Bernie’s health plan is actually a kind of a train wreck for the poor

[Peter1469]

Bernie’s health plan is actually a kind of a train wreck for the poor (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/25/bernie-sanderss-health-plan-is-actually-kind-of-a-train-wreck-for-the-poor/)

They will end up paying more if they are part of the working poor.


of families among the working poor and lower-middle class would be substantially worse off under the health-care plan proposed by Bernie Sanders, according to an analysis by a public health researcher at Atlanta's Emory University.

At a press conference in Columbia, S.C. on Wednesday, Sanders told reporters (http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/24/bernie-sanders-ties-hillary-clinton-to-poverty-caused-by-welfare-reform/)that his single-payer plan -- in which the federal government, rather than the private insurance industry, would reimburse doctors and hospitals for treatment -- would take "a huge bite" out of poor families' financial distress.


Sanders estimates a middle-class family of four would pay an annual premium of $466 under his plan, with no deductible or co-pays. Less affluent households would pay less than that, or nothing at all.


But for at least 72 percent of households enrolled in Medicaid -- in which someone is working -- the costs of Sanders's plan would exceed the benefits, according to an analysis by Kenneth Thorpe, a public-health expert at Emory University.

Read more at the link.

[zelmo1234]

Of course they will end up paying more? What did you think Socialism is about.

The poor and working poor don't have a higher standard of living in Socialist countries, neither do the so called middle class.

The money taken from the wealthy does not go to the lower classes it goes to the government elite's. Socialism in not about equality, it is about power.

But you feel better because you think that the rich guy got what was coming to him, as he closes his business and puts you out of work.

[kilgram]

Of course they will end up paying more? What did you think Socialism is about.

The poor and working poor don't have a higher standard of living in Socialist countries, neither do the so called middle class.

The money taken from the wealthy does not go to the lower classes it goes to the government elite's. Socialism in not about equality, it is about power.

But you feel better because you think that the rich guy got what was coming to him, as he closes his business and puts you out of work.

Any other misinformed lie?

Sanders want to create a socialdemocrat system like the Nordic countries. In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.

[FindersKeepers]

Bernie’s health plan is actually a kind of a train wreck for the poor (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/02/25/bernie-sanderss-health-plan-is-actually-kind-of-a-train-wreck-for-the-poor/)

They will end up paying more if they are part of the working poor.



Read more at the link.

Right now, too many people are dropping between the cracks. I'm not a fan of socialized medicine, but could it be any worse than what we have right now?

As it is, half of the states in the union did not join the Medicaid expansion so those poor folks (half of the nation) do not qualify for care and those who make more than they do, yet are not wealthy, lost their plans and, because they don't qualify for a subsidy, have to pay a penalty. They can't afford care, mind you, but they have to pay for the care of others through a penalty. In what world does that make sense?

I don't know what Sanders' plan is. I don't know what Hillary' or Trump's plan is. I just know that under Obama's plan, millions are going without.

[FindersKeepers]

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.

What is wrong with allowing citizens power over their own health care?

[kilgram]

What is wrong with allowing citizens power over their own health care?
None. Obviously none. It. Works pretty well. It is the best system, clearly. Obviously is the best system to grant healthcare to every citizen. I don't know how there are so many idiot countries that have it nationalizes when it is obvious that is a worse system than your proposal.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

[Matty]

Any other misinformed lie?

Sanders want to create a socialdemocrat system like the Nordic countries. In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.



How do you achieve equality in socialism?

[Peter1469]

Any other misinformed lie?

Sanders want to create a socialdemocrat system like the Nordic countries. In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.

Sander's estimates his plan will cost $1.3T. Outsiders claim it will be $2.5T.

We are already running deficits over $1T per year.

[FindersKeepers]

None. Obviously none. It. Works pretty well. It is the best system, clearly. Obviously is the best system to grant healthcare to every citizen. I don't know how there are so many idiot countries that have it nationalizes when it is obvious that is a worse system than your proposal.



When you turn responsibility for your healthcare over to the government, don't expect them to treat you as you'd like to be treated.

Take the UK's Liverpool Care Pathway for example.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-23698071

or, what they're recommending to replace such a flawed program:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11779213/New-death-guidelines-worse-than-Liverpool-Care-Pathway.html

That's what you get with national healthcare. It can't be avoided.

That's not to say that Sander's plan isn't better than Obamacare, which is a failure. I'm just pointing out to you that something valuable is lost when you opt for national care.

[Matty]

Can someone tell me in plain language how equality is achieved in socialism? I would have thought the dude from Spain would be eager to answer.

[PNW]

Of course they will end up paying more? What did you think Socialism is about.

The poor and working poor don't have a higher standard of living in Socialist countries, neither do the so called middle class.

The money taken from the wealthy does not go to the lower classes it goes to the government elite's. Socialism in not about equality, it is about power.

But you feel better because you think that the rich guy got what was coming to him, as he closes his business and puts you out of work.

It's still amazing to me that some still fall for the mindless rightwing propaganda.
Is there any conservatives that can or will do a little tiny bit of open minded research?
Or do you all fulfill the 'sheeple' position?

[PNW]

Sander's estimates his plan will cost $1.3T. Outsiders claim it will be $2.5T.

We are already running deficits over $1T per year.
By that you should be really pissed off at the capitalism system!
Seems to be an abject failure.

[PNW]

How do you achieve equality in socialism?

We haven't done it here, so what is your point?

Of course it would much simpler to achieve equality if it weren't the conservatives.

[Peter1469]

From the first link:


Critics dubbed it the "road to death" and accused the NHS of killing off thousands of elderly patients. Supporters say it helped their relatives have a peaceful and dignified death.






From the second link:


One of the first medics to raise concerns about the now discredited Liverpool Care Pathway says new protocols to replace it are more dangerous, and could hasten patients' deaths





When you turn responsibility for your healthcare over to the government, don't expect them to treat you as you'd like to be treated.

Take the UK's Liverpool Care Pathway for example.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-23698071

or, what they're recommending to replace such a flawed program:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11779213/New-death-guidelines-worse-than-Liverpool-Care-Pathway.html

That's what you get with national healthcare. It can't be avoided.

That's not to say that Sander's plan isn't better than Obamacare, which is a failure. I'm just pointing out to you that something valuable is lost when you opt for national care.

[PNW]

When you turn responsibility for your healthcare over to the government, don't expect them to treat you as you'd like to be treated.

Take the UK's Liverpool Care Pathway for example.

