7th Dem 2020 Debate (last before Iowa)

[hornhorn 100]

28 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

The idea is to sacrifice for the greater good because you need to realize your privilege is why you have amazing, employee-paid insurance and for a family of 5 you pay 1% of your paycheck out of pocket. You are privileged to have that perk and so you should think of others less privileged.

On the thread about the working class being dead everyone is in agreement that government jobs are where the mentally slow and weak of society go to toil away for a life time of meaningful work stapling papers and filing away $500 hammer receipts, but whenever people talk about a nationalized or M4A, everyone seems to give the government the benefit of the doubt it won’t be a disaster and full of graft and embezzlement like the Medicare/Home Health industry Being run by Nigerian War Lords and Filipino confidence men.

So you want to ask that mother/father who pays $1500/month in heatlhcare as a self employed person for their family to continue doing so and get extended wait times in return because she needs to realize her privilege?

Yeah, like I said good plan! 

[NowThis 931]

1 minute ago, hornhorn said:

Oh yes people will have to pay the second time if they want the same level of service they do right now. If they don't want to deal with wait times etc.

And you can defund the military by half and it would only add 400 billion to a 3.2 trillion M4ALL budget. 

no there won't be a second payment.  My mom goes to the same In Network doctors that I can go to via the same carrier -- United Healthcare. There is no extra wait time.

The $3.2 trillion is already funded by premiums from employees and employers.  Incremental monies can come from cuts in other areas such as military.

[bad_teammate 13132]

We spent $3.5t/yr in 2017 with 27.4m uninsured people and hundreds of thousands of people in medical debt.

Mercatus pegged M4A at $3.3t/yr.

100% coverage for less money.

Some people won't want to make even a tiny sacrifice to help others. Fine. Vote Republican.

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, NowThis said:

no there won't be a second payment.  My mom goes to the same In Network doctors that I can go to via the same carrier -- United Healthcare. There is no extra wait time.

The $3.2 trillion is already funded by premiums from employees and employers.  Incremental monies can come from cuts in other areas such as military.

Canadian citizens have a second payment if they want a private option without extended wait times. So will we. 

I get that 3.2 trillion is already funded but we do not spend anywhere close to that amount on anything else. Our entire budget for 2020 is 4.7 trillion, adding a few billion here or there isn't going to impact much.

[hornhorn 100]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

We spent $3.5t/yr in 2017 with 27.4m uninsured people and hundreds of thousands of people in medical debt.

Mercatus pegged M4A at $3.3t/yr.

100% coverage for less money.

Some people won't want to make even a tiny sacrifice to help others. Fine. Vote Republican.

Mercatus also said that to keep it 3.3 trillion/year we will have to cut physician reimbursements by 40% which is below their service costs and is unsustainable. So the plan is to drive doctors out of business? LOL OK. 

 

[NowThis 931]

3 minutes ago, hornhorn said:

Mercatus also said that to keep it 3.3 trillion/year we will have to cut physician reimbursements by 40% which is below their service costs and is unsustainable. So the plan is to drive doctors out of business? LOL OK. 

 

yet the same In Network  doctors accept Medicare Supplement insurance from United Healthcare.

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, NowThis said:

yet the same In Network  doctors accept Medicare Supplement insurance from United Healthcare.

Two things have nothing to do with each other. To keep the costs at 32 trillion for ten years, the study said we will have to cut healthcare reimbursements by 40% and are unsustainable. Doctors today can accept low payments from Medicare and still stay afloat because they have higher reimbursements from insurance companies which will not be an option under M4ALL. 

Many doctors do decline Medicare patients for that very reason. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

Mercatus also said that to keep it 3.3 trillion/year we will have to cut physician reimbursements by 40% which is below their service costs and is unsustainable. So the plan is to drive doctors out of business? LOL OK. 
 

Cool then raise doctor payouts to a more sustainable rate.

100% coverage is non-negotiable. It's a red line.

You're either a piece of shit or you're not.

