As far as I know, M4A (as proposed by people like Bernie Sanders) would not be financed only with tax increases of the rich, but also regular people would see taxes increase. However, for regular people this would be less than what they would save on not paying for premiums and other costs of the current system. Bernie is a lefty. He wants to help regular people and the poor on the expense of the rich. Do you think this senator who has been fighting for M4A for DECADES doesn't know the math?
I think he is so biased that he is likely making assumptions that may well prove to be erroneous. And he reckons without the fact that if you try to push higher taxes on the American people, the pushback will be overwhelming. Look at what happened after the Obama years. Don't you think that is likely to happen again if the Left manages to get something as progressive as this passed?
It is the MSM creating the doubts in order to protect status quo.
There you go again with the agitprop. It's ironic really, considering that nearly the exact opposite allegation is made by Trump and his followers, that the MSM is controlled by communists and what they call "globalists".
People who get healthcare paid by their employee would get higher salaries, because their employee doesn't need to pay for the healthcare. So, even if your taxes go up your net incomes goes up. Even if your expensies went up under M4A (would be very special case) you could feel good because millions of fellow American would have access to healtcare and this would save so many lives. Or is money the only thing that matters to you? Are you that shallow. Suffering off other people does not matter to you?
Wow. You have not been reading what I have written. I would be very happy to see this go through EVEN THOUGH it would cost me a small increase in my healthcare expenses. My salary would go up by roughly $70 per month but because I would be paying the premiums out of pocket (again, assuming this is Medicare as we know it, except that everyone is eligible), that would be about $150 per month after a drug plan was added in, for a net loss of $80/mo. The gain for me would be that I would not be tied to my job for fear of losing my health insurance. But I am not sure how it would balance out for most people. I have the highest tier plan my employer offers. For those opting for cheaper plans, at least at my employer, the loss would be greater.
My worry, as I've said several times now, is how it would be paid for. My guess is that it would not, because the pushback against higher taxes would nix anything like this, so it would either not happen or we would simply tack this onto the deficit. That is not a recipe for a healthy future, economically speaking.
Yes in the US they lie all the time, but there are a few good Apples and Bernie Sanders is one of them. The fact that this is unclear to you tells more about you than Bernie Sanders. Bernie doesn't take corporate money so why would he lie for corporations? Why do corporations and the establishment hate him if he lies for them? What is his lies about?
Lies are not always about shilling for a more powerful entity like a mega-corporation. They can be untruths we tell ourselves because we so much want something to be true. Bernie wants to see the US remade on the Scandinavian model. It's a noble goal, I agree. But having watched how the political pendulum swings in this country for over 60 years now, and knowing that our electoral system favors rural states which are now predominantly Red (meaning, Republican, not Communist), I am convinced it is not going to happen, and trying to force it to happen will result in another four years of Trump, or maybe eight of a Trump clone. Someday, maybe we'll be mature enough to accept higher taxes for something that should exist in every first world country. We're not there yet though.