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-23698071

or, what they're recommending to replace such a flawed program:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/11779213/New-death-guidelines-worse-than-Liverpool-Care-Pathway.html

That's what you get with national healthcare. It can't be avoided.

That's not to say that Sander's plan isn't better than Obamacare, which is a failure. I'm just pointing out to you that something valuable is lost when you opt for national care.

Thats what you get when you screw up and elect an conservative Govt that has a hard on for the national health system and in essence defunds it.
It's not the healthcare system, it's the conservatives running it.

[Peter1469]

Can someone tell me in plain language how equality is achieved in socialism? I would have thought the dude from Spain would be eager to answer.

Easy: LCD. That is math for lowest common denominator. That is why I despise it. It punishes people capable of more.

[Peter1469]

It's still amazing to me that some still fall for the mindless rightwing propaganda.
Is there any conservatives that can or will do a little tiny bit of open minded research?
Or do you all fulfill the 'sheeple' position?

When the facts are on your side argue the facts.

When the law is on your side argue the law.

When neither are on your sound talk loudly, spin, and pound the table.

You sir, are talking loudly, spinning, and pounding the table.

[Matty]

We haven't done it here, so what is your point?

Of course it would much simpler to achieve equality if it weren't the conservatives.


Does this mean you do not know how equality is achieved under socialism?

[Peter1469]

By that you should be really pissed off at the capitalism system!
Seems to be an abject failure.

Which capitalist system has your ire? Our's that needs free market reforms?

[PNW]

When the facts are on your side argue the facts.

When the law is on your side argue the law.

When neither are on your sound talk loudly, spin, and pound the table.

You sir, are talking loudly, spinning, and pounding the table.

When you have no facts on your side do as the cons always do, insult like a child.

[PNW]

Does this mean you do not know how equality is achieved under socialism?

No that means it's a stupid question.

[Matty]

When you have no facts on your side do as the cons always do, insult like a child.


You are the one acting child like and throwing insults around. If you can't or don't wish to discuss socialism and how equality is achieved then go pick up your tinker toys.

[PNW]

Which capitalist system has your ire? Our's that needs free market reforms?

It doesn't have my ire, it should have yours based on your whining about the debt/deficit.

[Matty]

No that means it's a stupid question.


Really? You want people to accept socialism but to ask how it works is stupid?

[PNW]

You are the one acting child like and throwing insults around. If you can't or don't wish to discuss socialism and how equality is achieved then go pick up your tinker toys.

Insults?
Where have I insulted anyone that didn't insult me first?

If you want to discuss equality in socialism then tell me how we have achieved in your capitalistic system first.
You want to whine about a hypothetical system and how bad it is then first prove to me that our current situation is perfect.
Do we have equality or not?
yes or no?

[PNW]

Really? You want people to accept socialism but to ask how it works is stupid?

When did I say that?

[Matty]

When did I say that?



when did you say anything? That meant something?

[PNW]

when did you say anything? That meant something?

There it is, the childish insults, just as I expected.
When faced with someone that calls them out, the cons ALWAYS resort to the 3 grader insults.

[Matty]

It's still amazing to me that some still fall for the mindless rightwing propaganda.
Is there any conservatives that can or will do a little tiny bit of open minded research?
Or do you all fulfill the 'sheeple' position?


We haven't done it here, so what is your point?

Of course it would much simpler to achieve equality if it weren't the conservatives.


When you have no facts on your side do as the cons always do, insult like a child.


No that means it's a stupid question.


It doesn't have my ire, it should have yours based on your whining about the debt/deficit.


Insults?
Where have I insulted anyone that didn't insult me first?

If you want to discuss equality in socialism then tell me how we have achieved in your capitalistic system first.
You want to whine about a hypothetical system and how bad it is then first prove to me that our current situation is perfect.
Do we have equality or not?
yes or no?




Here here here and here!

[Matty]

There it is, the childish insults, just as I expected.
When faced with someone that calls them out, the cons ALWAYS resort to the 3 grader insults.


So! Can you tell us how equality is achieved under socialism?

[PNW]

So! Can you tell us how equality is achieved under socialism?

Again, can you tell us how we have achieved equality under capitalism?
If we have, how did we do it?

[PNW]

Here here here and here!

I didn't insult anyone, unlike you.
You want to grow up now or is this the best you can do?

[Matty]

I didn't insult anyone, unlike you.
You want to grow up now or is this the best you can do?



Poor ewe!

[Matty]

Again, can you tell us how we have achieved equality under capitalism?
If we have, how did we do it?




I haven't said my goal is equality. Is it yours?

[Peter1469]

When you have no facts on your side do as the cons always do, insult like a child.

lol

Pointing out that you haven't addressed the issue is not an insult.

How many substantive posts have you had so far. One? Two?

[Peter1469]

It doesn't have my ire, it should have yours based on your whining about the debt/deficit.

That doesn't count as a substantive post.

[PNW]

lol

Pointing out that you haven't addressed the issue is not an insult.

How many substantive posts have you had so far. One? Two?

From the looks of it about the same number as you.
Why?

[PNW]

That doesn't count as a substantive post.

But you run from it regardless.

[PNW]

I haven't said my goal is equality. Is it yours?

Then why are you asking such a stupid question?

[MisterVeritis]

How do you achieve equality in socialism?
It works by making everyone equally poor.

[Peter1469]

Again, can you tell us how we have achieved equality under capitalism?
If we have, how did we do it?


Equality of outcome is not a goal under capitalism. It isn't possible.

[MisterVeritis]

If you want to discuss equality in socialism then tell me how we have achieved in your capitalistic system first.
Do you believe that capitalism promotes equality? If so why do you believe that? You and I are not equal. We cannot be. One of us is smarter than the other. One of us is better looking than the other. One of us is taller, stronger, younger or older. One of us has far more life experiences than the other.

One of us is willing to take risks and work very long hours to accomplish things of importance. One wants the government to be tightly limited in what it can do. And one wants the government to make us equal. One of us is wise. And one of us is a fool.

Given those things how can any system make us equal? Capitalism means you get to choose what is best for you. And I get to choose what is best for me. Under socialist systems some faceless government bureaucrat chooses for both of us.


Do we have equality or not?
yes or no?
Why would anybody want to be equal to you?

[Peter1469]

From the looks of it about the same number as you.
Why?

incorrect

[zelmo1234]

Any other misinformed lie?

Sanders want to create a socialdemocrat system like the Nordic countries. In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.

It is cheaper for those that are takers already. But most of us makers have NO intention of working for free, That is why they estimate that 11.6 million people will loose their jobs.

Now that I am not making any money, and you are paying my 78 people unemployment and they are not paying any taxes, but we still get all the benefits? what is going to happen?