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Cool then raise doctor payouts to a more sustainable rate.

100% coverage is non-negotiable. It's a red line.

You're either a piece of shit or you're not.

Cool then this 32 trillion number doesn't work. The number goes up substantially and that money has to come from somewhere.

Until Bernie or one of those that support this magic pixie dust can actually tell us what that number is going to be, M4ALL is a no go. Its a red line. Fuck it, make it black!

You're either with us here on Earth when it comes to Math or you're not. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

We raise taxes progressively until it is sustainably funded.

[ChickenSandwich 9798]

4 minutes ago, hornhorn said:

Cool then this 32 trillion number doesn't work. The number goes up substantially and that money has to come from somewhere.

Until Bernie or one of those that support this magic pixie dust can actually tell us what that number is going to be, M4ALL is a no go. Its a red line. Fuck it, make it black!

You're either with us here on Earth when it comes to Math or you're not. 

I would like to hear their explanation as to how we won’t be providing the rest of the continent with free health care as well based on their stated incentive plans and amnesty ideas. 

[Zonahorn 8079]

4 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

I would like to hear their explanation as to how we won’t be providing the rest of the continent with free health care as well based on their stated incentive plans and amnesty ideas. 

God damn, you're stupid

[hornhorn 100]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

We raise taxes progressively until it is sustainably funded.

Progressive like how:

Top 1 percent pays: 37% of ALL the income tax revenue?

Top 5 percent pays: 60% of ALL the income tax revenue?

Top 10 percent pays: 70% of ALL the income tax revenue? 

While the Bottom 50 percent pays: 3% of ALL the income tax revenue? 

Uh, we already do that. 

[immortal13 4059]

Pie in the sky

[bad_teammate 13132]

Progressive like how:
Top 1 percent pays: 37% of ALL the income tax revenue?
Top 5 percent pays: 60% of ALL the income tax revenue?
Top 10 percent pays: 70% of ALL the income tax revenue? 
While the Bottom 50 percent pays: 3% of ALL the income tax revenue? 
Uh, we already do that. 

Raise the taxes.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 hour ago, NowThis said:

it's not going to be exponential, perhaps 20% increase in patients.  People with insurance will not pay a second time, because they won't need their private insurance anymore; which employers partially fund as well and will continue to do so to M4A.  This is all just a paper change in payment systems, diverting the money away from insurance companies who remain as admins and take some profit, but deductibles and co insurance are eliminated.  More funding can come from military cuts.

Why a 20% increase in patients?  The uninsured rate nationwide is at about 9%.  In Texas, its 17.5%.  Even if everyone ran to the doctor, it wouldn't be a 20% increase. Really,  I doubt we'd see a meaningful increase at all at the outset.  What we would see is ER's becoming less taxed with non-emergencies which is a good thing.  We'd see an uptick in preventative care.  Also a good thing.  The conservative idea that everyone who is currently uninsured is going to turn into a super-hypochondriac is laughable.

And conservatives are going to have to live with the idea that poor people deserve cancer treatment too.  However, even that isn't going to drastically affect the wait time at the oncologist.  The primary issue the uninsured and impoverished have had when it comes to cancer is a lack of early detection.  By the time they hit the ER, its too late to do anything about it.  And they still often get the current too-late super expensive end stage surgeries.  What they don't get is the early and cheaper treatments.

Also, the hysterics over the price tag is funny.  We spend far more than that on healthcare every year.  The current massive premiums we pay will be shifted to M4A.  If supplemental is permitted, the premiums will be far cheaper than current rates since it will be gap coverage.  At some point, we could also stop allowing pharma to gouge us too.

Edited January 15, 2020 by FondrenRoad

[hornhorn 100]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

 

 

Raise the taxes.

 

First tell us how much its going to really cost. No, really. 

[Rougarou 594]

This is the boiled down truth of it

Quote

Some people won't want to make even a tiny sacrifice to help others. Fine. Vote Republican.

