Senate Democrats to Introduce A Socialist 'Public Option'

Medicare has unfunded liabilitis in the tens of billions staring it in the face and VA healthcare is shaky as will.

 

Well if they earn less than about $1,400 a month, they are eligible for Medicaid which makes health care close to free. Except in some Red States of course, the scumbags.....

 

That's nice. Should have no problem giving them up then.

Here's shaky. Take your pick.

(1) financial crash 2008 - Bing

 

Gee, imagine bringing health care to all citizens, now, that's some kind of evil ****.

That's how the right wing brain thinks, jeezus **** you guys are bizarro.

"We all saw...." ?

You didn't see ****. I owe my life to Obama, I couldn't afford $700 for health insurance, but when ACA was introduced, I signed on with heathnet silver plan, $136 per moth, $500 deductible, and $10 copays. the ACA helped millions. It has flaws, but republicans refused to work with democrats to fix them, because they didn't want Obama to have a win. See, if he wins, they think they lose. The don't care about what is good for the nation, they only care about power, and that's it.

Besides, my doctor runs a private clinic. ACA foots the bill, but he has as many private insured clients as he does ACA sponsored insurers.

Not exactly 'government run' in the sense of England and Canada, that you are thinking.

 

WTF are you babbling about?

 

Yeah, but it's a government run institution.

****ing socialism.

Doesn't matter if it's in the constitution, it's still 'socialism'.

If a government sponsored health care is 'socialism', then anything sponsored by the government is socialism.

Why? Because THAT IS HOW YOU ARE DEFINING SOCIALISM.

Although that is not how socialism is actually defined, that is how y'all on the right are defining it, so be it, government sponsored anything is socialism.

Therefore....

You only approve of socialism that helps you, but if it helps someone else, you are against it.

 

Now you're catching on.

Insolvency...hiccup...VA...belch...blah...blah...blah...fart...

DONT LIKE SOCIALIST HEALTHCARE?

GIVE

IT

UP

I realize you got lost and forgot what you were talking about. Hope this clears it up for ya. *thumbs up*

(Those darned insurance companies didn't do too well in '07-08. Shaky, shaky, shaky.)

 

"We all saw how destructive government-run healthcare could be, thanks to obamacare."

But it's not government-run healthcare at all, and this public option wouldn't be that either.

Do yourself a favor and unsubscribe from these goofy emails. Clearly all that fake news delivered to your inbox is only making you angry and less informed.

 

FYI, medicare is funded by the government.

Nor are democrats proposing a 'government run hospital', noting that the Naval hospital is par none.

They are proposing Medicare as an option, if they want it.

 

Wow! try and make sure all the words in you head get typed into your posts.

 

These are government run institutions. Medicare, the Military, etc. "Government" as opposed to 'privately owned'.

If you call government sponsored health care 'socialism', then anything sponsored by the government is socialism.

Fire departments, police departments, the military, a branches of government, are socialism.

Why? Because that his how it is being defined in this OP: In this thread, the ACA was called 'socialism'.

Why? Because it is administered and sponsored by the government? Okay, if that is your definition, IF that is your definition, fine,
I'll accept it, but be consistent.

That means anything endeavor directed by, funded by, administered by, the government, is 'socialism'.

You can't have it both ways. However you want to define socialism, you have to be consistent, you can't be selective.

Apparently you only favor socialism that benefits you, personally.

FYI, the actual definition of socialism is 'means of production and distribution owned and operated by the state'.

Your vet programs, whether they are earned are not, by the true definition of socialism, are socialism.

Actual socialism is not necessary about free stuff.

Republicans made up that idea, to call government programs for the needy, 'socialism', as a scare tactic to get people not to vote for it.

 

Holy ****. I just now realized the OP is sourced. Lmao.

 

Lol. Whatever, Bullseye. No, really. 'Cause I have no clue what you're talking about. Lol.