The Nordic countries have the population of one of our medium size cities, and Spain is going broke under it's social programs.

And I don't want to live in a country were my healthcare is decided by the Government instead of me and my doctor, because they want it to be equal. Equal and bad is still bad.

[zelmo1234]

Right now, too many people are dropping between the cracks. I'm not a fan of socialized medicine, but could it be any worse than what we have right now?

As it is, half of the states in the union did not join the Medicaid expansion so those poor folks (half of the nation) do not qualify for care and those who make more than they do, yet are not wealthy, lost their plans and, because they don't qualify for a subsidy, have to pay a penalty. They can't afford care, mind you, but they have to pay for the care of others through a penalty. In what world does that make sense?

I don't know what Sanders' plan is. I don't know what Hillary' or Trump's plan is. I just know that under Obama's plan, millions are going without.

I don't know of anyone that did not receive care in the USA? that did not choose to not receive care. And I don't see a long list of Doc and Hospital officials going to jail because the refused care?

So who are these people that are not getting care in the USA?

[zelmo1234]

Sander's estimates his plan will cost $1.3T. Outsiders claim it will be $2.5T.

We are already running deficits over $1T per year.

And I am not paying any more taxes. When you add in my state, federal, property and sales tax? I am paying over 50% of my revenue. Enough is Enough

[TrueBlue]

“We will raise taxes, yes we will,” -- Senator Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate

[zelmo1234]

It's still amazing to me that some still fall for the mindless rightwing propaganda.
Is there any conservatives that can or will do a little tiny bit of open minded research?
Or do you all fulfill the 'sheeple' position?

OK a worker making under 27 now does not pay anything for healthcare. but he is going to get hit with about 4% added to his FICA deductions under the Sanders plan.

How is that a win for him, he can't get that back on his taxes as he does now, he can't not pay it? he just looses 4% plus he will get hit with the inflation that the taxation will cause.

Where am I wrong.

[zelmo1234]

By that you should be really pissed off at the capitalism system!
Seems to be an abject failure.

If you are failing under capitalism, perhaps you should get off your lazy ass and change that? What do you think?

[Peter1469]

And I am not paying any more taxes. When you add in my state, federal, property and sales tax? I am paying over 50% of my revenue. Enough is Enough

The way democrats run for office is to say to the poor- make Zelmo and his ilk pay more. You outnumber them. Vote for me and they will pay more. And more. We already are at the tipping point. ~45% don't pay federal income taxes.

[zelmo1234]

We haven't done it here, so what is your point?

Of course it would much simpler to achieve equality if it weren't the conservatives.

Does that mean that every one works 70 to 80 hours a week like I do, for the same pay that they are getting now?

And I don't want rationed healthcare because I will then be equal with the pot head that can't hold a job because he has to get high everyday.

Capitalism is about equality of opportunity. the lazy will fail the go getters are rewarded, Under Socialism the lazy are rewarded and the Go Getters are punished or leave. And they run out of other peoples money and the standard of living drops.

[Peter1469]

OK a worker making under 27 now does not pay anything for healthcare. but he is going to get hit with about 4% added to his FICA deductions under the Sanders plan.

How is that a win for him, he can't get that back on his taxes as he does now, he can't not pay it? he just looses 4% plus he will get hit with the inflation that the taxation will cause.

Where am I wrong.

The increase in payroll taxes on the worker will be 6.5% under Sander's plan. That is why the article says the working poor will pay more under the plan than they pay now. (I have seen some claim the payroll tax would be 8.8%).

That is a lot of money to add to people's tax burden.

[zelmo1234]

Thats what you get when you screw up and elect an conservative Govt that has a hard on for the national health system and in essence defunds it.
It's not the healthcare system, it's the conservatives running it.

OK here is your big chance. Lets say that we elect a conservative. Curz,, he is the only one left.

And he and the GOP repeal the ACA.

What or How does that effect the healthcare system in the USA

[Truth Detector]

Any other misinformed lie?

In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

Spain's economy is a train wreck and the standard of living sucks compared to the US. But you picked a great example to make zelmos case.


In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

this claim is bullsh!t as well; It's only cheaper using leftist math.


Socialism is about equality not power.

Socialism is about mediocrity, malaise, a loss of liberty, freedoms and choices.


Capitalism is about power.

Wrong; Capitalism is all about Liberty, freedom of choice and economic growth and prosperity.

[Chris]

Any other misinformed lie?

Sanders want to create a socialdemocrat system like the Nordic countries. In Spain, for example we pay very little for the social security insurance and we receive all the benefits.

In most countries with single payer system is cheaper than other countries like USA with private insurances or in countries like Netherlands that use a mixed system that is more expensive than the previous one that was a single payer, and also its quality became worse.

Socialism is about equality not power. Capitalism is about power.


The Nordic nations are abandoning their social democrat system.

TNSTAAFL.

[zelmo1234]

When you have no facts on your side do as the cons always do, insult like a child.

Here are the facts. the ACA had raised the cost of Health Insurance and taxes and still is running a trillion dollar 10 year deficit that we can't afford. Plus there are many things and many doctors and hospitals that don't accept this insurance so people don't have the same access to medical care as the did before the ACA

Socialized medicine is gong to cost an additional 1.5 to 2.5 trillion dollars and you will have to ration more serviced and treatments to bring the cost down. How is that better and where are you going to get the money

[zelmo1234]

It doesn't have my ire, it should have yours based on your whining about the debt/deficit.

So you are saying that debt does not matter? What about Greece and Spain, the people there seem to be losing the batter of benefits and are having to go back to work and taxes are getting much higher to pay down the debt.

Are you saying that this can't happen here and why not?

[Truth Detector]

So! Can you tell us how equality is achieved under socialism?

Because PNW prefers keeping his head in the sand, I'll answer that. Socialism achieves equality by turning its citizens into delendent wards of the state, confiscating wealth and ensuring everyone is equally miserable.

[Chris]

So you are saying that debt does not matter? What about Greece and Spain, the people there seem to be losing the batter of benefits and are having to go back to work and taxes are getting much higher to pay down the debt.

Are you saying that this can't happen here and why not?


We could repudiate our debt but then ruin reputation for borrowing more.

[Truth Detector]

Again, can you tell us how we have achieved equality under capitalism?
If we have, how did we do it?

Equality of outcomes is the dumbest goal of socialism. Wealth inequality and wage inequality are moronic terms used to dupe uneducated dullards into supporting socialistic outcomes that lead to malaise and mediocrity.