Also this:

Quote

And conservatives are going to have to live with the idea that poor people deserve cancer treatment too.  However, even that isn't going to drastically affect the wait time at the oncologist.  The primary issue the uninsured and impoverished have had when it comes to cancer is a lack of early detection.  By the time they hit the ER, its too late to do anything about it

In essence, we have to be honest with people and ourselves that the top 50% are going to have to pay more for, best case scenario the same care, most likely scenario worse care and that this is a moral and ethical and values-based policy of doing what is right to be humans. It will need to be understood that this sacrifice is help people not die or suffer and yes, you will likely have to find other ways to save money or you will need to find ways to make more money to supplant the money you've lost. Just like, yes, slave owners had to figure out how to make money in other ways that don't include owning slaves if they just had to keep their wealth at the same levels, because it's wrong to own slaves as a human being. It's wrong to not give healthcare to everyone in your country, is the boiled down point, and you have to be okay giving up some of your cash to do it unless you are the poor/working class.

And we need to be honest about it not being easy and affordable and it's going to hit a lot of people in their comfort zone. It's going to hit a lot of people in their feelings. It will seem unfair and be painful in the short term. But over time, we will learn to live in the world again. Just like most of us learned to live in a world without owning slaves.

Lastly we need to be honest about the government and  your employer:

Are government workers smart human beings with real skills and abilities that are valuable to any organization? lol absolutely not (but they should still be afforded dignity). Will there be massive inefficiencies and waste? Of course. It's part of the calculus, though. It's baked in to the formula. Will the net promoter score or quality based scores of your 1) service 2) experience 3) cost and 4) quality of care be negatively effected? Almost certainly, if you are in the top 50% who have good to great insurance because you are a valuable, capitalist vampire with a graduate degree. But is it worth it to take a ding on these things so that the bottom half who have no insurance to even complain about and would love to gripe about a 2 hour wait time, can get some basic healthcare for when they are sick and maintain their health with yearly wellness/preventative appointment?  That's the argument!

Is your employer a soulless and cold and calculating outfit who cares only about the bottom line? Likely, if they are any good and worth working for. Do they only offer amazing health benefits because they have to? To compete with others to get top talent to drive shareholder value and grow? You betcha they aren't doing it to be nice! Will they pay their employers more because they will no longer have to pay 95% of their health insurance? lol. no way jose. These are the same folks who took the Trump tax cut to buy back stock and raise earnings as opposed to trickling down to the employees. We've seen the playbook and what they will do. Why do we pretend companies will grow a heart and do something different with healthcare? When someone tells/shows you who they are, you oughta believe them.

Edited January 15, 2020 by Rougarou

[GSU&UT 1798]

Y'all are out here whining about cost when people literally do not go to the doctor or hospital because they can't afford their deductible, copays, and out of pocket expenses. Lots of people outright refuse an ambulance because of how much you can be charged for just a ride an emergency room visit. 

[NowThis 931]

9 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Why a 20% increase in patients?  The uninsured rate nationwide is at about 9%.  In Texas, its 17.5%.  Even if everyone ran to the doctor, it wouldn't be a 20% increase. Really,  I doubt we'd see a meaningful increase at all at the outset.  What we would see is ER's becoming less taxed with non-emergencies which is a good thing.  We'd see an uptick in preventative care.  Also a good thing.  The conservative idea that everyone who is currently uninsured is going to turn into a super-hypochondriac is laughable.

And conservatives are going to have to live with the idea that poor people deserve cancer treatment too.  However, even that isn't going to drastically affect the wait time at the oncologist.  The primary issue the uninsured and impoverished have had when it comes to cancer is a lack of early detection.  By the time they hit the ER, its too late to do anything about it.  And they still often get the current too-late super expensive end stage surgeries.  What they don't get is the early and cheaper treatments.

