of their lifespans like now. Costing hundreds of thousands of dollars is not millions. Teh sickly will not either.

 

[TruthNotBS]

But should either fail you or you find a better deal, you do have the liberty to opt out of both. You have to enroll in both to get what benefits they offer. Both have to compete against possible private enterprise and therefore maintain much more integrity and competence than they otherwise would likely have.

Kamala wants you to have no opportunity to opt out and those in government will determine what healthcare you MUST have or CANNOT have with no alternative being available. Likely the VA would be dissolved as veterans would be covered by the same healthcare everybody else would be required to have.

I agree with you. People should have the option, to go to the private sector and get their medical care there. If you have the money to pay for private healthcare, go ahead. If for whatever reason, you can't afford private healthcare, your government is there to help you, to make sure you get the medical care that you need. The government ensures, that you are always covered, and if you don't want to avail yourself of your right to use government healthcare, you can turn to the market. No problem.

I'm a Democratic National Socialist. My party allows for what you just described.

 

[TruthNotBS]

People's surplus...hahahahahahahahahahaha
Is this guy from earth?

Yes, it's your investments, savings, your assets..etc. It's the money in the private sector.

 

[HikerGuy83]

The national debt isn't a debt, it's just how much money is currently invested in the private sector. It's the people's surplus.

That has to be one of the most stupid things I've ever read.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Another unemployed dreg weighs in.....

Why would you think I am unemployed?

Oh, right. Your a cruel and angry, low IQ white winger who must dehumanize the others to justify his own poor behavior.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Yes, it's your investments, savings, your assets..etc. It's the money in the private sector.

No it isn't moron.

It's money they've spent but not collected in taxes. Tell your grandkids that when inflation is rampant and they are living on the street.

 

[Crepitus]

In fact, the Harris plan from 2019 could cost $44 trillion over a decade, according to a forthcoming analysis from health economist Stephen Parente and Theo Merkel at the American Action Forum. That includes some $1.8 trillion to cover some 11 million illegal immigrants.

MSN

Nope. Harris will not take away private insurance, you will still be able to get additional insurance in the open market if you choose, but everyone will have coverage from the government first.

 

[TruthNotBS]

We can question medical care. The costs you typed for national insurance are low. Way lower than what reality will be. Medicine came a business when government entered it. There will be rationing and limits for people at some point. The elderly will not hang on for a few months at the end of their lifespans like now. Costing hundreds of thousands of dollars is not millions. Teh sickly will not either.

There will be both government healthcare, that you can benefit from, and the private sector. You will also have medical freedom. No more need for prescriptions from a doctor. You will be able to go to any pharmacy as our grandparents did, and get your medications. The FDA will still exist, but it will be much more limited in what it can do. It will mostly just be an educational institution, disseminating information on different products and procedures, allowing consumers to make good decisions.

Democratic National Socialism will free you, not enslave you as the capitalists are doing now. Capitalism will be serving the nation, and the American people will have more freedom to capitalize, start a business..etc. You will have a higher standard of living with Democratic National Socialism.

 

[TruthNotBS]

That has to be one of the most stupid things I've ever read.

Because unfortunately, you're misinformed sir.

 

[HikerGuy83]

Because unfortunately, you're misinformed sir.

Sorry, clown. You have no clue.

 

[TruthNotBS]

No it isn't moron.

It's money they've spent but not collected in taxes. Tell your grandkids that when inflation is rampant and they are living on the street.

Yes sir, but that money that hasn't been collected in taxes, is what I mentioned. Your assets, investments, and savings, everything that is in the private sector. Thank you for adding that other aspect of the so-called "debt", pointing out that it's the money that the government has spent and hasn't taxed back.

 

[Foxfyre]

And those mixed economies are the most robust, successful and provide the best standard of living to their citizens. We're also going to have it here.

There is no country in the world with a population greater than a semi-large U.S. state, or even a large U.S. city, that can surpass the USA in per capita GDP or standard of living. To think the USA can operate as effectively as Norway or Switzerland, both with populations smaller than NY City, using the same policies as they do, is to think New York City could operate as effectively as Muleshoe TX utilizing the same laws/policies as Muleshoe does.

The USA has the third largest population in the world. Thinking what works in a small county in area with a small homogenous population will be no different here is the epitome of naivete'.

 

[Donald H]

What most Americans fail to realize is that socialism allows markets, and private property, within certain limits. There's also a clear distinction between private and personal property in socialism. Private property are all property that are used to exploit others for a profit. If you're exploiting or employing wage labor for a profit, then that property, those assets are private. All business-oriented properties aren't necessarily private property. So if you own your hardware shop, that you operate alone, your business isn't a "private property" in the socialist sense. If your wife and young adult children are working with you, that's a family business, and not a private property, where you're exploiting human labor for profit.

Personal property, unlike private property, are all of your properties for personal use. Your home, vehicle/s, computer/s, gun collection.etc, everything that is yours, for your personal use or the use of others to who you allow access to those properties and personal belongings.