The analogy that is most appropriate is giving everyone a trophy for just showing up.

[Peter1469]

We could repudiate our debt but then ruin reputation for borrowing more.

Not for long. We still have the strongest economy in the world. Money will continue to flow to the US.

And you don't just toss all debt out. Do it strategically.

[zelmo1234]

Insults?
Where have I insulted anyone that didn't insult me first?

If you want to discuss equality in socialism then tell me how we have achieved in your capitalistic system first.
You want to whine about a hypothetical system and how bad it is then first prove to me that our current situation is perfect.
Do we have equality or not?
yes or no?

If you are born in the USA and of able body and mind, then you have equal opportunity.

For example if you are born in an inner city and you are from a family that is dirt poor, you have free education in the public school system. And even if it is a bad system and you really apply yourself and get good grades, then you are going to go to collage Free under the pell grant system and be able to draw Welfare while you are doing so?

If you are of middle class you have the opportunity for scholarships loans and could go into the military as well, you still get your education.

If you are rich you get mom and dad to pay for it? But all get an education.

Now if you are a lazy ass a thug, or someone that just does not care? Well that is on YOU

[Truth Detector]

The leftist strawman in the room is this notion that health insurance leads to better health.

[zelmo1234]

Again, can you tell us how we have achieved equality under capitalism?
If we have, how did we do it?

OK here is another example

Boy is born to a lower middle class family Dad is a Factory worker and Mom stay at home.

He is dyslexic so his grade while not bad are not great, average student. Good at running the foot ball though so he gets a collage scholarship but then breaks his back and follows a path that leads to no degree and a middle class job.

Learns the secret of success and stops going into debt gets his Security Certifications goes overseas and makes a lot of money, but even before then he had purchased 2 rental homes and now he is among those that have made it.

But it took a lot more work than the person that has decided that working at walmart 40 hours a week is a good career. Why does the 40 hour worker deserve the same things. He does not work equally as hard?

[Green Arrow]

Can someone tell me in plain language how equality is achieved in socialism? I would have thought the dude from Spain would be eager to answer.

Socialism only promises equality of means, not equality of outcomes. Communism, which kilgram follows, promises both.

[zelmo1234]

But you run from it regardless.

Third Example Boy is born in Hawaii to an immigrant dad and a white mother in a time when mixed race couples are not cool.

Dad and Mom turn out to be losers and he is raised by his Grand Parents. He gets a great education and becomes President of the USA.

And Most people in his situation don't work as hard and become losers. Why should they get the same rewards?

[Chris]

The leftist strawman in the room is this notion that health insurance leads to better health.

Given that Republicans from Bush to Romney to Trump to other candidates all have health insurance plans, I'd say it's a modern political strawman, or, rather, to be correct, red herring.

[Matty]

It works by making everyone equally poor.


Yes, but how do they do it?

[zelmo1234]

“We will raise taxes, yes we will,” -- Senator Bernie Sanders, Presidential Candidate

Correct and I will either sell my business to an off shore holding company that will charge me nearly all of my profits as an administration fee, making my taxes in the USA nearly nothing while I pay the massive 11% that Grand Cayman charges me. Or I will just shut my businesses down, retire move my residency off shore and let the others figure it out.

Now What. How are you going to get my money now.

[MisterVeritis]

Yes, but how do they do it?
All governments, but especially socialist governments take as much money as possible from those who have money to grow government. The rich and the middle classes are the actual targets. The politicians become the new rich. Those with the means to escape will escape. The description of the middle class tends to drift downward. The differences between what the poor have and what the middle class have become narrower.

[zelmo1234]

Well I answered the Question 3 times but it looks like the liberals don't want to play anymore

[Chris]

Well I answered the Question 3 times but it looks like the liberals don't want to play anymore

They're regrouping. Temporary setback.

[PNW]

Do you believe that capitalism promotes equality?

Where did I say that?


Why would anybody want to be equal to you?
Because it would be far better than being on your level.

[MisterVeritis]

Where did I say that?


Because it would be far better than being on your level.
LOL. I am in the top 6%. Where are you?

[PNW]

Equality of outcome is not a goal under capitalism. It isn't possible.

Then why do you cons think it's a the goal of the evil scary 'socialism' none of you seem to understand?

[PNW]

incorrect
Your amazing insight and intellect is on display again.

[zelmo1234]

`
Then why do you cons think it's a the goal of the evil scary 'socialism' none of you seem to understand?

I have given 3 examples of Capitalism providing equal opportunity. Waiting for you to tell us how Socialism is more equal, in a good way?

[PNW]

If you are failing under capitalism, perhaps you should get off your lazy ass and change that? What do you think?

Try to keep up, I know it's hard for you but at least try.
Go back read the exchange again and see if where you went wrong.

[PNW]

`

I have given 3 examples of Capitalism providing equal opportunity. Waiting for you to tell us how Socialism is more equal, in a good way?

Where did I say or even imply that socialism is more equal, less equal or better in any way?

[PNW]

LOL. I am in the top 6%. Where are you?

Currently? Top 4%, why are failing?

[zelmo1234]

Try to keep up, I know it's hard for you but at least try.
Go back read the exchange again and see if where you went wrong.

Actually I answered you question 3 times I think that it is time for you to answer ours.

Where is socialized medicine or Socialism producing equality?

[zelmo1234]

Currently? Top 4%, why are failing?

Well according to my accountant, you only have 3% more to go? What is the trouble.

Bye the Bye, those last 2% are a bitch.

[zelmo1234]

Where did I say or even imply that socialism is more equal, less equal or better in any way?

You are asked the question several times you said you would not answer it until we told you how capitalism provided equality. I have done that 3 times.

If you don't have the answer that is OK but now is the time to stop dodging the question.

[PNW]

Actually I answered you question 3 times I think that it is time for you to answer ours.

Where is socialized medicine or Socialism producing equality?

I'm not aware that it does or even intends to.
All I've done it point out the stupidity of the question, anything over and above that is entirely on you.

If you would like my opinion on single payer healthcare, then ask.

[Truth Detector]

Given that Republicans from Bush to Romney to Trump to other candidates all have health insurance plans, I'd say it's a modern political strawman, or, rather, to be correct, red herring.

Call it whatever you like; what do Republicans have to do with the leftist strawman which attempts to suggest that insurance leads to better health?

It isn't HEALTH CARE; it's MEDICAL INSURANCE. There's a vast difference.

[PNW]

Well according to my accountant, you only have 3% more to go? What is the trouble.

Bye the Bye, those last 2% are a $#@!.

My guess from what I have read from you, you are struggling with the first 20%.

