Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
81,119
Reputation
14,898
Daps
193,208
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
1 shot every time bernie says billionaire
1 shot every time warren says plan
1 shot every time biden says heres the truth or the fact of the matter is
1 shot every time pete says coalition
1 shot every time amy says "red district"
1 shot every time bloomberg...idk
I gotta work tomorrow though :noah:
 

Miles Davis

Prince of Darkness
Joined
Jul 26, 2015
Messages
8,173
Reputation
2,120
Daps
35,657
Reppin
Bebop
1 shot every time bernie says billionaire
1 shot every time warren says plan
1 shot every time biden says heres the truth or the fact of the matter is
1 shot every time pete says coalition
1 shot every time amy says "red district"
1 shot every time bloomberg...idk
Change that to 1 shot every time klob make a lame ass joke. I would say every time her hair shakes but I don’t wanna kill no one.
 

A.R.$

Superstar
Supporter
Joined
Jun 3, 2012
Messages
8,551
Reputation
680
Daps
22,169
Their end goals are the same. The difference is that Warren is being forthright with people and acknowledging the actual structural impediments to getting them passed, so she's crafting plans with those in mind. Bernie is handwaving away those impediments and saying a revolution will melt them away. I'm not even mad at Bernie for that, it's the superior political strategy. Warren is acting like she's already governing whereas Bernie is smartly acting like we're still in campaign season...because we are.
Agreed. I like both Warren and Bernie but I think Liz would be a much better president. However Bernie have proven that he is a much better campaigner. I love the way Liz is campaigning now. She should of been this aggressive from the beginning. I blame her advisors for not letting Liz be Liz.
 

Conan

Superstar
Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
6,227
Reputation
2,307
Daps
19,383
Reppin
Brooklyn
If you're speaking about private industry being more "efficient" than government when it comes to healthcare then you're being disingenuous at best.

Private ownership is all about profit. And fair enough they do that pretty well. In no way is that compatible with the target of making sure all citizens have affordable healthcare.

Someone said they don't trust the government to administer healthcare. Have you seen how the private sector treats people it can't make a buck off of? They'll administer it well for you if you don't lean too much on them.

I was in the UK this last weekend, and in conversations with the bluds there, they were flabbergasted at the idea that they would have to pay at the point of healthcare. And they have plenty of gripes with the NHS, but at the heart of it they've seen what privatization has done to their housing stock, trains, infrastructure... No way they let that happen to healthcare.
 

wire28

Blade said what up
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
60,152
Reputation
13,499
Daps
216,442
Reppin
#ByrdGang #TheColi
1 shot every time bernie says billionaire
1 shot every time warren says plan
1 shot every time biden says heres the truth or the fact of the matter is
1 shot every time pete says coalition
1 shot every time amy says "red district"
1 shot every time bloomberg...idk
Double shot when Biden says “I’m about to run out of time” :wow:
 

King Kreole

natural blondie like goku
Joined
Mar 8, 2014
Messages
16,989
Reputation
4,628
Daps
45,629
let me try to make sense of your terrible argument

canada pays for healthcare for all by taxing the middle class. does america have to do the same thing, with 10 times the population?

and if warren can accomplish that without taxing the middle class, why doesnt canada do that right now?
My god man, no one is advocating abolishing current taxes that fund federal spending on healthcare. The argument is whether or not to RAISE middle-class taxes to pay for this new system :beli:

Right now, America’s total bill for health care is projected to be $52 trillion for the next ten years. That money will come from four places: the federal government, state governments, employers, and individuals who need care. Under my approach to Medicare for All, most of these funding sources will remain the same, too.

  • Existing federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid will help fund Medicare for All.

  • Existing state spending on health insurance will continue in the form of payments to Medicare – but states would be better off because they’d have more long-term predictability, and they’d pay less over time because these costs will grow more slowly than they do today.

  • Existing total private sector employer contributions to health insurance will continue in the form of contributions to Medicare – but employers would be better off because under the design of my plan, they’d pay less than they would have otherwise.
Here’s the main difference: Individual health care spending.

Over the next ten years, individuals will spend $11 trillion on health care in the form of premiums, deductibles, copays, and out-of-pocket costs. Under my Medicare for All plan, that amount will drop from $11 trillion to practically zero.

I asked top experts – Mark Zandi, the Chief Economist of Moody’s Analytics; Betsey Stevenson, the former Chief Economist for the Obama Labor Department; and Simon Johnson – to examine options for how we can make up that $11 trillion difference. They conclude that it can be done largely with new taxes on financial firms, giant corporations, and the top 1% – and making sure the rich stop evading the taxes we already have.

That’s right: We don’t need to raise taxes on the middle class by one penny to finance Medicare for All.

Honestly, you have to read up before you jump into a discussion :upsetfavre:
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
48,344
Reputation
7,341
Daps
153,158
Reppin
CookoutGang
let me try to make sense of your terrible argument

canada pays for healthcare for all by taxing the middle class. does america have to do the same thing, with 10 times the population?

and if warren can accomplish that without taxing the middle class, why doesnt canada do that right now?
Isn't the argument that the middle class are adequately taxes therefore we should get the money from elsewhere?
 
Top