And They're Off! The Democratic Candidates for 2020

[71 dB]

Wrong about the Mercatus study
https://economics21.org/blahous-study-didnt-find-medicare-for-all-lowers-costs-two-trillion

It's a Koch funded study trying hard to make medicare for all look as bad as possible and they need this kind of damage control to do so.

Even if medicare for all costs more at least it covers everyone and prevents bankrupticies. The rich pay more. How rich are you? Are you rich enought to pay more? I doubt it. Regular people pay less. I'm sure you'd pay less too. So why are you against something that would be good to you and MOST people?

[71 dB]

the UMass study is really just a shill piece for Berniecare
https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2018/11/30/depth-analysis-team-umass-amherst-economists-shows-viability-medicare-all

But it assumes that employer provided insurance will have their premiums cut...which means it's not envisaging an actual single payer system.
It also includes a new federal sales tax on almost everything other than food and housing, and a wealth tax.  Good luck on passing that even in a Democratic Party controlled Congress.

If you got those two studies via the Young Turks, then you once again have clear evidence that they are feeding you garbage information.

Why does anyone do "shill pieces" for Berniecare? US healthcare is a mess and needs to be fixed. Bernie has the solution. That's why.

[JBS]

It's a Koch funded study trying hard to make medicare for all look as bad as possible and they need this kind of damage control to do so.

Even if medicare for all costs more at least it covers everyone and prevents bankrupticies. The rich pay more. How rich are you? Are you rich enought to pay more? I doubt it. Regular people pay less. I'm sure you'd pay less too. So why are you against something that would be good to you and MOST people?

I have explained this before, but you seem unable to grasp it.
Medicare for All would leave most people worse off, or at best  no better than they are now, in terms of health care costs and access. Regular people would not in fact pay less.

Please explain to me why I would support such a plan.

BTW, it would do little or nothing to prevent bankruptcies. People get sick, lose their job, can't afford to pay the basics like food, housing, etc, so they end up in debt and eventually in bankruptcy. The amount of their medical bills has nothing to do with it. Which means they would be bankrupt with MfA just like they would be bankrupt now.

[71 dB]

I have explained this before, but you seem unable to grasp it.
Medicare for All would leave most people worse off, or at best  no better than they are now, in terms of health care costs and access. Regular people would not in fact pay less.

Please explain to me why I would support such a plan.

That's a lie. A lie told to protect the profits of insurance companies and Big Pharma. That's what you don't seem to get. Only the richest people would be worse of because they would have to pay their fair share of taxes to finance the system and also they would not benefit of the rigged system as it is today.

Everyone should support medicare for all, because it's much better than the for profit system. Bernie Sanders is not bought by the corporations so he doesn't need to serve their interest. Instead he can serve the regular people. That's why he is high in the polls and has huge grassroot support and movement behind him, the most small donations of any candidate. That's because a lot of people unlike you have discovered the truth of American healthcare (oligarchy really) and what's wrong with it. People don't want to pay $2000-3000 for ambulance for example if it's practically free in other countries. People don't have $16.000 lying around in case they need it for deductibles if it's possible to have a system without such costs. Do YOU have $16.000 lying around? If you have then congratulations! Most Americans don't have.

BTW, it would do little or nothing to prevent bankruptcies. People get sick, lose their job, can't afford to pay the basics like food, housing, etc, so they end up in debt and eventually in bankruptcy. The amount of their medical bills has nothing to do with it. Which means they would be bankrupt with MfA just like they would be bankrupt now.

Of course it wouldn't prevent ALL bankruptcies, but since healthcare bills are the biggest reason for bankruptcies in the US the amount would drop significantly. Not having to pay $16.000 deductibles helps a lot avoiding bankruptcy. Stop believing the corporate lies. Stop being a useful idiot for the richest people, the top 1 %.

[71 dB]

This is a 15 minutes long comprehensive video about what's going on in the US:

The BIGGEST Threat To Medicare for All

https://www.youtube.com/v/_SOTYmWZ4Vg

[SimonNZ]

^The tone of that was indistinguishable from that of Fox, but with red hats exchanged for blue. Cenk's near hysterical yelling was exactly that of Hannity or Carlson (or for that matter Keith Olberman, who I also have no respect for).