[PNW]

You are asked the question several times you said you would not answer it until we told you how capitalism provided equality. I have done that 3 times.

If you don't have the answer that is OK but now is the time to stop dodging the question.

I was never asked the question, I simply responded to the idiotic question to point out just how stupid it really is.
I'm not 'dodging' anything. why would I? It's not like anything on this forum is taxing on an intellectual level.

[zelmo1234]

I'm not aware that it does or even intends to.
All I've done it point out the stupidity of the question, anything over and above that is entirely on you.

If you would like my opinion on single payer healthcare, then ask.

I thought that is what we were asking. Sorry for the confusion.

So I would like to know your Opinion on Single payer healthcare. As to the following subjects

#1 How does it provide more equal Care
#2 How is it cheaper than a Market based Healthcare system
#3 How does it provide for R&D and medical breakthroughs, when it has to ration those cares out of the system?

[MisterVeritis]

Currently? Top 4%, why are failing?
I am sure you won't mind if I do not believe you.

[zelmo1234]

I was never asked the question, I simply responded to the idiotic question to point out just how stupid it really is.
I'm not 'dodging' anything. why would I? It's not like anything on this forum is taxing on an intellectual level.

I understand, Sorry for the confusion. I asked the questions above?

[PNW]

I am sure you won't mind if I do not believe you.
Not anymore than I believe your BS, no.

[zelmo1234]

I am sure you won't mind if I do not believe you.

Why not I do? Why would it be impossible. that is really not that much money a year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluence_in_the_United_States

So he is a little over 135K that is fairly easy to get to in the USA,

It is making the jump from 3% to 1%, you have to start adding comma's to the figures, that is a little harder.

[MisterVeritis]

Well according to my accountant, you only have 3% more to go? What is the trouble.

Bye the Bye, those last 2% are a $#@!.
LOL. So is the jump from six to 4 percent. My last pre-retirement year I earned just a bit under 200K. The year I retired, in May, I earned a total of 110K plus retirement benefits adding an additional 49K.

[Tahuyaman]

They will end up paying more if they are part of the working poor.

This is the basic problem with most government assistance programs. They punish people for doing the right things.

[Matty]

What is the point of socialism? Can anybody answer that question? PNW does not have to. We already know it beyond his capabilities. All he knows is he hate capitalism.

[MisterVeritis]

Why not I do? Why would it be impossible. that is really not that much money a year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluence_in_the_United_States

So he is a little over 135K that is fairly easy to get to in the USA,

It is making the jump from 3% to 1%, you have to start adding comma's to the figures, that is a little harder.
Based on your referenced article I am in error. It looks like I was easily in the top 5%. Oops.

"The top 5% of households, three quarters of whom had two income earners, had incomes of $166,200 (about 10 times the 2009 US minimum wage) or higher,[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluence_in_the_United_States#cite_note-US_Census_Bureau.2C_income_quintile_and_top_5.25_h ousehold_income_distribution_and_demographic_chara cteristics.2C_2006-11) with the top 10% having incomes well in excess of $100,000"

[zelmo1234]

LOL. So is the jump from six to 4 percent. My last pre-retirement year I earned just a bit under 200K. The year I retired, in May, I earned a total of 110K plus retirement benefits adding an additional 49K.

So you were top 3% that is GREAT!

Like I said to be in the top 4% is about 135,900 To get into the top 1% you have to get to 1.25 million and that is a bit of a jump. then just cutting a tenth of a percentage is very difficult. I am trying to crack .8% and I have a long way to go.

[Green Arrow]

What is the point of socialism? Can anybody answer that question?

I answered it on page 7 and was completely ignored.

Socialism promises equality of means, not equality of outcomes.

[zelmo1234]

Based on your referenced article I am in error. It looks like I was easily in the top 5%. Oops.

"The top 5% of households, three quarters of whom had two income earners, had incomes of $166,200 (about 10 times the 2009 US minimum wage) or higher,[11] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affluence_in_the_United_States#cite_note-US_Census_Bureau.2C_income_quintile_and_top_5.25_h ousehold_income_distribution_and_demographic_chara cteristics.2C_2006-11) with the top 10% having incomes well in excess of $100,000"



See I told you it is not that hard. That is what is so funny about a lot of Democrats when they hear that the top 10% are the ones that are going to pay and find out that they are in the top 10%

[zelmo1234]

I answered it on page 7 and was completely ignored.

Socialism promises equality of means, not equality of outcomes.

Why do you think that would be a good thing, or beneficial to the economy?

[Matty]

I answered it on page 7 and was completely ignored.

Socialism promises equality of means, not equality of outcomes.



What does equality of means mean? How is it achieved? Sorry I missed it the first time.

[PNW]

I thought that is what we were asking. Sorry for the confusion.
That is not at all what was asked and your constient state of confusion and lack of ability to keep up with an adult conversation is noted.


So I would like to know your Opinion on Single payer healthcare. As to the following subjects

#1 How does it provide more equal Care
#2 How is it cheaper than a Market based Healthcare system
#3 How does it provide for R&D and medical breakthroughs, when it has to ration those cares out of the system?

#1 as I have stated several times now, that you fail to read, I do not think that 'equality' is the stated goal of single payer health care.
Depending how it is set up it very well could provide equal health care and on the very base level most systems do. Everyone has the same level and same access to to care in most if not all nations have single payer.
I'm sure you know that.

#2 it's cheaper in the same way that your favorite store, walmart is cheaper, buying power. When a supplier of lets say cotton swabs wants to get the national contract, the power of the size of that account allows for a great deal of negation on price. It's a bit complicated for someone on your level to understand, but that is the basic's.

#3 Why is it the govts job to provide a private company of anything? You don't like the free market?

[MisterVeritis]

Not anymore than I believe your BS, no.
The difference between us is that I have a history here and have been consistent.

:-)

[Green Arrow]

Why do you think that would be a good thing, or beneficial to the economy?

If everyone has the same chance at success, it will be good for the economy and society because more people will succeed.

[Crepitus]

OK a worker making under 27 now does not pay anything for healthcare. but he is going to get hit with about 4% added to his FICA deductions under the Sanders plan.

How is that a win for him, he can't get that back on his taxes as he does now, he can't not pay it? he just looses 4% plus he will get hit with the inflation that the taxation will cause.

Where am I wrong.
Why does this upset you? don't you think everyone should have some skin in the game? Besides, I thought you conservatives hated giving free stuff to poor people?

[PNW]

What is the point of socialism? Can anybody answer that question? PNW does not have to. We already know it beyond his capabilities. All he knows is he hate capitalism.

