Yall like polls right? Check out these NEW poll numbers on Mediscam For All

[g5000]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Just noise. Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

So what you are saying is, "You don't need no stinkin' facts." That's long been clear.

 

[g5000]

Face it, rubes.

You've been hoaxed by the GOP. Massively hoaxed. They gave you a bunch of noise to parrot while the Democrats are incrementing their way to UHC.

You've been sold down the river and you don't even know it.

 

[g5000]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

So what you are saying is, "You don't need no stinkin' facts." That's long been clear.

We don't need no noise. We need a Republican reform bill.

You've been hoaxed, rube. Face it. There is no Trumpcare. There is no Obamacare replacement.

When the FUCK will you idiots wake up?

Seriously.

 

[g5000]

Plan A: "Duuuhhhhh...we got nuttin'."

Plan B: A government takeover of health care.

Guess which plan will inevitably win, dumb fucks.

Look at the chart and see if you can guess.

 

[depotoo]

No, we are spending $1.83 trillion per year.

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

 

[g5000]

That should be the Republican 2020 platform: "Duuuuuhhhh...we got nuttin'."

 

[g5000]

No, we are spending $1.83 trillion per year.

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

Historical - Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

U.S. health care spending grew 3.9 percent in 2017, reaching $3.5 trillion or $10,739 per person.

 

[nat4900]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

I've always found it rather IRONIC, that right wing nitwits would much rather send a check to some greedy privaye health insurer, than to send the very same amount of dollars toward Medicare.......NOW, the difference may well be that whereas Medicare may not deny some costly procedure, the private insurer OFTEN does....

The main difference is that the CEO and CFO of the private insurance company my not be able to purchase a new Lear Jet every other year.

 

[g5000]

Sooner or later, the business community is going to support UHC, and then you are all fucked. Because they have the big donor dollars.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

So what you are saying is, "You don't need no stinkin' facts." That's long been clear.

We don't need no noise. We need a Republican reform bill.

You've been hoaxed, rube. Face it. There is no Trumpcare. There is no Obamacare replacement.

When the FUCK will you idiots wake up?

Seriously.

Seriously, you have no idea what you are babbling about. Medicare for All is no more than a slogan, and we already have universal healthcare in the US. If you could quiet the voices in your head for a while you might understand it. First, HHS runs thousands of clinics all over the US that provide comprehensive primary care to everyone on a sliding scale fee basis, and if you require more care than they can provide, once you spend down your assets you will become eligible for Medicaid. Clearly, the Democrats have been lying to you for years.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Lucid Democrats know that you don't want a government monopoly on health care.

Expand the current Medicare / Medicare Advantage / Medicare Supplement system to all.

A public foundation with dynamic and innovative free market competition.
.

Cover the indigent and leave everyone else alone.

Problem solved

You’re as stupid as you are ignorant.

The ‘indigent’ aren’t the only Americans who lack access to affordable healthcare.

 

[g5000]

The cost to employers of employer sponsored health insurance has been skyrocketing for decades.

Eventually, employers will figure out they can save a shit ton of money by chucking the whole system over to the government. Let the government pay for their employees health care, and then they can use tax dodges to avoid paying their share of taxes.

Once they figure that out, you're all fucked. Because they have the big lobby dollars and donor dollars.

Meanwhile, you sit there with your thumbs up your asses waiting for the Trumpcare that's never coming. BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!

 

[g5000]

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

So what you are saying is, "You don't need no stinkin' facts." That's long been clear.

We don't need no noise. We need a Republican reform bill.

You've been hoaxed, rube. Face it. There is no Trumpcare. There is no Obamacare replacement.

When the FUCK will you idiots wake up?

Seriously.

Seriously, you have no idea what you are babbling about. Medicare for All is no more than a slogan, and we already have universal healthcare in the US. If you could quiet the voices in your head for a while you might understand it. First, HHS runs thousands of clinics all over the US that provide comprehensive primary care to everyone on a sliding scale fee basis, and if you require more care than they can provide, once you spend down your assets you will become eligible for Medicaid. Clearly, the Democrats have been lying to you for years.

Oh wow. That's about the most convoluted TardLogic I've ever seen.

