How does it not support the headline? It's Pelosi's policy advisor describing the difficulties of M4A to a BCBS exec? Just what exactly do think the purpose is of that? Did you think the BCBS exec was on-board with M4A and Pelosi wanted to talk him out of it?I just read that piece and don't see anything in there to support the headline. This line seems like a more accurate summary. "Democrats, Primus said, are united around the concept of universal coverage, but see strengthening the Affordable Care Act as the means to that end." Is there something specific in there that particularly bothered you?
How does it not support the headline? It's Pelosi's policy advisor describing the difficulties of M4A to a BCBS exec? Just what exactly do think the purpose is of that? Did you think the BCBS exec was on-board with M4A and Pelosi wanted to talk him out of it?
To be clear, since you're gaslighting me - M4A is supposedly a Democratic policy goal, which health insurance execs will spend millions and billions to oppose.
You all have brainworms. The fucking speaker of the house would collude with health insurance conglomerates against the stated policy goals of Democratic Presidential candidates, and you don't see a problem just because you...don't think M4A is realistic??
Dude what in the fuck are you talking about? Honestly, like why am I not just blocking you to miss all the random stupid snide comments you post? At this point I just straight up dislike you because you literally never stop talking shit. What's the purpose of this back and forth - you're a hemorrhoid to me.is it really that far from your Truth
Go fuck yourself you condescending pricki don't know, stop posting stupid panicky paranoid shit all the time
Go fuck yourself you condescending prick
If Pelosi blocks M4A under a Dem pres and Senate who want it, she’ll be gone.
If you want to understand white privilege, just see that dipshits like this can become governor of decent sized state.
https://theintercept.com/2019/02/05/nancy-pelosi-medicare-for-all/
TOP NANCY PELOSI AIDE PRIVATELY TELLS INSURANCE EXECUTIVES NOT TO WORRY ABOUT DEMOCRATS PUSHING “MEDICARE FOR ALL”
"...Pelosi adviser Wendell Primus detailed five objections to Medicare for All and said that Democrats would be allies to the insurance industry in the fight against single-payer health care. Primus pitched the insurers on supporting Democrats on efforts to shrink drug prices, specifically by backing a number of measures that the pharmaceutical lobby is opposing."
How does it not support the headline? It's Pelosi's policy advisor describing the difficulties of M4A to a BCBS exec? Just what exactly do think the purpose is of that? Did you think the BCBS exec was on-board with M4A and Pelosi wanted to talk him out of it?
To be clear, since you're gaslighting me - M4A is supposedly a Democratic policy goal, which health insurance execs will spend millions and billions to oppose.
You all have brainworms. The fucking speaker of the house would collude with health insurance conglomerates against the stated policy goals of Democratic Presidential candidates, and you don't see a problem just because you...don't think M4A is realistic??
Yeah, that won't happen.
If you look back at my posts, I think you'll see that I've tried to engage with you and MDH in good faith and will continue to do so, accusations aside.
M4A is *not* a Democratic policy goal. The policy goal is (and should be) affordable universal health care. M4A is one particular policy to achieve that, and it has been endorsed by some Democrats (though many of them have endorsed multiple pieces of possible health care legislation across the universal health care spectrum, and it's not clear to me they understand exactly what M4A would mean). We can have a separate discussion about M4A the policy. I'm personally not sure it's the right approach, it's to the left of essentially the entire world, and is very unpopular with the public once explained in any detail. But again, that's a separate discussion (we should probably have 1 or more threads about policy ideas, I'd enjoy hearing and learning about the ideas people have on here).
I wouldn't think it surprising that the Speaker of the House and the PhD economist who are representing her, both of whom were architects of the ACA, continue to support strengthening the program. I also wouldn't think it surprising that they would try to court the powerful insurance lobby to help with what is in this case a shared goal, trying to decrease drug costs. I think the purpose of the discussion of M4A and its potential difficulties is to try to keep them at the table (and I doubt any real promises were made) by (correctly) stating that there are ways to obtain universal health care that still involve the insurance industry (like most of the world does).
I do get that it can feel a little gross to see interactions between dem leadership and the insurance industry, especially if you see them as partially responsible for the past and current state of health care in this country. And if your position is that no dem should be working with *any* corporate interest, fine, I guess. But I think acting as if this is some betrayal of the party, or collusion again dem presidential candidates, just seems silly to me. Clearly some dems will still push for and support M4A regardless of what the Speaker thinks and that's great! I hope there is robust debate of lots of different plans to achieve universal coverage, and we can come up with the best one in the end. But in the mean time, I just don't think it's a big deal to take a stab at pitting the insurance industry against the drug companies to help drive down prices while we wait.
[M4A] is very unpopular with the public once explained in any detail.
M4A is an immensely popular grassroots issue at best.
All the M4A polls I’ve seen indicate the center wants it. It’s just a question of how. What polling are you basing things on?
I’m glad that made you laugh out loud. Short of taking my post out of context, what was so funny about it? Tilt and I agree.