Also, the hysterics over the price tag is funny.  We spend far more than that on healthcare every year.  The current massive premiums we pay will be shifted to M4A.  If supplemental is permitted, the premiums will be far cheaper than current rates since it will be gap coverage.  At some point, we could also stop allowing pharma to gouge us too.

my 20 % was a ballpark guesstimate. I've seen figures of uninsured from 25mil to 45mil Americans, so i was giving a fat estimate as the upper limit of newcomers.

On the political front, if the Dems can deliver better healthcare, more hospitals, clinics and EMS to the outer rural areas -- they are going to clean up in the elections.  I'd say go for it, we want to save American lives don't we?

[GSU&UT 1798]

1 minute ago, NowThis said:

I'd say go for it, we want to save American lives don't we?

ONLY IF THE ~* MARKETS *~  ARE THE ONES WHO DO SO! Gubment bad! I like my family deductible being at $10k if I go to an out-of-network hospital (or an out-of-network doctor in an in-network hospital)! That's just the invisible hand making sure I'm taken care of!

[bad_teammate 13132]

First tell us how much its going to really cost. No, really. 

How can we know exactly to the penny? It's not the production of widgets. Healthcare is variable.

But as to the premise, no, fuck you. 100% coverage is the redline. We work from that point.

Go be a Republican. Fuck off out of Dem discussions.

[henrygandorf 29176]

if it’s totally acceptable now to explode the deficit (according to the gop) then who gives a shit what it costs?

the average citizen won’t even be able to tell the difference. 

[hornhorn 100]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How can we know exactly to the penny? It's not the production of widgets. Healthcare is variable.

Penny? How about you round it to the next 10 billion? But you can't. Which is why you respond in this manner:

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

But as to the premise, no, fuck you. 100% coverage is the redline. We work from that point.

Go be a Republican. Fuck off out of Dem discussions.

You know your ass is owned, now you fuck off and stop acting like a petulant child who wants a toy dumbass. I'll stay right here and keep shoving reality up your ass. 

[Incredulity 11564]

11 hours ago, Fozzz said:

lol what a petty and immature turd

 

 

that is a horrible look.

petty is exactly right.

[Zonahorn 8079]

Just now, hornhorn said:

Penny? How about you round it to the next 10 billion? But you can't. Which is why you respond in this manner:

You know your ass is owned, now you fuck off and stop acting like a petulant child who wants a toy dumbass. I'll stay right here and keep shoving reality up your ass. 

Your opinion means jackshit for the healthcare debate. Republicans don't get an opinion.

[tantric superman 4667]

We need to be big tent.  But we need to realize that health care costs can suddenly economically cripple anyone who doesn't have a good hunk of wealth.

Gonna cost a lot.  I don't think we should demand exact figures, just explanations as to why something makes more sense than the current way.

 

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, Calihorn said:

Your opinion means jackshit for the healthcare debate. Republicans don't get an opinion.

LOL, so does yours.

Also, not a Republican just a Math aficionado. 

And lastly, the status quo stays until you can prove overwhelmingly why it needs to change and more importantly, HOW. So you're going to need some of us independents if you need this bullshit passed. So far, you're doing a stellar job of not making your point.

[GSU&UT 1798]

4 minutes ago, hornhorn said:

Penny? How about you round it to the next 10 billion? But you can't. Which is why you respond in this manner:

You know your ass is owned, now you fuck off and stop acting like a petulant child who wants a toy dumbass. I'll stay right here and keep shoving reality up your ass. 

Nah, go vote for a Republican if you're so fucking worried about how much this is going to cost instead of how much we've spent in Iraq and Afghanistan without somehow crippling the economy.

[Zonahorn 8079]

Just now, hornhorn said:

LOL, so does yours.

Also, not a Republican just a Math aficionado. 

And lastly, the status quo stays until you can prove overwhelmingly why it needs to change and more importantly, HOW. So you're going to need some of us independents if you need this bullshit passed. So far, you're doing a stellar job of not making your point.

Fiscally conservative retard, Republican. It doesn't make a difference. I don't need to, you don't get an opinion.

[GSU&UT 1798]

Just now, hornhorn said:

LOL, so does yours.