I have to wonder why conservatives always inject opinions and projections onto others when they themselves fail at an adult discussion.
What is the point of telling lies?

[MisterVeritis]

If everyone has the same chance at success, it will be good for the economy and society because more people will succeed.
What is the difference between your "same chance at success" and equality before the law?
Why do you believe more people would succeed under your formulation? Do more people succeed in socialist countries? What is your metric for success?

[Green Arrow]

What does equality of means mean? How is it achieved? Sorry I missed it the first time.

What it means is that everyone has the same tools to succeed, the same opportunities. Whether or not they take advantage of those opportunities is entirely up to them.

To use an example, let's say you have some runners in a race. Usain Bolt, through virtue of birth, simply had more talent than the other racers, but you decide to give him even more of an advantage and let him start halfway across the track. Bolt now has only half the track to run with all the virtue of his superior running talent.

Socialism says, we know he's more talented than the other racers, but let's still give them the same opportunity to succeed that he has. So, Usain Bolt will start the race at the same point as the other racers. His talent still gives him an advantage but now they all have the same opportunity.

[Crepitus]

The increase in payroll taxes on the worker will be 6.5% under Sander's plan. That is why the article says the working poor will pay more under the plan than they pay now. (I have seen some claim the payroll tax would be 8.8%).

That is a lot of money to add to people's tax burden.
6.5% increase on the FICA for $27K is about $125.00 a year.

[FindersKeepers]

I don't know of anyone that did not receive care in the USA? that did not choose to not receive care. And I don't see a long list of Doc and Hospital officials going to jail because the refused care?

So who are these people that are not getting care in the USA?


Over a quarter of uninsured adults (27%) in 2014 went without needed care in the past year due to cost (Figure 7). Studies repeatedly demonstrate that the uninsured are less likely than those with insurance to receive preventive care and services for major health conditions and chronic diseases.18 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-18), 19 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-19), 20 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-20), 21 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-21) Research also has suggested that insurance can decrease likelihood of depression and stress.22 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-22)

Key Details:

Health providers can choose to not provide care to the uninsured. Only emergency departments are required by federal law to screen and stabilize all individuals. However, the uninsured are not necessarily more likely to use the emergency room than those with insurance.23 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-23) If the uninsured are unable to pay for care in full, they are often turned away when they seek follow-up care for urgent medical conditions.24 (http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/#footnote-165699-24)



http://kff.org/uninsured/fact-sheet/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/

[Crepitus]

LOL. I am in the top 6%. Where are you?
LMAO! EVERYONE on the internet is a wealthy beautiful ultra-fit MMA fighter business tycoon.

[FindersKeepers]

From the first link:

I'm not sure why you quoted from my links. I was demonstrating that giving the government all responsibility for your healthcare could backfire. The quotes you posted just reinforced that.






From the second link:

[Chris]

What does equality of means mean? How is it achieved? Sorry I missed it the first time.


What it means is that everyone has the same tools to succeed, the same opportunities. Whether or not they take advantage of those opportunities is entirely up to them.

To use an example, let's say you have some runners in a race. Usain Bolt, through virtue of birth, simply had more talent than the other racers, but you decide to give him even more of an advantage and let him start halfway across the track. Bolt now has only half the track to run with all the virtue of his superior running talent.

Socialism says, we know he's more talented than the other racers, but let's still give them the same opportunity to succeed that he has. So, Usain Bolt will start the race at the same point as the other racers. His talent still gives him an advantage but now they all have the same opportunity.


Not sure you've answered how it's achieved. Where does the same opportunity in "give them the same opportunity to succeed" come from?

[Matty]

What it means is that everyone has the same tools to succeed, the same opportunities. Whether or not they take advantage of those opportunities is entirely up to them.

To use an example, let's say you have some runners in a race. Usain Bolt, through virtue of birth, simply had more talent than the other racers, but you decide to give him even more of an advantage and let him start halfway across the track. Bolt now has only half the track to run with all the virtue of his superior running talent.

Socialism says, we know he's more talented than the other racers, but let's still give them the same opportunity to succeed that he has. So, Usain Bolt will start the race at the same point as the other racers. His talent still gives him an advantage but now they all have the same opportunity.



Tell me in real terms. How do you establish equal opportunity?

[MisterVeritis]

LMAO! EVERYONE on the internet is a wealthy beautiful ultra-fit MMA fighter business tycoon.
As an added benefit I live in Madison, AL.

Regretfully, I am no longer fit. I am still handsome but gracefully aging.

[kilgram]

The Nordic nations are abandoning their social democrat system.

TNSTAAFL.
They don't.

Sweden is the one that has done more counter reforms to their social democracy and are the ones who have got worse results.

It was during the conservative government but in last elections won again the social democrats.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

[zelmo1234]

That is not at all what was asked and your constient state of confusion and lack of ability to keep up with an adult conversation is noted.

#1 as I have stated several times now, that you fail to read, I do not think that 'equality' is the stated goal of single payer health care.
Depending how it is set up it very well could provide equal health care and on the very base level most systems do. Everyone has the same level and same access to to care in most if not all nations have single payer.
I'm sure you know that.

#2 it's cheaper in the same way that your favorite store, walmart is cheaper, buying power. When a supplier of lets say cotton swabs wants to get the national contract, the power of the size of that account allows for a great deal of negation on price. It's a bit complicated for someone on your level to understand, but that is the basic's.

#3 Why is it the govts job to provide a private company of anything? You don't like the free market?

OK please note that I apologizes in the threads that I was confused and this Arrogant ASS had to resort to personal attacks.

So now to discredit the crap that he just posted. In Socialized medical countries they have dictated what they will pay, and what they will not pay for is new and expensive break through drugs and procedures , this has take profit out of the system and they now have a shortage of care providers and long wait times for tests and procedures and people are dying because of it. The fact that both people have to die to be equal is a terrible outcome, but one that agencies like the world health organization applaud and actually give a higher score for. This is why the wealthy still travel to the USA or countries that have some private systems left so they can get life saving treatments.

#2 This is correct and it is why people stop being doctors and Hospitals close and new drugs are not developed. But a simpleton such as yourself actually believes that people will work in this high stress mega hour jobs and make minimum wage. Not going to happen. It is also why there is no money to experiment on new treatments and drugs, and the system becomes worse not better. But liberals are afraid that someone that works harder than them will reap more rewards.

#3 Using your logic, why should a company go out of its way to save lives with new treatments and drugs if there is no money in it for them. Clearly we can see the world over that they do not. And that is where socialized medicine reduces the quality of care for the masses, and in the end makes it much more expensive.