Thanks for the fiduciary info. Worthless info in regard to my point, but thanks anyway.

 

What percentage of life and livingness exists, but yet is not 'in the enumerated ....." blah blah of the constitution?

You are under this delusion, that if it's not in the constitution, it cannot be allowed to exist.

You really thought that was the intent of the founding fathers?

Gawd help us if that is true.

But, it's not.

 

It's really quite simple. I'll let a master explain:

Socialism. noun

• “I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro. In front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids—and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch—they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do. And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

Anyone who can't see that the XRW uses "socialism" to indicate blacks on welfare, isn't playing with reality.

 

For those of you naysayers concerning obama's government run health care, I suggest you read the link below.

https://www.rpc.senate.gov/policy-papers/obamacare-proves-government-run-health-care-is-a-disaster

 

Is that VA or Medicare?

 

Excuse me? Who funds the Government? Government already has government run hospitals that are not military.
Vets that qualify can be treated at Naval Hospitals.
Is Medicare currently an option?

 

The way VA works for those now out of the military is that first the vet must qualify. Vets that retired with benefits can go to VA for treatment. Vets that did not have enough time to retire with benefits are blocked from VA hospitals.
Medicare for the bulk of citizens kicks in at a ripe old age. The good deal for the patient is the premiums can be deducted from your social security and added benefits paid for by the patient can also be deducted from social security. The bad deal is for the doctor and hospital. If they bill the patient $120, the doctor who must pay all of is bills in full will receive around 60 percent from the Feds. The doctor loses 40 percent. Doctors that dare send you for some exams or treatments risk that they will be paying all of it. They will be told by Medicare that they will not be paid and must not charge the patient. Say you go in for a colonoscopy. IF lucky the bill will be paid by Medicare. Those who think Trump cheated have yet to see real cheating done by Medicare.

 

Roy Blunt is a climate change denying hard right republican, so, I do not trust his essay, and your avatar is 'libhater'.

I cannot take you seriously.

 

True, but there is no national health service, like in England. So, when repubs are using the 'socialism' boogeyman, they often point to England and Canada, but dems are not proposing such a system.
Government is funded by
1. taxes
2. Borrowing ( sales of Treasury Bonds, etc)
3. fees, and fees for services, etc.
4. Wealth transfer from poor to the government via fiat currency initiated inflation -- deficit spending. (conclusion based on the fact that the poor cannot hedge, and the affluent can ).

Note that "who funds funds the government?" and, 'what are the government's revenue sources' are actually distinctly two different questions. Revenue refers to taxation, but if you are asking all the ways the government is funded, there is more than just taxation that funds it.
I'm sure there are other sources but those are off the top of my head.
Why do you ask?

If you are over 65, I believe it is.

 

Why would anyone think that a for profit insurance industry would make the health system cheaper? Insurance companies want to mak a profit right? And they also have financial motivation to not cover the most vulnerable (biggest risk).

 

You should check your myopia. Per the Constitution if it is not in the enumerated list of powers the federal government can't do it. There are few restrictions on what a state or local government can do. The framers weren't concerned about things being done to help people if that is what the people want. They were very concerned that a central government given more power would inevitably lead to centralized tyranny which is magnitudes more difficult for the people to rectify.

 

Genetic fallacy.

 

Tyranny my ass.

The only faction working day and night to exact tyranny are the republicans. they are creating laws which are not created for the needs of the will of the people, but to maintain their grip on power, all of the laws they have put forth in state legislatures have only one goal, to make it easier for them to cling to power and make it harder for democrats to vote.

they are creating laws that if they don't like the outcome of an election, they usurped the power of the state secretary of state, replaced the responsibility over elections with a partisan, and then if only one person accuses the process of fraud, they can set aside the results and install their own electors.

Don't lecture me on Tyranny, the republicans are trying desperately, and to some extent, they are succeeding.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/legislative-assaults-state-courts-2021