Poll: Majority of Democrats and Republicans support Medicare for all

[Ray From Cleveland]

Bankruptcy for all!

.
Uh, guy, most countries with single payer spend 8% of their GDP on health care and get better results than we do paying 17% of our GDP on it.

Medicare for all would save us money, as it would remove things like investor payouts and CEO salaries and marketing expenses.

And all the hospitals and clinics would go bankrupt because Medicare refuses to pay for anything and reimbursements are pennies.

There are all kinds of tweaks that can be made. One would be a whole new cottage industry of entry-level preventive and diagnostic walk-in clinics.

We would definitely have to increase and re-construct reimbursement schedules.

We just have to THINK a little bit. But that appears to be a lost art.

So here comes real Single Payer.
.

Single payer would be just like Commie Care. It never addressed the problems of cost.

If we are to make any change, we can't do it the Democrat way and say "Here, somebody else pay for it."

The first step is to analyze how costs got so out of control in the first place, make a list of them, then execute each problem one at a time.

Now, this would take some guts to actually call problems, problems, particularly on the Democrat side which caused most of them. So until we can get to that point, everything else is fruitless.

the cost isn't ever going to go away. again, a demoloser thinks you plant a dollar in the ground and you get a trillion in a tree I guess. Still unclear to me where they expect money to come from. perhaps they could explain it. I doubt it, but it is worth a try.

The same place they want to get everything from--the rich people.

What they are ignorant of is the rich people don't have all this money to support all these government goodies. They think the rich have an endless amount of money. For instance Medicare for All would cost 32 trillion for 10 years. That means 3.2 trillion (and government estimates are always low) per year. Now our budget is a little over 4 trillion a year, and with that we add deficits. So what the Democrats think is that if we up our budget to 7.3 trillion a year, we can get the rich to pay for all that spending.

Even if you took every dime away from rich people, there is no way they could support that kind of spending for even one year. But Democrats don't have the common sense to understand that. Just gimme, gimme, gimme, and I don't care how it's paid for, as long as I get what I want.

If the tax rate were 0%, the government would collect 0 dollars. If the tax rate were 100%, the government would still collect 0 dollars because who would be stupid enough to create wealth? Liberals simply don't understand that when you make goals impossible to reach, most people will never try to achieve those goals. Make it impossible for any American to get rich, and they won't invest, won't spend, and won't have the money for government TO take away from them.

 

[jasonnfree]

Here's a right wing think tank proving that Medicare for all would be affordable.


Study Shows Medicare for All Would Be Cheaper, Cover 30 Million More People - Opponents Yell '$32 Trillion'

 

[JoeB131]

Why shouldn't they? If you sold fruits and vegetables, and it cost you two dollars for a dozen ears of corn, and the government only paid you one dollar, wouldn't you bitch too?

If it only cost me .50 to produce that dozen ears of corn, um, yeah, then I wouldn't have much tocomplain about.

Here's the problem with our medical system... if you want to treat it like a commodity, to go to the highest bidder, you can pretty much soak people. It's why 63% of bankruptcies are linked to medical crisis. You can drive people into the poorhouse with medical bills.

Medicare realized that you can't let them do that and still provide medical care.

I'm sure the doctors would hate "Medicare for all"... but honestly, fuck them.

Government only pays about 2/3 of the bill for their patients. That's why when you see facilities close down, it's usually in lower income areas where most of the people are on government programs.

Then we need government facilities to serve those locations, and if you want to keep your license, you have to work there part of your career. Hey, guess what, that's how the Europeans do it.

We've had capitalism in medical my entire life, yet in the 60's and 70's, healthcare was affordable whether you had insurance or not.

Guy, do you practice at being a retard? Oh, yeah, Health Care was GREAT in the 1960's... if you were with dying before 65, which is what most people did because most of the options sucked. It's why three of my four grandparents were dead before I was 8.

And you ask if I was dropped on my head as a baby?

Naw, man, you've pretty much confirmed it.