[zelmo1234]

They don't.

Sweden is the one that has done more counter reforms to their social democracy and are the ones who have got worse results.

It was during the conservative government but in last elections won again the social democrats.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

Sweden has ran out of other peoples money, Companies are moving or being sold and closed down. They just lost a large appliance manufacture to Gorenia and it closed and moved production.

That is what always happens to socialism people keep demanding more free stuff and eventually you run out of money and the system collapses. That is what Sweden is in the beginning stages of.

[Peter1469]

They don't deserve the same thing and society couldn't do it anyway without the same thing being extremely low.

Who wants to live in that world? Other than the lazy, too sick to work, intellectually challenged, etc?
OK here is another example

Boy is born to a lower middle class family Dad is a Factory worker and Mom stay at home.

He is dyslexic so his grade while not bad are not great, average student. Good at running the foot ball though so he gets a collage scholarship but then breaks his back and follows a path that leads to no degree and a middle class job.

Learns the secret of success and stops going into debt gets his Security Certifications goes overseas and makes a lot of money, but even before then he had purchased 2 rental homes and now he is among those that have made it.

But it took a lot more work than the person that has decided that working at walmart 40 hours a week is a good career. Why does the 40 hour worker deserve the same things. He does not work equally as hard?

[Peter1469]

Then why do you cons think it's a the goal of the evil scary 'socialism' none of you seem to understand?

I haven't described socialism yet, so don't put words into my mouth. Stick to making and defending arguments instead of trying to be clever.

[Peter1469]

So you were top 3% that is GREAT!

Like I said to be in the top 4% is about 135,900 To get into the top 1% you have to get to 1.25 million and that is a bit of a jump. then just cutting a tenth of a percentage is very difficult. I am trying to crack .8% and I have a long way to go.

Is that figure AGI?

[zelmo1234]

Is that figure AGI?

Just took it out of the Wiki posting. thought it would be close enough for our discussion. did not read far enough to see their source.

But AGI would be where I would thing they would go. Revenue or total income would be a foolish indicator. Our Appliance Distribution has HUGE revenue numbers, but very low net profit at the end of the year. So it should be AGI

[Peter1469]

6.5% increase on the FICA for $27K is about $125.00 a year.

You got the math wrong. It is over $1700 per year just for the increase. (10% would be $2700). That is a lot of money for someone making 27K a year unless they have room mates or live with momma.

[Peter1469]

zelmo1234, he seems to be trolling 90%. I wouldn't invest much in him.
OK please note that I apologizes in the threads that I was confused and this Arrogant ASS had to resort to personal attacks.

So now to discredit the crap that he just posted. In Socialized medical countries they have dictated what they will pay, and what they will not pay for is new and expensive break through drugs and procedures , this has take profit out of the system and they now have a shortage of care providers and long wait times for tests and procedures and people are dying because of it. The fact that both people have to die to be equal is a terrible outcome, but one that agencies like the world health organization applaud and actually give a higher score for. This is why the wealthy still travel to the USA or countries that have some private systems left so they can get life saving treatments.

#2 This is correct and it is why people stop being doctors and Hospitals close and new drugs are not developed. But a simpleton such as yourself actually believes that people will work in this high stress mega hour jobs and make minimum wage. Not going to happen. It is also why there is no money to experiment on new treatments and drugs, and the system becomes worse not better. But liberals are afraid that someone that works harder than them will reap more rewards.

#3 Using your logic, why should a company go out of its way to save lives with new treatments and drugs if there is no money in it for them. Clearly we can see the world over that they do not. And that is where socialized medicine reduces the quality of care for the masses, and in the end makes it much more expensive.

[Peter1469]

Just took it out of the Wiki posting. thought it would be close enough for our discussion. did not read far enough to see their source.

But AGI would be where I would thing they would go. Revenue or total income would be a foolish indicator. Our Appliance Distribution has HUGE revenue numbers, but very low net profit at the end of the year. So it should be AGI

Sorry, I missed the link. I am above that mark. Started taxes this year. Going to be a pain because of my circumstances.

[Matty]

There must be a reason they won't tell us how it's achieved. It must be a scarey process.

[Crepitus]

You got the math wrong. It is over $1700 per year just for the increase. (10% would be $2700). That is a lot of money for someone making 27K a year unless they have room mates or live with momma.
Actually I got the math right. You are calculating a6.5% increase in the tax rate, I am calculating 6.5% more than they are paying now, which is the figure I have seen tossed around.

[Peter1469]

There must be a reason they won't tell us how it's achieved. It must be a scarey process.

Redistribution of wealth. Under what many consider traditional socialism the state owns property. The individual does not, although they may be allocated property or rent it.

But there are many types of socialism, so if people are thinking different forms of it they won't be communicating.

[Peter1469]

Actually I got the math right. You are calculating a6.5% increase in the tax rate, I am calculating 6.5% more than they are paying now, which is the figure I have seen tossed around.

Sorry, I thought it was an additional 6.5% added to payroll tax on the individual side.

[Matty]

Redistribution of wealth. Under what many consider traditional socialism the state owns property. The individual does not, although they may be allocated property or rent it.

But there are many types of socialism, so if people are thinking different forms of it they won't be communicating.


So they would actually have to confiscate wealth, property, and corporations?

[Tahuyaman]

What is the point of socialism? Can anybody answer that question? .

I can.

The purpose is to spread misery equally to all.

[PNW]

The difference between us is that I have a history here and have been consistent.

:-)

So what?
Doesn't mean not full of it, which you are.

[PNW]

6.5% increase on the FICA for $27K is about $125.00 a year.

Holy crap! Bernie wants to bankrupt the poor and give them great heath care!
The horrors!

[PNW]

OK please note that I apologizes in the threads that I was confused and this Arrogant ASS had to resort to personal attacks.

So now to discredit the crap that he just posted. In Socialized medical countries they have dictated what they will pay, and what they will not pay for is new and expensive break through drugs and procedures , this has take profit out of the system and they now have a shortage of care providers and long wait times for tests and procedures and people are dying because of it. The fact that both people have to die to be equal is a terrible outcome, but one that agencies like the world health organization applaud and actually give a higher score for. This is why the wealthy still travel to the USA or countries that have some private systems left so they can get life saving treatments.

#2 This is correct and it is why people stop being doctors and Hospitals close and new drugs are not developed. But a simpleton such as yourself actually believes that people will work in this high stress mega hour jobs and make minimum wage. Not going to happen. It is also why there is no money to experiment on new treatments and drugs, and the system becomes worse not better. But liberals are afraid that someone that works harder than them will reap more rewards.