Seriously, dude: pick up a book.

[71 dB]

Bernie gets less MSNBC coverage than Klobuchar despite polling 7x higher

[Karl Henning]

Bernie gets less MSNBC coverage than Klobuchar despite polling 7x higher

So complain to MSNBC, since they mean so much to you.

[SimonNZ]

Or blame Sanders' own media strategists for not getting him the headlines.

[JBS]

That's a lie. A lie told to protect the profits of insurance companies and Big Pharma. That's what you don't seem to get. Only the richest people would be worse of because they would have to pay their fair share of taxes to finance the system and also they would not benefit of the rigged system as it is today.

Everyone should support medicare for all, because it's much better than the for profit system. Bernie Sanders is not bought by the corporations so he doesn't need to serve their interest. Instead he can serve the regular people. That's why he is high in the polls and has huge grassroot support and movement behind him, the most small donations of any candidate. That's because a lot of people unlike you have discovered the truth of American healthcare (oligarchy really) and what's wrong with it. People don't want to pay $2000-3000 for ambulance for example if it's practically free in other countries. People don't have $16.000 lying around in case they need it for deductibles if it's possible to have a system without such costs. Do YOU have $16.000 lying around? If you have then congratulations! Most Americans don't have.

Of course it wouldn't prevent ALL bankruptcies, but since healthcare bills are the biggest reason for bankruptcies in the US the amount would drop significantly. Not having to pay $16.000 deductibles helps a lot avoiding bankruptcy. Stop believing the corporate lies. Stop being a useful idiot for the richest people, the top 1 %.

Look, I'll be blunt.
You are the one who mistakes propaganda for truth. You are being lied to.

You seem to have no idea of how the American health system works. How much the rich pay is tangential. How much coverage the average person has right now is important.

Most people in the US have adequate health insurance that at least covers the basics. For those people Medicare for All would at best allow them the same level of care, and would often mean getting worse care. Grok that basic idea before you say anything more. If the Young Turks are telling you anything different, they are not telling you the truth.

The 16,000 dollar deductibles are a direct result of forcing people to get insurance that covers more than they need. (Obamacare) It's a direct result of government intervention. But the 2000 dollar ambulance rides are not a concern for most people. They have insurance that covers it.

The problem is those people who don't have adequate coverage. Medicare  For All will get them covered, but only at the cost of degrading for every one else. So why should everyone else want  Medicare for All?

[André]

Your reasoning makes sense Jeffrey, but it's not useful. Since it's a big topic in the States, I suppose that numbers must exist for « most people », « those people » and « everyone else ». Until they are brought into the discussion it's going to be one's blablabla against someone else's blablabla  .

[Karl Henning]

Julian Castro has dropped out.

[Karl Henning]

Darn that "corporate media" for reporting the facts, even when they're favorable to Bernie...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/02/bernie-sanders-fundraising-fourth-quarter

[JBS]

Your reasoning makes sense Jeffrey, but it's not useful. Since it's a big topic in the States, I suppose that numbers must exist for « most people », « those people » and « everyone else ». Until they are brought into the discussion it's going to be one's blablabla against someone else's blablabla  .

There are roughly 30 million people who don't have insurance in the US versus roughly 100 million who do.  Since Medicare for Seniors is essentially the bare minimum in coverage, and requires supplemental private insurance to reach even that level (Medigap is the usual term), it's fair to presume that Medicare for All would provide the same basic coverage. Hence my statement that MfA would result in most people being no better off than before, and possibly worse off.

There's also the fact that Medicare is a bureaucratic mess that consistently underpays providers, is easily defrauded by shady "providers" and is often hard to deal with if you are a senior who needs something beyond  basic care.

The problem is how to get those 30 million people  insurance. Medicare for All would do so at the cost of degrading coverage for everyone else.

FTR, I am in favor of the public option proposals like Biden's.

[71 dB]

There are roughly 30 million people who don't have insurance in the US versus roughly 100 million who do.  Since Medicare for Seniors is essentially the bare minimum in coverage, and requires supplemental private insurance to reach even that level (Medigap is the usual term), it's fair to presume that Medicare for All would provide the same basic coverage. Hence my statement that MfA would result in most people being no better off than before, and possibly worse off.