 

[JoeB131]

What they are ignorant of is the rich people don't have all this money to support all these government goodies. They think the rich have an endless amount of money. For instance Medicare for All would cost 32 trillion for 10 years. That means 3.2 trillion (and government estimates are always low) per year. Now our budget is a little over 4 trillion a year, and with that we add deficits. So what the Democrats think is that if we up our budget to 7.3 trillion a year, we can get the rich to pay for all that spending.

Again, we are doing to spend that amount anyway... We spend 19% of our GDP on healthcare... 19% of our GDP is about 4 Trillion dollars..

Make the rich pay their fair share... take all the money that is being wasted in payouts to CEO and stockholders, and effectively allocate resources... and we end up spending LESS on health care,not more.

Again, the Europeans have ALREADY FIGURED THIS OUT. But as Upton Sinclair once observed, you can't get a man to understand a problem if his paycheck depends on him not understanding it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What they are ignorant of is the rich people don't have all this money to support all these government goodies. They think the rich have an endless amount of money. For instance Medicare for All would cost 32 trillion for 10 years. That means 3.2 trillion (and government estimates are always low) per year. Now our budget is a little over 4 trillion a year, and with that we add deficits. So what the Democrats think is that if we up our budget to 7.3 trillion a year, we can get the rich to pay for all that spending.

Again, we are doing to spend that amount anyway... We spend 19% of our GDP on healthcare... 19% of our GDP is about 4 Trillion dollars..

Make the rich pay their fair share... take all the money that is being wasted in payouts to CEO and stockholders, and effectively allocate resources... and we end up spending LESS on health care,not more.

Again, the Europeans have ALREADY FIGURED THIS OUT. But as Upton Sinclair once observed, you can't get a man to understand a problem if his paycheck depends on him not understanding it.

Oh, so now it's not just CEO's, it's stockholders too?

Well what about all those stockholders that are depending on those investments for their retirement? What do we do with them, force them to rely on the pittance they receive from SS?

The top 20% of taxpayers pay nearly 95% of all collected taxes. If 95% isn't enough, then what is?

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, so now it's not just CEO's, it's stockholders too?

Well what about all those stockholders that are depending on those investments for their retirement? What do we do with them, force them to rely on the pittance they receive from SS?

Investment is gambling.... You pays your money, you takes your chances.

The top 20% of taxpayers pay nearly 95% of all collected taxes. If 95% isn't enough, then what is?

Since they have most of the wealth, then we aren't collecting enough to meet our obligations.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Here's a right wing think tank proving that Medicare for all would be affordable.


Study Shows Medicare for All Would Be Cheaper, Cover 30 Million More People - Opponents Yell '$32 Trillion'

Why shouldn't they? If you sold fruits and vegetables, and it cost you two dollars for a dozen ears of corn, and the government only paid you one dollar, wouldn't you bitch too?

If it only cost me .50 to produce that dozen ears of corn, um, yeah, then I wouldn't have much tocomplain about.

Here's the problem with our medical system... if you want to treat it like a commodity, to go to the highest bidder, you can pretty much soak people. It's why 63% of bankruptcies are linked to medical crisis. You can drive people into the poorhouse with medical bills.

Medicare realized that you can't let them do that and still provide medical care.

I'm sure the doctors would hate "Medicare for all"... but honestly, fuck them.

Government only pays about 2/3 of the bill for their patients. That's why when you see facilities close down, it's usually in lower income areas where most of the people are on government programs.

Then we need government facilities to serve those locations, and if you want to keep your license, you have to work there part of your career. Hey, guess what, that's how the Europeans do it.

We've had capitalism in medical my entire life, yet in the 60's and 70's, healthcare was affordable whether you had insurance or not.

Guy, do you practice at being a retard? Oh, yeah, Health Care was GREAT in the 1960's... if you were with dying before 65, which is what most people did because most of the options sucked. It's why three of my four grandparents were dead before I was 8.

And you ask if I was dropped on my head as a baby?

Naw, man, you've pretty much confirmed it.

