intra vires

Glory to Michigan
Joined
Aug 3, 2017
Messages
4,112
Reputation
1,525
Daps
14,636
Reppin
The Catholepistemiad


The entire cost argument is bullshyt and you're better off framing the conversation around people not dying of preventable diseases or going bankrupt because they, or a loved one, decided to live. The right will attack the Democrats regardless of the plan they run on, kneecapping M4All over costs isn't going to make them support a public option.

Speaking of which, one of the prominent arguments for a public option is that it will edge out private plans and serve as a slow transition to single-payer. If that's the case then it will eventually have the same costs as an immediate transition. So, if you can reasonably ask how do we pay for M4All, then it's just as valid to ask how we can pay for a public option in ten years. The difference is a public option would face adverse selection in the form of sucking up high-cost healthcare consumers who private insurers would prefer to avoid covering. From the jump, it'll start out with a disproportionate percentage of the costs but without the installed base to justify the funding. In other words, it seems harder to justify those costs politically than it does to justify the costs of M4All.

So again, the cost argument was bullshyt, is bullshyt, and will always be bullshyt. If you think it won't pass (it won't), then okay but that's not about costs.
 

Jhoon

Spontaneous Mishaps and Hijinks
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
16,518
Reputation
1,495
Daps
37,713


Lol wow

good piece here


Maybe we should actually pay public servants something. Maybe we as a country shouldn’t demonize its public servants. Maybe.

I would prefer an honest servant than an ex ceo.
 
Top