Medicare for all

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
Why do you suppose we break up monopolies?

eliminating choice has never benefited a consumer. Ever. And it’s never made anything cheaper.
Not apples to apples. A monopoly is a for profit business venture. There is nothing to monopolize in a single payer system. Your example is true only if the government decided to maximize revenue everywhere. There is no profit motive.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
Not apples to apples. A monopoly is a for profit business venture. There is nothing to monopolize in a single payer system. Your example is true only if the government decided to maximize revenue everywhere. There is no profit motive.
No, but there is the motivation of staying within a budget...the result is the same. The effect is the same.
 

jt212713

Senior
Gold Member
Nov 4, 2008
6,320
7,652
0
Not apples to apples. A monopoly is a for profit business venture. There is nothing to monopolize in a single payer system. Your example is true only if the government decided to maximize revenue everywhere. There is no profit motive.
LOL...profit motive is why there is innovation. Quit being so dense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bjabrad

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com

Moderate, establishment Democrat making his case for Universal Healthcare in 1962 at the height of the Cold War. His brother, Ted, would become Senator that for the next 47 having spent a significant of that time advocating or pushing for the same.

No one called it "far left"
No one called it "crazy"

There's actually footage of Hillary and Pelosi in the early 90s advocating it as well. Now they use Republican talking points against it.

The lobbies and the propaganda won out in the end - so far.
 

viviajm

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
May 14, 2004
16,193
2,891
0
78
Liberty, MO
Ok, let's hear someone defend this.

How about a little more detail please. Is this an issue with medicare, an insurance company, or a pharma company? Were these a valid scrip or a trial drug? Are you filing an appeal? I'm am not arguing with you. I am medicare advocate under SHIP and spend most of my time helping seniors with issue. I would be happy to look into this issue if I can get more details.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bjabrad

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
How about a little more detail please. Is this an issue with medicare, an insurance company, or a pharma company? Were these a valid scrip or a trial drug? Are you filing an appeal? I'm am not arguing with you. I am medicare advocate under SHIP and spend most of my time helping seniors with issue. I would be happy to look into this issue if I can get more details.
right, it's anecdotal. But the question should be yes or no: Is it ok for a private for profit insurance company to demand restitution if their money spent on your treatment works, yes or no.

It's that simple.

The answer is no. But you won't admit it.
 

viviajm

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
May 14, 2004
16,193
2,891
0
78
Liberty, MO
right, it's anecdotal. But the question should be yes or no: Is it ok for a private for profit insurance company to demand restitution if their money spent on your treatment works, yes or no.

It's that simple.

The answer is no. But you won't admit it.
That wasn't how the question was posed and it's not how your comment is written. In the cited case the treatment didn't work. To answer your question if the treatment worked he should pay for it.

Somethimes I can't believe you are so naive. You are someone who is inelligent and dumb at the same time. That's some feat.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
right, it's anecdotal. But the question should be yes or no: Is it ok for a private for profit insurance company to demand restitution if their money spent on your treatment works, yes or no.

It's that simple.

The answer is no. But you won't admit it.
Healthcare is never black and white....its a million shades of gray. The answer is unknown because you haven't provided enough information. Viv is spot on.
 

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
That wasn't how the question was posed and it's not how your comment is written. In the cited case the treatment didn't work. To answer your question if the treatment worked he should pay for it.

Somethimes I can't believe you are so naive. You are someone who is inelligent and dumb at the same time. That's some feat.
You're missing the point. Anecdotal evidence and rhetorical questions are designed to make you think.

It really is black and white when it comes to a company demanding restitution though, seriously. You want to protect the businesses regardless but you don't want to admit it.

The only scenario a company should be allowed to ask for its money back would be fraud.

Just own it. 2001 has gone on record defending an insurer for denying treatment to a cancer patient. He's out and proud. We should throw a parade.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
You're missing the point. Anecdotal evidence and rhetorical questions are designed to make you think.

It really is black and white when it comes to a company demanding restitution though, seriously. You want to protect the businesses regardless but you don't want to admit it.

The only scenario a company should be allowed to ask for its money back would be fraud.

Just own it. 2001 has gone on record defending an insurer for denying treatment to a cancer patient. He's out and proud. We should throw a parade.
And you want to keep it simple because if you actually dive into these types of situations, the answers aren't nearly as clean. Which anyone that truly wanted to solve a problem would welcome...you poke fun.
 