Free shit for everybody but the nations best sounds like an amazing concept for a society with no wetbacks and with aggressive population control.
It’s too bad you ignorant fools gotta have your thirdworlders and bottom feeders...you’ve manifested way too much filth here and now shits out of hand. ($21 trillion in debt) You beggars will never get all that free shit you know you deserve...YOU DUMB BASTARDS FUCKED YOURSELVES!
hahahahahahaha

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If it only cost me .50 to produce that dozen ears of corn, um, yeah, then I wouldn't have much tocomplain about.

Here's the problem with our medical system... if you want to treat it like a commodity, to go to the highest bidder, you can pretty much soak people. It's why 63% of bankruptcies are linked to medical crisis. You can drive people into the poorhouse with medical bills.

Medicare realized that you can't let them do that and still provide medical care.

I'm sure the doctors would hate "Medicare for all"... but honestly, fuck them.

Of course they would hate Medicare for all, it would close down the facility where they work. Without private insurance to make up for government losses, the businesses would have to close down. No business can stay open operating at a loss.

Then we need government facilities to serve those locations, and if you want to keep your license, you have to work there part of your career. Hey, guess what, that's how the Europeans do it.

Well then vote for a dictator when the next one runs (which I'm sure in the Democrat party, won't be too long) because in a free society, we don't FORCE people to work anywhere.......yet, because the Republicans are in charge.

Guy, do you practice at being a retard? Oh, yeah, Health Care was GREAT in the 1960's... if you were with dying before 65, which is what most people did because most of the options sucked. It's why three of my four grandparents were dead before I was 8.

No, they died because we didn't have the technology in the 60's that we do today. Our advancements in medical care are tenfold of what they used to be back then. But advancements cost trillions of dollars. Medication costs trillions of dollars. Thanks to unions, it became harder and harder to find people to enter the medical field. Why go to school for an RN for $60,000 a year when you can start work right away as a UPS driver for nearly the same money?

So unions, lawsuits and government drove up the costs dramatically.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Oh, so now it's not just CEO's, it's stockholders too?

Well what about all those stockholders that are depending on those investments for their retirement? What do we do with them, force them to rely on the pittance they receive from SS?

Investment is gambling.... You pays your money, you takes your chances.

The top 20% of taxpayers pay nearly 95% of all collected taxes. If 95% isn't enough, then what is?

Since they have most of the wealth, then we aren't collecting enough to meet our obligations.

LefTard Logic:
“My neighbor has more than I have...DAMNIT, he should pay for some of my shit!”

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Investment is gambling.... You pays your money, you takes your chances.

Correct, when government isn't ruining that investment like government ruins everything else they touch. Let the markets be, and we'll do just fine without government. We can take care of ourselves you know.

Since they have most of the wealth, then we aren't collecting enough to meet our obligations.

Diversion once again. Answer the question. If 95% isn't enough, then what is? Hint: you only have 5% left in which to choose from.

 

[JoeB131]

Of course they would hate Medicare for all, it would close down the facility where they work. Without private insurance to make up for government losses, the businesses would have to close down. No business can stay open operating at a loss.

Which is why we should operate healthcare as a public service instead of a business.

Thanks for finally seeing the light,Ray.

 

[JoeB131]

Diversion once again. Answer the question. If 95% isn't enough, then what is? Hint: you only have 5% left in which to choose from.

Hint. We have a 20 Trillion dollar GDP. We need 4 Trillion to run the government. Since the One Percent have 43% of the wealth, that's a good place to start.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Diversion once again. Answer the question. If 95% isn't enough, then what is? Hint: you only have 5% left in which to choose from.

Hint. We have a 20 Trillion dollar GDP. We need 4 Trillion to run the government. Since the One Percent have 43% of the wealth, that's a good place to start.

Joe, do you ever listen to yourself?
“Excuse me neighbor, you’re more successful than I am and you’ve done better for yourself than I have so I’m gonna need you to pay my way… Oh and by the way, my buddy here Gustavo, he’s from Mexico and I’m going to need you to pay his way as well.”