Also, not a Republican just a Math aficionado. 

And lastly, the status quo stays until you can prove overwhelmingly why it needs to change and more importantly, HOW. So you're going to need some of us independents if you need this bullshit passed. So far, you're doing a stellar job of not making your point.

If you just can't bring yourself to guarantee healthcare to all Americans because you're that worried about cost, inefficiencies, etc then you are not the voter we're trying to reach. Go take your ball, bitch on the internet, and vote for Trump or Gary Johnson again and smell your farts because you're a smart big boy.

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

Nah, go vote for a Republican if you're so fucking worried about how much this is going to cost instead of how much we've spent in Iraq and Afghanistan without somehow crippling the economy.

The total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan wars(which I'm against as well) in the last 19 years is $2.4 trillion. 

This is going to cost 3.2 trillion in ONE year. Every year, forever. 

Do you even Math bro?

[Zonahorn 8079]

2 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Nah, go vote for a Republican if you're so fucking worried about how much this is going to cost instead of how much we've spent in Iraq and Afghanistan without somehow crippling the economy.

Don't you just love it when fiscal conservatives or Republicans think their opinion on healthcare matters?

[hornhorn 100]

1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

Fiscally conservative retard, Republican. It doesn't make a difference. I don't need to, you don't get an opinion.

I do,  and here I am. Go fuck yourself. 

[Zonahorn 8079]

1 minute ago, hornhorn said:

I do,  and here I am. Go fuck yourself. 

Nope, that's how it work now.

[GSU&UT 1798]

1 minute ago, hornhorn said:

The total cost of Iraq and Afghanistan wars(which I'm against as well) in the last 19 years is $2.4 trillion. 

This is going to cost 3.2 trillion in ONE year. Every year, forever. 

Do you even Math bro?

* Some poor person who makes just enough to not qualify for Medicaid, on his deathbed because he was too worried about the cost for his family to go to a doctor which could have diagnosed him early for cancer *

* Enter hornhorn, a big smart boy with math skills holding a copy of Atlas Shrugged *

Hornhorn: That's just the way it works, sorry dude. Do you even math bro?

[hornhorn 100]

1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

Nope, that's how it work now.

Last I checked still no M4ALL. 

[hornhorn 100]

Just now, GSU&UT said:

* Some poor person who makes just enough to not qualify for Medicaid, on his deathbed because he was too worried about the cost for his family to go to a doctor which could have diagnosed him early for cancer *

* Enter hornhorn, a big smart boy with math skills holding a copy of Atlas Shrugged *

Hornhorn: That's just the way it works, sorry dude. Do you even math bro?

Strawman much? 

[hpslugga 4044]

35 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

The conservative idea that everyone who is currently uninsured is going to turn into a super-hypochondriac is laughable.

It’s an idea born from the same two inbred parents that spawned the idiot, “if you legalize drugs, everyone will become a junky,” bastard. As to this idea that they somehow are the ones that know the numbers, that’s just another fantasy that they rubbed out alongside Trickle Down Economics and Peace Through Strength.

35 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

And conservatives are going to have to live with the idea that poor people deserve cancer treatment too. 

That they will not do and you’d be wasting your time suggesting it to these undereducated narcissists.

35 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

However, even that isn't going to drastically affect the wait time at the oncologist.  The primary issue the uninsured and impoverished have had when it comes to cancer is a lack of early detection.  By the time they hit the ER, its too late to do anything about it.  And they still often get the current too-late super expensive end stage surgeries.  What they don't get is the early and cheaper treatments.

Also, the hysterics over the price tag is funny.  We spend far more than that on healthcare every year.  The current massive premiums we pay will be shifted to M4A.  If supplemental is permitted, the premiums will be far cheaper than current rates since it will be gap coverage.  At some point, we could also stop allowing pharma to gouge us too.

BUT TAXES!!!

[GSU&UT 1798]

6 minutes ago, hornhorn said:

Strawman much? 