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
Personal attacks on my intelligence aside, the fact remains: it is completely normal for children to be denied food and go hungry in schools because they owe, banks ran by people of extreme wealth can pry people out of their homes, people are booted off healthcare to remain sick and die to appease investors and you guys not only think this is the pillar of a great and stable society, but you defend with great vigor and take deep offense at anyone that dare questions it.

Just look at yourselves.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
Personal attacks on my intelligence aside, the fact remains: it is completely normal for children to be denied food and go hungry in schools because they owe, banks ran by people of extreme wealth can pry people out of their homes, people are booted off healthcare to remain sick and die to appease investors and you guys not only think this is the pillar of a great and stable society, but you defend with great vigor and take deep offense at anyone that dare questions it.

Just look at yourselves.
Kids are denied food because their parents are derelict in their responsibilities...banks foreclose because the owners aren't paying their mortgage...people are 'booted off healthcare' plans for not paying their premiums.

The facts are that food, shelter and healthcare cost money. It's not uncaring or bloodthirsty to expect people to be held accountable for their decisions. At what point does personal responsibility even exist in your world?!
 
  • Like
Reactions: jayhawkart

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
Kids are denied food because their parents are derelict in their responsibilities...banks foreclose because the owners aren't paying their mortgage...people are 'booted off healthcare' plans for not paying their premiums.

The facts are that food, shelter and healthcare cost money. It's not uncaring or bloodthirsty to expect people to be held accountable for their decisions. At what point does personal responsibility even exist in your world?!
People are getting booted for paying their premiums all the time hence my argument that profit needs to be removed from our healthcare system. It's now at the stage where restitution is demanded if the meds/treatment doesn't work.

Children need to eat at school. I don't give a flying fvck how bad their parents are. There should be no profit motive there. Levy their bank accounts. Drag them through the streets with all the CIA funded right-wing death squads our taxpayer money pays for, I don't care; these are our children.

There's also several gradients of greed vs dereliction when it comes to throwing people out in the street.
 
Last edited:

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
People are getting booted for paying their premiums all the time hence my argument that profit needs to be removed from our healthcare system. It's now at the stage where restitution is demanded if the meds/treatment doesn't work.

Children need to eat at school. I don't give a flying fvck how bad their parents are. There should be no profit motive there. Levy their bank accounts. Drag them through the streets with all the CIA funded right-wing death squads our taxpayer money pays for, I don't care; these are our children.

There's also several gradients of greed vs dereliction when it comes to throwing people out in the street.
I know you don't give a ****; any time we can fix some social justice warrior BS by spending other people's money, you're all over it.

Children need to eat at home before they go to school. and there is no profit motive there...schools want the damn food paid for.

And, no, they they are not getting booted for paying their premiums. You're just making shit up now.

There's plenty of levels of greed vs dereliction when it comes to expecting shit for free too.
 

bjabrad

Hall of Fame
Dec 5, 2005
33,565
8,128
0
Personal attacks on my intelligence aside, the fact remains: it is completely normal for children to be denied food and go hungry in schools because they owe, banks ran by people of extreme wealth can pry people out of their homes, people are booted off healthcare to remain sick and die to appease investors and you guys not only think this is the pillar of a great and stable society, but you defend with great vigor and take deep offense at anyone that dare questions it.

Just look at yourselves.
Commie gonna commie. Amiright comrade?

Nick believes that people should be coddled and provided with a roof, food, clothes, spending money, entertainment, transportation, education, healthcare, and a reach around when they're getting fvckd.

Can't wait for those breadlines and the months of waiting for a doctor after critical diagnosis like in Canada. Good times are ahead.
 

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
I know you don't give a ****; any time we can fix some social justice warrior BS by spending other people's money, you're all over it.

Children need to eat at home before they go to school. and there is no profit motive there...schools want the damn food paid for.

And, no, they they are not getting booted for paying their premiums. You're just making shit up now.