There's also the fact that Medicare is a bureaucratic mess that consistently underpays providers, is easily defrauded by shady "providers" and is often hard to deal with if you are a senior who needs something beyond  basic care.

The problem is how to get those 30 million people  insurance. Medicare for All would do so at the cost of degrading coverage for everyone else.

FTR, I am in favor of the public option proposals like Biden's.

You don't need to "assume" anything. You can read what Bernie is actually proposing: https://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-healthcare/

How does Bernie's Medicare For All plan work? 
Bernie's plan calls for a phased roll-out over 4 years, to expand and scale up our current Medicare system to be more comprehensive.  The phased timing will enable a smooth transition, until everyone is covered:

- Increase Access & Choice:  Patients can see the doctors they want, since the "out of network" limitations of a private system will vanish with single payer. 

- Increase Quality: Covers primary and preventive care, mental health care, reproductive care, vision, hearing and dental care, and prescription drugs, as well as long-term services for the disabled and elderly.  Allows doctors to make decisions in the best interest of patients, rather than based on complex private plans engineered to deliver profits.

- Reduce Prescription Drug Costs:  Lowers prices dramatically, by empowering the federal government to negotiate with pharmaceutical corporations.  Some brand-name prescription drugs will have a copay.

- Eliminate Out-Of-Pocket Costs:  No premiums, deductibles or copays for any medical services. 

- Empower People:  Separates health coverage from employment, so everyone will have more flexibility to change employers, or even consider starting their own business, without the risk and fear of losing their health benefits.

Even if medicare for all covered only the same as the typical plans do people have, people would still be better off because of reduced costs and increased choice (no network limitations). However it covers more and care wouldn't be denied to make profit. Why would Bernie fight this hard to bring worse healthcare to Americans? He is not corrupt/bought so he doesn't serve the insurance companies/Big Pharma. He serves the people trying to give them better healthcare that costs less removing the "mafia" in between and making the rich pay their fair share of taxes.

Biden's public option would certainly be an improvement compared to the current system (ObamaCare aka RomneyCare sabotaged by Trump), but not a big improvement as it would leave a few million uninsured and create cherry picking where private ensurers pick healthy customers while leaving the sick ones to the public side. Biden is fine with that, Bernie is not. Biden supports public option because it allows the "mafia" to keep milking people. He is bought by the insurance companies/Big Pharma. Only Bernie seems to be raising a lot of money in the form of small dollar donations from regular people so other candidates need to go down to wine cellars to collect the cheques of millionaires and billionaires. Even Buttigieg used to support medicare for all before he was bought. Corporate media doesn't tell you this, but at least you hear the truth from a Finnish guy.

[JBS]

You don't need to "assume" anything. You can read what Bernie is actually proposing: https://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-healthcare/

How does Bernie's Medicare For All plan work? 
Bernie's plan calls for a phased roll-out over 4 years, to expand and scale up our current Medicare system to be more comprehensive.  The phased timing will enable a smooth transition, until everyone is covered:

- Increase Access & Choice:  Patients can see the doctors they want, since the "out of network" limitations of a private system will vanish with single payer. 

- Increase Quality: Covers primary and preventive care, mental health care, reproductive care, vision, hearing and dental care, and prescription drugs, as well as long-term services for the disabled and elderly.  Allows doctors to make decisions in the best interest of patients, rather than based on complex private plans engineered to deliver profits.

- Reduce Prescription Drug Costs:  Lowers prices dramatically, by empowering the federal government to negotiate with pharmaceutical corporations.  Some brand-name prescription drugs will have a copay.

- Eliminate Out-Of-Pocket Costs:  No premiums, deductibles or copays for any medical services. 

- Empower People:  Separates health coverage from employment, so everyone will have more flexibility to change employers, or even consider starting their own business, without the risk and fear of losing their health benefits.

Even if medicare for all covered only the same as the typical plans do people have, people would still be better off because of reduced costs and increased choice (no network limitations). However it covers more and care wouldn't be denied to make profit. Why would Bernie fight this hard to bring worse healthcare to Americans? He is not corrupt/bought so he doesn't serve the insurance companies/Big Pharma. He serves the people trying to give them better healthcare that costs less removing the "mafia" in between and making the rich pay their fair share of taxes.