Hey look, factual data that says this happens!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2018/03/26/poll-44-of-americans-skip-doctor-visits-due-to-cost/#559e848b6f57

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/29/over-half-of-americans-delay-health-care-becasue-they-cant-afford-it.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/15/520110742/as-drug-costs-soar-people-delay-or-skip-cancer-treatments

[RomaVicta 29784]

44 minutes ago, hornhorn said:

Progressive like how:

Top 1 percent pays: 37% of ALL the income tax revenue?

Top 5 percent pays: 60% of ALL the income tax revenue?

Top 10 percent pays: 70% of ALL the income tax revenue? 

While the Bottom 50 percent pays: 3% of ALL the income tax revenue? 

Uh, we already do that. 

Yea. The ones reaping the greatest benefits of a system they largely control actually have to pay a percentage of the wealth they gain and protect back to the system. Oh, and maybe the money they keep in their corporations will have to be taxed, too.  I weep at the tragedy of it all.

I know they spend all day thinking of ways to Make America Great Again and providing the not-illusory-trickle of wealth down to the peons, but they'll have to actually contribute a little more.

Poor, heroic top 1%. Maybe they can shift some of the money they pay to PACs, politicians, and pedophile distributors to cover the bill.

The greediest part of that class are what made the GOP the GOP it is. The generous part of that class pay their taxes with no more complaint than the rest of us and then go out and find other ways to do good with their wealth.

Fuck the greedy part of that 1%. The more you learn about them, the more you find that they should be in jail.

Now go to a default class warfare argument, irony-deaf motherfuckers. It's actually class retaliation as the war on the poor and middle class has been going on ever since the progressive tax was introduced.

 

[hornhorn 100]

2 minutes ago, GSU&UT said:

Hey look, factual data that says this happens!

https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2018/03/26/poll-44-of-americans-skip-doctor-visits-due-to-cost/#559e848b6f57

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/29/over-half-of-americans-delay-health-care-becasue-they-cant-afford-it.html

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/15/520110742/as-drug-costs-soar-people-delay-or-skip-cancer-treatments

And M4ALL will have ridiculous wait times:

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/waiting-your-turn-wait-times-for-health-care-in-canada-2018

Yeah, that's not going to have any impact on people's health. 

[GSU&UT 1798]

Yes, in Canada doctors literally refuse to see patients for months knowing they have cancer. That is 100% how it works, the libertarian think-tank told me so!

[hornhorn 100]

3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Yea. The ones reaping the greatest benefits of a system they largely control actually have to pay a percentage of the wealth they gain and protect back to the system. Oh, and maybe the money they keep in their corporations will have to be taxed, too.  I weep at the tragedy of it all.

I know they spend all day thinking of ways to Make America Great Again and providing the not-illusory-trickle of wealth down to the peons, but they'll have to actually contribute a little more.

Poor, heroic top 1%. Maybe they can shift some of the money they pay to PACs, politicians, and pedophile distributors to cover the bill.

The greediest part of that class are what made the GOP the GOP it is. The generous part of that class pay their taxes with no more complaint than the rest of us and then go out and find other ways to do good with their wealth.

Fuck the greedy part of that 1%. The more you learn about them, the more you find that they should be in jail.

Now go to a default class warfare argument, irony-deaf motherfuckers. It's actually class retaliation as the war on the poor and middle class has been going on ever since the progressive tax was introduced.

 

You sound like AOC just threw up on surly. 

You think corporations didn't or don't pay taxes? Apple in 2015 paid half of the amount in corporate taxes that Bottom fifty percent of ALL Americans put together. 

You're the one gunning for THEIR money and they're the greedy ones? 

And y u mad bro? Its already Wednesday, two more days. 

[RomaVicta 29784]

50 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

And conservatives are going to have to live with the idea that poor people deserve cancer treatment too.  However, even that isn't going to drastically affect the wait time at the oncologist.  The primary issue the uninsured and impoverished have had when it comes to cancer is a lack of early detection.  By the time they hit the ER, its too late to do anything about it. 