There's plenty of levels of greed vs dereliction when it comes to expecting shit for free too.
I am so sorry you feel this way.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
Do you think our healthcare system is a good system?
I think we have the infrastructure to have a good system, yes. If the gov't would stop stealing from Medicare/Medicaid and fund both programs properly, the industry can fix just about everything else. Do that and fix immigration..that's all that's needed for our healthcare system to be successful.
 

viviajm

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
May 14, 2004
16,193
2,891
0
78
Liberty, MO
I think we have the infrastructure to have a good system, yes. If the gov't would stop stealing from Medicare/Medicaid and fund both programs properly, the industry can fix just about everything else. Do that and fix immigration..that's all that's needed for our healthcare system to be successful.
Correct. But of course impeachment is more important now. People can wait on immigration, healthcare, and prompt funding of the government, but let's keep the impeachment going forward versus solving real problems. We need to forget all about the promises the incumbments made while on the campaign trail. Afterall, they are all experts in kicking cans down the road.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawker-2001

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
Warren said she wouldn't try to implement it right away. Said she wouldnt even bother to implement M4A for the first three years.

I'll say it again, she never was on board with it. The crux of her plan rests on two very unpopular and unfeasible planks. She's all cowboy, no hat on this one.

Bernie announced immediately afterward he would start working on it the first week.

If this is something important to you, then there is only person you can trust to implement it.
 

Hawker-2001

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
Dec 4, 2001
16,429
2,038
0
Kansas...land of milk and honey
Warren said she wouldn't try to implement it right away. Said she wouldnt even bother to implement M4A for the first three years.

I'll say it again, she never was on board with it. The crux of her plan rests on two very unpopular and unfeasible planks. She's all cowboy, no hat on this one.

Bernie announced immediately afterward he would start working on it the first week.

If this is something important to you, then there is only person you can trust to implement it.
If Warren is serious about not implementing it, then she just moved up the list for me. If she'd soften on the gun control rhetoric, I might even vote for her.
 

cornstalk

Sophomore
Gold Member
Nov 22, 2003
2,037
408
0
Warren said she wouldn't try to implement it right away. Said she wouldnt even bother to implement M4A for the first three years.

I'll say it again, she never was on board with it. The crux of her plan rests on two very unpopular and unfeasible planks. She's all cowboy, no hat on this one.

Bernie announced immediately afterward he would start working on it the first week.

If this is something important to you, then there is only person you can trust to implement it.
 

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
If Warren is serious about not implementing it, then she just moved up the list for me. If she'd soften on the gun control rhetoric, I might even vote for her.
She definitely should be up on your list then. She feigned support only to gather to votes. They all did. Because that's what the people want.

They all did.

All but one.
 

cornstalk

Sophomore
Gold Member
Nov 22, 2003
2,037
408
0
She definitely should be up on your list then. She feigned support only to gather to votes. They all did. Because that's what the people want.

They all did.

All but one.
I know it is not Bernie style, kind like Trump just tell the truth and let the chips fall, but I think he would win if he just back off a little on medicare for all because that is what warren is going to do if she wins dem nomination and campaigns in the general election
 

Jsn921

Junior
Gold Member
May 14, 2004
3,040
479
0
Hopefully...what an idiot.
Silly article. Of course we could pay for it. The argument is how it’s paid for and the honesty of the proposals, ie is it a tax break or increase. Also what are the downsides vs upside of single payer. Those points should be debated and let the American public decide.
 

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com
Silly article. Of course we could pay for it. The argument is how it’s paid for and the honesty of the proposals, ie is it a tax break or increase. Also what are the downsides vs upside of single payer. Those points should be debated and let the American public decide.
Too many people on the stage for tomorrow's debate. But with Julian Castro failing to qualify and Beto out, who knows.

December and January debates should in theory have a smaller field to allow for more discussion on this. Let the American public decide like you said. They can all make a case for their various proposals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jsn921

viviajm

Ring of Honor
Gold Member
May 14, 2004
16,193
2,891
0
78
Liberty, MO
I wish the idiots would change to "healthcare for all" instead of "medicare for all". We can't afford medicare for all because medicare is very good coverage, and people on it pay for it. There are a wide variety of plans to choose from. We cover our elderly better than the European socialist programs. But as I have said before-allow anyone who wants to enroll in Medicare as it exists today to enroll under the present rules. But first put in place high penalties for those patients and providers for falsifying anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawker-2001

nick77

All-American
Gold Member
Sep 27, 2003
12,638
2,137
0
113
Chicago
www.richardsimmons.com

Brits hilariously attempt to guess what healthcare costs for services in the US, discuss their own NHS. I would love to see their reactions when any of you attempt to say how the NHS anecdotally sucks and how we can't do what they do.