Biden's public option would certainly be an improvement compared to the current system (ObamaCare aka RomneyCare sabotaged by Trump), but not a big improvement as it would leave a few million uninsured and create cherry picking where private ensurers pick healthy customers while leaving the sick ones to the public side. Biden is fine with that, Bernie is not. Biden supports public option because it allows the "mafia" to keep milking people. He is bought by the insurance companies/Big Pharma. Only Bernie seems to be raising a lot of money in the form of small dollar donations from regular people so other candidates need to go down to wine cellars to collect the cheques of millionaires and billionaires. Even Buttigieg used to support medicare for all before he was bought. Corporate media doesn't tell you this, but at least you hear the truth from a Finnish guy.

1) Bernie won't write whatever law is eventually passes, nor will the Young Turks. Congress will.
2) Most of that verbiage can be used to describe Medicare right now. The exceptions are prescription drug coverage--I have explained to you before that the only way to solve that is reform of the patent and regulatory process, meaning Berniecare will leave Big Pharma untouched--and out of pocket costs--an idea that won't survive the legislative process.
3) Berniecare won't refuse payment because of profit motive. Berniecare will refuse payment because it will have to operate within the budget limits set by Congress. For the patient, the result will be the same.

FYI, Bernie's proposal for paying for this plan is bogus. He wants a wealth tax, which the Constitution expressly prohibits the federal government from levying, and a federal sales tax. There is no federal sales tax now, so even if Congress were to approve it (not likely), we would need a whole new bureaucracy (or at least a vastly expanded IRS) to implement and enforce, and which costs even more money. Plus sales taxes are regressive taxes. Bernie has a proviso to compensate the truly poor, but everyone else would pay more taxes.

[André]

There are roughly 30 million people who don't have insurance in the US versus roughly 100 million who do.  Since Medicare for Seniors is essentially the bare minimum in coverage, and requires supplemental private insurance to reach even that level (Medigap is the usual term), it's fair to presume that Medicare for All would provide the same basic coverage. Hence my statement that MfA would result in most people being no better off than before, and possibly worse off.

There's also the fact that Medicare is a bureaucratic mess that consistently underpays providers, is easily defrauded by shady "providers" and is often hard to deal with if you are a senior who needs something beyond  basic care.

The problem is how to get those 30 million people  insurance. Medicare for All would do so at the cost of degrading coverage for everyone else.

FTR, I am in favor of the public option proposals like Biden's.

IOW the money that now pays for 100 million people would have to be stretched to cover 130 millions ? To accommodate the extra insurees, coverage would be reduced for the existing 100 million or some sort of premium/deductible increase would be needed, if I understand correctly.

What coverage do the other 200 million Americans currently get?

[JBS]

IOW the money that now pays for 100 million people would have to be stretched to cover 130 millions ? To accommodate the extra insurees, coverage would be reduced for the existing 100 million or some sort of premium/deductible increase would be needed, if I understand correctly.

What coverage do the other 200 million Americans currently get?

Actually taxes would have to be raised on everyone. Bernie does it with a new federal sales tax and a wealth tax, both of which are problematic in and of themselves. The idea of no premiums and no deductibles can be thought of as campaign promises only the credulous think will come to pass.  But the main problem is that MfA will have to offer lower levels of coverage and lower reimbusements to providers (doctors, hospitals, etc), so people will often find themselves with worse health care than they have now.

The other 200 million would be seniors (now covered by Medicaid) and the poor (mostly covered by Medicaid), two government run insurance systems that might be textbook examples of badly managed, chronically underfunded programs.

[71 dB]

Are you on the payroll of Aetna JBS?

This is a serious issue. This is about Americans having healthcare they can afford and you keep repeating corporate lies. Not cool.

[JBS]

Are you on the payroll of Aetna JBS?

This is a serious issue. This is about Americans having healthcare they can afford and you keep repeating corporate lies. Not cool.

I will be very blunt.
You are merely channelling propaganda for some very bad policy ideas. I've pointed out instances where your sources distort and even outright lie, but they seem to sail right past your head.

You are impressed by all the small donors Sanders get. Did you ever look into the rankings for PAC donations? He does pretty well with them, according to something I saw yesterday.

Medicare For All won't do what it promises.  That's reality.