• 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

Anyway here's to the only adult in the room! Let's hear it from the big serious man himself:

 
MHBDemon said:
Medicare for All means no premiums or copays for everyone!
Click to expand...

FANTASTIC! I am sure that something like that will actually come about as opposed to say, a compromise that is called "Medicare For All" and that actually resembles Medicare.
 
ABCDeac said:
FANTASTIC! I am sure that something like that will actually come about as opposed to say, a compromise that is called "Medicare For All" and that actually resembles Medicare.
Click to expand...

lol spoken like someone who has never gotten free healthcare before
 
TownieDeac said:
type in bernie sanders middle class tax, and americans for tax reform is like 8 of the top 10 links!
Click to expand...

I skipped that one.

I remembered hearing a sound bite of Bernie mentioning raising taxes and Googled it to make sure I got it right. I didn’t get the number from Grover.

Instead of having a discussion with someone who you likely have few differences with, you just throw out the Norquist line.
 
TownieDeac said:
lol spoken like someone who has never gotten free healthcare before
Click to expand...

Are we advocating TRICARE for All or Medicare for All? Most people with means who are on Medicare have supplemental plans and pay significant sums out of pocket for those benefits. Hell, even a large number of veterans opt to pay into a health insurance system and for obvious reasons.

If you all believe that "Middle Class" (I know we have learned in this thread that there is no such thing as the Middle Class in America, but just humor me) people in America are going to have no option whatsoever to supplement whatever minimum health care the government provides under a M4A platform, and/or that those same people are going to have such an option but will nevertheless overwhelmingly refuse to elect that option despite the means to supplement, then you are fucking crazy.

This is pie in the sky shit. Improve it, by all means. It is not fair. I work with people with crippling health issues and mounting medical bills every day. Navigating the health care industry is awful, and totally unfair for a number of people. Raise taxes. Fine. Do some means testing. Fine. But you are just being intellectually dishonest (or you just aren't very smart) if you think this is achievable as "the next step." It isn't. You shouldn't advocate for it because it makes it seem like practical improvements are half-measures and that makes those "half-measures" fall by the wayside.

The US does not and never has worked for everyone. It works for more people today than it typically has. There was a stretch from the 50s-70s where you could argue it worked for a higher percentage of people, but you might have to exclude every black southerner from that analysis, and you would have to just assume that women who didn't work were June Cleavers and happily attached to the Father who knew best. We have a fundamentally flawed system that, for as long as it lasts, is going to be fundamentally flawed.
 
Tobacco Road said:
Probably not when he is at/near the top of the polls. When is it Sanders' or Warren's time?
Click to expand...

Probably not when they are at/near the top of the polls. I'm just following the 2016 playbook and want to make sure my outrage is property calibrated !
 
bym051d said:
I skipped that one.

I remembered hearing a sound bite of Bernie mentioning raising taxes and Googled it to make sure I got it right. I didn’t get the number from Grover.

Instead of having a discussion with someone who you likely have few differences with, you just throw out the Norquist line.
Click to expand...

I did also write several paragraphs before this and also respond to you
 
ABCDeac said:
Are we advocating TRICARE for All or Medicare for All? Most people with means who are on Medicare have supplemental plans and pay significant sums out of pocket for those benefits. Hell, even a large number of veterans opt to pay into a health insurance system and for obvious reasons.

If you all believe that "Middle Class" (I know we have learned in this thread that there is no such thing as the Middle Class in America, but just humor me) people in America are going to have no option whatsoever to supplement whatever minimum health care the government provides under a M4A platform, and/or that those same people are going to have such an option but will nevertheless overwhelmingly refuse to elect that option despite the means to supplement, then you are fucking crazy.

This is pie in the sky shit. Improve it, by all means. It is not fair. I work with people with crippling health issues and mounting medical bills every day. Navigating the health care industry is awful, and totally unfair for a number of people. Raise taxes. Fine. Do some means testing. Fine. But you are just being intellectually dishonest (or you just aren't very smart) if you think this is achievable as "the next step." It isn't. You shouldn't advocate for it because it makes it seem like practical improvements are half-measures and that makes those "half-measures" fall by the wayside.

The US does not and never has worked for everyone. It works for more people today than it typically has. There was a stretch from the 50s-70s where you could argue it worked for a higher percentage of people, but you might have to exclude every black southerner from that analysis, and you would have to just assume that women who didn't work were June Cleavers and happily attached to the Father who knew best. We have a fundamentally flawed system that, for as long as it lasts, is going to be fundamentally flawed.
Click to expand...

This is precisely the argument I don't understand. Republicans are just going to all of the sudden give in if you argue against what you want and go stepwise? No, you ask for what you want first as a negotiating position and then the compromise is better. If you start from the compromise position, you end up with nothing.
 
So if a moderate has incremental change in his presidency, then he is a sellout.
But if Bernie does, then AOK!!!!!!!!!
 
ABCDeac said:
Totally agree with this, in theory. It would be great to root out corruption in the government and get things back to...

Wait, in practice, there has always been rampant corruption in our government and in the private sector. That was true with a nation of 20 million people, and will always be true in a nation of over 300 million.
Click to expand...

I find this a little strange. Do you not think it is possible change the way things are done, even a little bit, to limit that corruption? Of course it will never be perfect, but I think there's a lot of low hanging fruit out there that could make a big difference. Warren has some ideas here: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/after-trump
 
tiltdeac said:
I find this a little strange. Do you not think it is possible change the way things are done, even a little bit, to limit that corruption? Of course it will never be perfect, but I think there's a lot of low hanging fruit out there that could make a big difference. Warren has some ideas here: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/after-trump
Click to expand...

I would be interested in ChrisL's thoughts on plans like this, too, especially because the depth with which Warren treats her proposals vs. the sloganeering that puts folks on here off about Sanders.
 
Liquid Karma said:
Free?
Click to expand...

RJKarl said:
Does Santa pay for it?

A tax is no different than paying a premium.
Click to expand...

I said it once before but if you want to call premiums taxes (which I think is certainly fine) your overall tax liability will be lowered under the Sanders M4A plan. The argument about whether that could be passed with the 2021 Congress is another story altogether, and a place where I think there's room for the Warren-style incremental progress, getting health/pharma/biomed lobbying out of elections, negotiating drug prices, decouple insurance from employment, etc., etc. But to make your actual platform starting point Medicare For All Who Want It And Make Those Who Don't Want It Pay Thousands Of Dollars And Don't Ensure Every American Is Covered Because We Can Pass This, I think that's not a good sales pitch to Americans and I think you're naive for assuming Republicans will negotiate with you in good faith.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top