• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

2020 Democratic Presidential Nominees

ImTheCaptain said:
you don't care how we pay for it?
Click to expand...

We find a way to pay for most things that we consider to be important in society. I'm not sure that it's up to voters to find a way to pay for things in a presidential election. It's up to voters to identify priorities and support presidential candidates who are committed to implementing those priorities. Warren and Sanders both have detailed proposals for how we might pay for M4A. You should look at them.
 
Strickland33 said:
I don’t care about private insurance. At all. It’s a racket and deserves to go the way of the dinosaurs.

What do you think the answer is?
Click to expand...

Making a national public available will create a pool so large that only certain super rich people will have private insurance other than supplemental insurance.

We would destroy the GOP's golden goose by using their own methods. The market will get rid of most private insurance and everyone will end up fully covered. It will happen faster, cheaper and more seamlessly than any other way.

Plus, it will be much harder for GOP to challenge and be completely effective.

Why fight for years when something can be instituted almost immediately.
 
PhDeac said:
Works for Pubs.

Townie and Strick, I have a tough time believing you don't care if a plan will hurt private insurance. It seems like you specifically want a plan to hurt private insurance. That's fine. Just make sure you clarify your stance because you seem to be against plans that take private insurance into account.
Click to expand...

I just don't care about a sector that exists to leech off of the suffering of the poor and middle classes. I'm sure that whatever policy ultimately emerges will take their welfare into consideration. Private insurance, private equity, and the financial sector can all fuck off as far as I'm concerned. The last two decades of policy has been oriented to enrich these industries. The next two decades of policy should be oriented towards addressing their crimes and victims.
 
PhDeac said:
Works for Pubs.

Townie and Strick, I have a tough time believing you don't care if a plan will hurt private insurance. It seems like you specifically want a plan to hurt private insurance. That's fine. Just make sure you clarify your stance because you seem to be against plans that take private insurance into account.
Click to expand...

I think the best plans eliminate private insurance, because I think it's a major cost driver. Still, a M4A that had supplemental private insurance similar to what many other major economies have, makes sense.

Further still, what's far more important to me is ensuring universal, affordable coverage. I don't really think some of the non-M4A M4A plans really do that, but I'm encouraged to hear tilt suggesting otherwise, or at least that there are significant improvements to ACA being proposed.
 
Strickland33 said:
We find a way to pay for most things that we consider to be important in society. I'm not sure that it's up to voters to find a way to pay for things in a presidential election. It's up to voters to identify priorities and support presidential candidates who are committed to implementing those priorities. Warren and Sanders both have detailed proposals for how we might pay for M4A. You should look at them.
Click to expand...

Yea nobody asks how we're gonna pay to fund our military.
 
RJKarl said:
Making a national public available will create a pool so large that only certain super rich people will have private insurance other than supplemental insurance.

We would destroy the GOP's golden goose by using their own methods. The market will get rid of most private insurance and everyone will end up fully covered. It will happen faster, cheaper and more seamlessly than any other way.

Plus, it will be much harder for GOP to challenge and be completely effective.

Why fight for years when something can be instituted almost immediately.
Click to expand...

I'm sure that this will actually happen once we get to the stage of policy implementation. I largely agree with what you have posted, but it just doesn't represent my beliefs. It's why I support Warren and Sanders rather than Biden and Buttigieg.
 
Warren and Sanders will scare the populace away from making this a reality. Telling people we are eliminating your health insurance does scare tens of millions of people. It could create a second Trump term.

Getting rid of it like the internet got rid of brick and mortar travel agents or other businesses won't scare people and will work faster.

A really simple law that states any doctor or hospital that accepts Medicare must accept the policy would get it implemented.
 
ImTheCaptain said:
[they actually do] but also that's just as dumb
Click to expand...

who does this?

bernie is pretty much the only dem running who has voted against authorizing military force and increasing military spending; we constantly look the other way on this and basically the other 5/6 of the economy that isn't health care
 
ImTheCaptain said:
[they actually do] but also that's just as dumb
Click to expand...

I mean, how do we fund anything in the United States? We either raise taxes, shuffle funding over from welfare programs, or charge it.

TownieDeac said:
who does this?

bernie is pretty much the only dem running who has voted against authorizing military force and increasing military spending; we constantly look the other way on this and basically the other 5/6 of the economy that isn't health care
Click to expand...

maybe the mythical centrist bloc?
 
RJKarl said:
Warren and Sanders will scare the populace away from making this a reality. Telling people we are eliminating your health insurance does scare tens of millions of people. It could create a second Trump term.

Getting rid of it like the internet got rid of brick and mortar travel agents or other businesses won't scare people and will work faster.

A really simple law that states any doctor or hospital that accepts Medicare must accept the policy would get it implemented.
Click to expand...

Data doesn't support this idea.
 
We won't need to raise taxes. Once fully implemented costs will most likely go down and save most Americans money.
 
Strickland33 said:
I'm sure that this will actually happen once we get to the stage of policy implementation. I largely agree with what you have posted, but it just doesn't represent my beliefs. It's why I support Warren and Sanders rather than Biden and Buttigieg.
Click to expand...

Warren and Sanders are going to be pivotal in writing and passing it no matter what.
 
bernie put it best

“Are you willing to fight for young people drowning in student debt even if you are not? Are you willing to fight to ensure that every American has health care as a human right even if you have good health care? Are you willing to fight for frightened immigrant neighbors even if you are native born?”

my take is these questions matter more than whether the wealth tax starts at 100 or 500 million, or how much MMT we believe in

let's not make americans vote based on electability or the mechanics of authorizing and funding spending bills
 
Strickland33 said:
or tax cuts for the wealthy or the mortgage interest deduction or, basically, any policy that falls under the rubric of corporate welfare
Click to expand...

I seem to recall lots of people asking about those things either before or after the fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top