Dickens wrote with wit about things that are real. Scrooge is himself a spirit. The spirit of greed that really exists through acts of commission and omission.

[immortal13 4059]

39 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How can we know exactly to the penny? It's not the production of widgets. Healthcare is variable.

But as to the premise, no, fuck you. 100% coverage is the redline. We work from that point.

Go be a Republican. Fuck off out of Dem discussions.

He asked a legitimate question (which you massively failed to answer). Why be such a dick?

[Rougarou 594]

Bear with me as I present an analogy that I can see M4A being like and what we should prepare for, for a successful model. Think of it like an Amusement Park (again, bear with me):

M4A means that the US Govt pays your admission to the amusement park where the amusement park is a metaphor for general healthcare. Everyone gets in, those are the table stakes for M4A.

Now, because there is no longer a barrier to entry and because new rides take time to be built and tested for safety, there is a back-up in lines and you must wait a bit longer for the privilege of going on a ride, whereas a ride is a metaphor for a specific service or specialty under the general healthcare umbrella.

Then we should give the citizens of the amusement park the ability to use one or two given Flash Pass or Fast Pass to get in an expedited line. After that, you can buy more VIP passes or Fast passes to your heart's content and your threshold for wallet pain.

Is that such a bad model? Or is that what Pete is saying we should do and people think it's trash?

[RomaVicta 29784]

4 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

Why be such a dick?

Why be such a dick, sir? I am just a man of business speaking of the surplus population.

[immortal13 4059]

10 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Bear with me as I present an analogy that I can see M4A being like and what we should prepare for, for a successful model. Think of it like an Amusement Park (again, bear with me):

M4A means that the US Govt pays your admission to the amusement park where the amusement park is a metaphor for general healthcare. Everyone gets in, those are the table stakes for M4A.

Now, because there is no longer a barrier to entry and because new rides take time to be built and tested for safety, there is a back-up in lines and you must wait a bit longer for the privilege of going on a ride, whereas a ride is a metaphor for a specific service or specialty under the general healthcare umbrella.

Then we should give the citizens of the amusement park the ability to use one or two given Flash Pass or Fast Pass to get in an expedited line. After that, you can buy more VIP passes or Fast passes to your heart's content and your threshold for wallet pain.

Is that such a bad model? Or is that what Pete is saying we should do and people think it's trash?

 

[hornhorn 100]

3 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

Bear with me as I present an analogy that I can see M4A being like and what we should prepare for, for a successful model. Think of it like an Amusement Park (again, bear with me):

M4A means that the US Govt pays your admission to the amusement park where the amusement park is a metaphor for general healthcare. Everyone gets in, those are the table stakes for M4A.

Now, because there is no longer a barrier to entry and because new rides take time to be built and tested for safety, there is a back-up in lines and you must wait a bit longer for the privilege of going on a ride, whereas a ride is a metaphor for a specific service or specialty under the general healthcare umbrella.

Then we should give the citizens of the amusement park the ability to use one or two given Flash Pass or Fast Pass to get in an expedited line. After that, you can buy more VIP passes or Fast passes to your heart's content and your threshold for wallet pain.

Is that such a bad model? Or is that what Pete is saying we should do and people think it's trash?

But here's the problem. To get into that amusement park.

Currently:

Guy A gets to pay $2,000/month in insurance and another $80,000/year in taxes. No lines.

Guy B pays nothing for insurance and pays $1200/year in taxes. Can't get in.

With M4ALL:

Guy A gets to pay $2,000/month in insurance and another $95,000/year in taxes. His children when sick wait in a line. He sees them suffering everyday when he didn't during prior system. 

Guy B pays nothing for insurance and pay $1,500/year in taxes. He waits in line just like Guy A does. 

 

Tell me why Guy A is going to get on board. If it was just himself think Guy A would be OK, but if its his kids vs. ANYONE else its a no brainer he picks the older system. He's doing everything right, paying for insurance, paying his taxes then why should his children suffer?