The scary thing is, you beggars don’t even realize how fucking stupid that sounds.

 

[JoeB131]

Joe, do you ever listen to yourself?
“Excuse me neighbor, you’re more successful than I am and you’ve done better for yourself than I have so I’m gonna need you to pay my way… Oh and by the way, my buddy here Gustavo, he’s from Mexico and I’m going to need you to pay his way as well.”

The scary thing is, you beggars don’t even realize how fucking stupid that sounds.

Naw, man, what's stupid is that Gustavo probably does more back-breaking work than some middle manager in charge of counting towels or whatever.

The very fact that you and every other white trash loser is on here all day tells me that you guys aren't really gainfully employed while Gustavo is busting his ass.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Diversion once again. Answer the question. If 95% isn't enough, then what is? Hint: you only have 5% left in which to choose from.

Hint. We have a 20 Trillion dollar GDP. We need 4 Trillion to run the government. Since the One Percent have 43% of the wealth, that's a good place to start.

Still won't answer, huh? Can't blame you. Even you understand how stupid it would sound.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Of course they would hate Medicare for all, it would close down the facility where they work. Without private insurance to make up for government losses, the businesses would have to close down. No business can stay open operating at a loss.

Which is why we should operate healthcare as a public service instead of a business.

Thanks for finally seeing the light,Ray.

Yes, because so many government services are doing so well and projected to be doing better in the future.

The point (that obviously flew over your head) is that government programs cannot survive without the private market. The estimate for Medicare For All is it's current payout. In order for facilities to stay afloat, government would have to cough up another 35% on top of what they pay now. That would make Medicare broke in less than ten years.

So we are right back to where we started: who is going to pay for all this wonderful care? And no, the rich don't have the money for it. Besides, why should they pay the bill for the rest of the people in this country?

 

[JoeB131]

The point (that obviously flew over your head) is that government programs cannot survive without the private market. The estimate for Medicare For All is it's current payout. In order for facilities to stay afloat, government would have to cough up another 35% on top of what they pay now. That would make Medicare broke in less than ten years.

sure they can, just tax rich people. problem solved. This isn't complicated.

 

[KissMy]

Bankruptcy for all!

Republicans are in charge of biggest deficit in history!!!

 

[BlueGin]

Of course they would hate Medicare for all, it would close down the facility where they work. Without private insurance to make up for government losses, the businesses would have to close down. No business can stay open operating at a loss.

Which is why we should operate healthcare as a public service instead of a business.

Thanks for finally seeing the light,Ray.

Yes, because so many government services are doing so well and projected to be doing better in the future.

The point (that obviously flew over your head) is that government programs cannot survive without the private market. The estimate for Medicare For All is it's current payout. In order for facilities to stay afloat, government would have to cough up another 35% on top of what they pay now. That would make Medicare broke in less than ten years.

So we are right back to where we started: who is going to pay for all this wonderful care? And no, the rich don't have the money for it. Besides, why should they pay the bill for the rest of the people in this country?

Medicaid/ Medicare don't pay for squat. They reimburse pennies on the dollar and expect the healthcare providers to eat the rest.

 

[KissMy]

Of course they would hate Medicare for all, it would close down the facility where they work. Without private insurance to make up for government losses, the businesses would have to close down. No business can stay open operating at a loss.

Which is why we should operate healthcare as a public service instead of a business.

Thanks for finally seeing the light,Ray.

Yes, because so many government services are doing so well and projected to be doing better in the future.

The point (that obviously flew over your head) is that government programs cannot survive without the private market. The estimate for Medicare For All is it's current payout. In order for facilities to stay afloat, government would have to cough up another 35% on top of what they pay now. That would make Medicare broke in less than ten years.

So we are right back to where we started: who is going to pay for all this wonderful care? And no, the rich don't have the money for it. Besides, why should they pay the bill for the rest of the people in this country?

Government took $14 TRILLION to bailout Wallstreet, yet you claim there is no way to provide healthcare. How stupid are you?