People have a lot of misconceptions about socialism in America due to decades of Cold War capitalist propaganda.

I'm a Canadian and so I can take it as self-evident that that is the truth. So you're preaching to the choir with me. That's not to say that there's no value in what you've written. I read it as the basics that are pretended to not be acceptable to Americans, but in fact must be already accepted in their minds.

I'm not sure though on what distinction you're trying to make between personal property and private property?
I'm not asking you to state the difference in legal terms. It would probably require more work than what the distinction is worth. But go ahead if you think it's worth it.

 

[Donald H]

There is no country in the world with a population greater than a semi-large U.S. state, or even a large U.S. city, that can surpass the USA in per capita GDP or standard of living.

Wrong! State is again with two single barrel questions. Then I can declare each wrong with explanations.

To think the USA can operate as effectively as Norway or Switzerland, both with populations smaller than NY City, using the same policies as they do, is to think New York City could operate as effectively as Muleshoe TX utilizing the same laws/policies as Muleshoe does.

The USA has the third largest population in the world. Thinking what works in a small county in area with a small homogenous population will be no different here is the epitome of naivete'.

 

[Foxfyre]

I agree with you. People should have the option, to go to the private sector and get their medical care there. If you have the money to pay for private healthcare, go ahead. If for whatever reason, you can't afford private healthcare, your government is there to help you, to make sure you get the medical care that you need. The government ensures, that you are always covered, and if you don't want to avail yourself of your right to use government healthcare, you can turn to the market. No problem.

I'm a Democratic National Socialist. My party allows for what you just described.

You put far more trust in government than I do. Than our Founders did. The Founders had witnessed far too much of what harm and misery a bad government can inflict upon the people. That is why they wanted a government that is required to promote the COMMON good, meaning everybody's good, and all laws and policy will be toward that end, but the people would be at liberty to provide for themselves and create whatever societies they want to have.

All who aspire to power are not good. And the more totalitarian the government, the less good those who control it are likely to be.

 

[Foxfyre]

Wrong! State is again with two single barrel questions. Then I can declare each wrong with explanations.

Maybe you can. But you never have.

 

[TruthNotBS]

There is no country in the world with a population greater than a semi-large U.S. state, or even a large U.S. city, that can surpass the USA in per capita GDP or standard of living. To think the USA can operate as effectively as Norway or Switzerland, both with populations smaller than NY City, using the same policies as they do, is to think New York City could operate as effectively as Muleshoe TX utilizing the same laws/policies as Muleshoe does.

The USA has the third largest population in the world. Thinking what works in a small county in area with a small homogenous population will be no different here is the epitome of naivete'.

The principles of democratic national socialism, apply to any country or economy, it's just scaled up. The more advanced our technology the easier it is to achieve that. China has five times our population and their GDP rivals ours, and is the fastest growing economy in the world. China's economy isn't a laissez-faire capitalist economy, there's plenty of government central planning and yet they're extremely productive and effective. Germany in the 1930s, applied a form of socialism, similar to what I propose, and turned the German economy into the most prosperous economy in the world, providing the highest standard of living to the German people.

 

[Foxfyre]

The principles of democratic national socialism, apply to any country or economy, it's just scaled up. The more advanced our technology the easier it is to achieve that. China has five times our population and their GDP rivals ours, and is the fastest growing economy in the world. China's economy isn't a laissez-faire capitalist economy, there's plenty of government central planning and yet they're extremely productive and effective. Germany in the 1930s, applied a form of socialism, similar to what I propose, and turned the German economy into the most prosperous economy in the world, providing the highest standard of living to the German people.

China floundered though until they adopted a more market driven economy and allowed more laizzez-faire capitalism to flourish there. But without being able to access and manipulate U.S. money, they would have far less economic success. And if you admire their totalitarian methods, you don't belong in the USA. But even China allows private health insurance.

And Germany's economy is currently flat and/or in recession with no certain remedy in the near future. Again Germany's land area is smaller than the state of Montana and their population far less than a third of ours while being far more homogenous with pretty much a single culture to consider.

The naive think Muleshoe Tx and New York City can be effectively run with identical laws, systems, policies. The wise take into consideration the difference that vast distances and huge populations made in what a nation's practical laws, policy, effectiveness will be. And the wise will not only look at what works in the short term--a few decades--versus the long term cause and effect, consequences, outcomes.

Finally the wise know that a constitutional republic of, for, and by the people will in the long run be far superior to any authoritarian bad government and there is always the possibility of those in government not knowing how or being unwilling to be public servants for the good of the people.

 

[Donald H]

Maybe you can. But you never have.

The countries with the highest standard of living include123:

• Switzerland
• Norway
• Iceland
• Hong Kong
• Australia
• Denmark
• Sweden
• Ireland
• Germany
• Netherlands

I'll leave it to you to deal with the other question, before proving you wrong on that too.