#3 Using your logic, why should a company go out of its way to save lives with new treatments and drugs if there is no money in it for them. Clearly we can see the world over that they do not. And that is where socialized medicine reduces the quality of care for the masses, and in the end makes it much more expensive.


What a pack of lies, but thats what I expected, the party talking points and personal insults and name calling.

[PNW]

I haven't described socialism yet, so don't put words into my mouth. Stick to making and defending arguments instead of trying to be clever.

Where did I say you did?
How about you stick to what is posted and not what you WANT it to say?
And 'cleaver' is outside conservatives understanding, they have a hard enough time with simple reading.

[PNW]

@zelmo1234 (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=588), he seems to be trolling 90%. I wouldn't invest much in him.
Like you've got room to talk.

Shameful for a mod to personally attack someone like that, but cons do what cons do.....

[Chris]

They don't.

Sweden is the one that has done more counter reforms to their social democracy and are the ones who have got worse results.

It was during the conservative government but in last elections won again the social democrats.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

I've already demonstrated they are weeks ago. And just the other day had a thread on how they are trneding toward private insurance. Bring some data to the table.

[Crepitus]

Sorry, I thought it was an additional 6.5% added to payroll tax on the individual side.
That would indeed be huge, and I assume there is a reason some people are not correcting folks when they say that.

Of course I could be wrong as well.

[Peter1469]

That would indeed be huge, and I assume there is a reason some people are not correcting folks when they say that.

Of course I could be wrong as well.

This is the paragraph in the OP that mentions it.


Many lower-income people are already insured or eligible for insurance under Medicaid, at least in the states that expanded the program under President Obama's health-care reform. Many Medicaid beneficiaries also work, and those workers' wages would likely decline due to the additional 6.2 percent payroll tax the proposal would levy on their employers.



I incorrectly said employee contribution. But, if the employer has to pay that much more some to all of it is coming out of your check.

[MisterVeritis]

so what?
Doesn't mean not full of it, which you are.
lol.

[kilgram]

I've already demonstrated they are weeks ago. And just the other day had a thread on how they are trneding toward private insurance. Bring some data to the table.
And becoming more expensive like Netherlands. If they do that.

Netherlands healthcare system is one of the worst and most expensive of Europe. Do you know what they did? Yes, privatize it.

The same happens to GB.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

[Green Arrow]

Tell me in real terms. How do you establish equal opportunity?

There is no one thing to do to establish equal opportunity, it's a lot of different things that come together. Everyone needs affordable health insurance, so you need a single-payer system. You need it to be administered on the state level, though, similar to the Canadian system, and it can't cover everything. We need a social welfare system that offers a hand up rather than a handout. We need either a minimum wage or something akin to Thomas Paine's "national wage" that matches the cost of living. Affordable college tuition, but not for "BS" degrees like women's studies. National jobs program like "America Works" from House of Cards.

Stuff like that.

[Crepitus]

This is the paragraph in the OP that mentions it.



I incorrectly said employee contribution. But, if the employer has to pay that much more some to all of it is coming out of your check.
I'll have to look at that a bit more closely.

[zelmo1234]

6.5% increase on the FICA for $27K is about $125.00 a year.

adding an additional 6.5% to FICA is 1755.00 per year but at that wage they are making the big bucks, so who cares

[zelmo1234]

What a pack of lies, but thats what I expected, the party talking points and personal insults and name calling.

you are the one that started the name calling, and of course you will be able to disprove my statements being they are lies. Kind of like what I did to you

[Peter1469]

Warning: ALL please don’t call members names.

[Matty]

There is no one thing to do to establish equal opportunity, it's a lot of different things that come together. Everyone needs affordable health insurance, so you need a single-payer system. You need it to be administered on the state level, though, similar to the Canadian system, and it can't cover everything. We need a social welfare system that offers a hand up rather than a handout. We need either a minimum wage or something akin to Thomas Paine's "national wage" that matches the cost of living. Affordable college tuition, but not for "BS" degrees like women's studies. National jobs program like "America Works" from House of Cards.

Stuff like that.


And who will be responsible for paying for this?

[MisterVeritis]

And who will be responsible for paying for this?
You and me, of course. Thus it always is with socialists. Other peoples' money until it runs out. Then beat them and confiscate their property.

[PNW]

Warning: ALL please don’t call members names.Does that include the mods as well?Just asking.Infracted for ignoring the notice stated clearly below in all Attention and Warnings.

[Peter1469]

Back on topic. The costs of Bernie's health care plan on the poor working class. Will their lower salary (through increased taxes, whether directly or though the employer) offset any benefits from the plan? The OP says yes.

[Matty]

You and me, of course. Thus it always is with socialists. Other peoples' money until it runs out. Then beat them and confiscate their property.



And and then people actually wonder why corporations move out of the US.

[MisterVeritis]

And and then people actually wonder why corporations move out of the US.
I believe it is a combination of high taxes and punitive regulations.

I had a friend in another corporation who was at the same level as me. Like me, he provided oversight for his program's security measures involving classified work spaces. When Obama's administration began the auditors changed from being trusted allies to help ensure that security was as good as it needed to be to punitive in order to extract maximum fines for infractions. He warned me... With my background I was very confident we would do well. And we did.

Safety was similar. I had a flawless safety program and was never inspected or audited by government thugs.

[Green Arrow]

And who will be responsible for paying for this?

Everyone. Everyone will pay taxes and those taxes will go to fund it. Among other things.

[MisterVeritis]

Everyone. Everyone will pay taxes and those taxes will go to fund it. Among other things.
In real life, that does not happen. The productive are milked, then squeezed, then beaten. Then killed.

[PNW]

God I'm glad I'm not a conservative.

[Peter1469]

God I'm glad I'm not a conservative.

You only get so many nonsense posts

Notice: Thread banned at the request of the thread owner. Do not respond to the thread banned member in this thread.

[kilgram]

In real life, that does not happen. The productive are milked, then squeezed, then beaten. Then killed.
Wow. No. False. Wrong.

Отправлено с моего Aquaris E5 через Tapatalk

[Tahuyaman]

Everyone. Everyone will pay taxes and those taxes will go to fund it. Among other things.


Did Sanders propose putting everyone on the income tax rolls? Even the nearly 50% who pay none now?

[Green Arrow]

Did Sanders propose putting everyone on the income tax rolls? Even the nearly 50% who pay none now?

Not quite everyone, there are still people who will end up not paying income tax, but certainly not half the country.