 

[g5000]

We just heard a tard say that once you are bankrupted by medical bills, then you can get Medicaid. Therefore, we have universal health care.

If I had not seen it for myself, I would not believe someone could be that fucking clueless.

Ho-lee SHIT!

 

[depotoo]

Dear, in that cost analysis, they include the cost of over the counter meds, durable medical equipment not covered by Medicare, dental, etc, etc, etc, and retirement homes and nursing care that Medicare does not cover. The cost for 2017 was $1.83 trillion

No, we are spending $1.83 trillion per year.

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

Historical - Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services

U.S. health care spending grew 3.9 percent in 2017, reaching $3.5 trillion or $10,739 per person.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Plan A: "Duuuhhhhh...we got nuttin'."

Plan B: A government takeover of health care.

Guess which plan will inevitably win, dumb fucks.

Look at the chart and see if you can guess.

The $32 trillion estimate is based on Sanders' bill that has never been voted on; in it he says he will reduce payments to providers by 40%, and that private insurance will have to be banned to induce doctors to accept his insurance plan, and it also claims he will force drug companies to vastly reduce their prices, which means there would have to be a vast reduction in expenditures for the development of new drugs. As a headline, Medicare for All may sound good, but a closer look shows it would require a vast increase in the government's coercive powers over the private sector.

Blah blah blah.

Noise noise noise.

No alternative legislation from the Republicans.

Blah blah blah.

And that is why UHC is inevitable.

So what you are saying is, "You don't need no stinkin' facts." That's long been clear.

We don't need no noise. We need a Republican reform bill.

You've been hoaxed, rube. Face it. There is no Trumpcare. There is no Obamacare replacement.

When the FUCK will you idiots wake up?

Seriously.

Seriously, you have no idea what you are babbling about. Medicare for All is no more than a slogan, and we already have universal healthcare in the US. If you could quiet the voices in your head for a while you might understand it. First, HHS runs thousands of clinics all over the US that provide comprehensive primary care to everyone on a sliding scale fee basis, and if you require more care than they can provide, once you spend down your assets you will become eligible for Medicaid. Clearly, the Democrats have been lying to you for years.

Oh wow. That's about the most convoluted TardLogic I've ever seen.

lol Clearly over your head, huh? You don't understand it because you have never taken the issue seriously enough to think it through; you just got all caught up in the cheering and booing. Like most systems, our healthcare system could be improved, but more than half of all Americans get their insurance from private carriers and polls show they are largely satisfied with it, and there are, as I pointed out, provisions for people who are too poor to buy health insurance or who have pre existing conditions that make it too expensive. However, if you were able to think this through, you would realize there is no reason for a massive overhaul of the system that would change everyone's insurance whether they like it or not. You have clearly been duped, so swallow your pride and try thinking about this before putting up anymore posts you don't understand.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Medicare for All Loses Momentum Among Democrats

Rut Roh!

Democrat talking points are being shunned as the pie in the sky bullshit they are.

The Democrats say Medicare-for-All would cost $32 trillion over ten years.

We are currently spending $3.5 trillion (and climbing) each year for health care.

Now here's the hard part: What is $3.5 trillion/year times ten years?

LOL you need to crawl and walk before you run. How does it make sense that it will cost less than what we pay now when more people will be on the plan? A lot more? Me things your math is fuzzy

 

[toomuchtime_]

We just heard a tard say that once you are bankrupted by medical bills, then you can get Medicaid. Therefore, we have universal health care.

If I had not seen it for myself, I would not believe someone could be that fucking clueless.

Ho-lee SHIT!

Since we agree everyone who needs healthcare can get it but some people might have to spend down their assets, so what you would be calling for if you were able to think about this, is a bankruptcy law that would allow people to protect some of their assets if they became very ill, but there is no basis for changing everyone's healthcare whether they like it or not.

 

[g5000]

Y'all like polls, right?

Nearly three-quarters of employed Americans (73%) say the healthcare system is "in a state of crisis" or "has major problems" in Gallup's most recent survey. There is little difference between American workers' attitudes on the healthcare system and the overall U.S. public, among which 71% say the system is "in a state of crisis" or "has major problems."

Americans Still Hold Dim View of U.S. Healthcare System