PELOSI AIDE PRIVATELY TELLS INSURANCE EXECUTIVES NOT TO WORRY ABOUT DEMOCRATS PUSHING “MED FOR ALL"

[ExodusNirvana]

Weren’t you advocating for us to stay in Syria?

I'm against leaving until Syria is actually stabilized and it does'nt look like that is the case

I don't feel like cutting the military budget and leaving Syria are conflicting ideas

 

[rapbeats]

and they dont have to at least not in the next decade. that shyt is dead without one of these candidates laying out how it gets paid for without barely raising taxes

what are you talking about. could yall stop bring up the "without raising taxes". Look do the math. if you no longer pay a super high premium for health insurance. you have more money to pay out in taxes for "medicare for all."

The amount you would pay each month in taxes would not meet nor exceed what you're paying now in premiums.

 

[The Fukin Prophecy]

anyone who runs on cutting the military has my vote. 200 billion a year or so?

Under Bernie Sanders plan, the federal government would spend an average of 2.8 trillion...His plan would actually end up saving us more in the long run though...On its current trajectory, the United States is projected to spend $7.65 trillion annually on health care by 2031...That number would drop to $7.35 trillion if Sanders’s plan were implemented for a net savings of about $2.1 trillion...

Keep in mind I only support this for American citizens and not sure if Sanders factored in others into his plan...

Affordable healthcare IMO is a fundamental right a government is responsible for providing its citizens...

 

[ExodusNirvana]

Under Bernie Sanders plan, the federal government would spend an average of 2.8 trillion...His plan would actually end up saving us more in the long run though...On its current trajectory, the United States is projected to spend $7.65 trillion annually on health care by 2031...That number would drop to $7.35 trillion if Sanders’s plan were implemented for a net savings of about $2.1 trillion...

Keep in mind I only support this for American citizens and not sure if Sanders factored in others into his plan...

Affordable healthcare IMO is a fundamental right a government is responsible for providing its citizens...

Would you agree that there should be an option/window for people to attempt to gain citizenship in this country?

These people would then become taxpayers just like anyone else, be subject to laws and rules of this country just like anyone else, etc.

 

[The Fukin Prophecy]

Would you agree that there should be an option/window for people to attempt to gain citizenship in this country?

These people would then become taxpayers just like anyone else, be subject to laws and rules of this country just like anyone else, etc.

100% agree...

I have repeatedly said I fully support a path to citizenship and that you can't have a real solution to the immigration problem without one...

Giving folk a path to citizenship and making citizenship mandatory for living in the country for more than 5 years is a sensible compromise IMO...

 

[the cac mamba]

what are you talking about. could yall stop bring up the "without raising taxes". Look do the math. if you no longer pay a super high premium for health insurance. you have more money to pay out in taxes for "medicare for all."

The amount you would pay each month in taxes would not meet nor exceed what you're paying now in premiums.

you're incredibly fukking naive if you think its just gonna happen like that

sad that im the bad guy for pointing that out

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

anyone actually read the article?

Cenk didn't. Its like they don't live in a world wheres theres actual republicans.

 

[FAH1223]

Best part here. We are already spending $2.2 trillion on government paying healthcare. While the other $1.3 trillion is the private sector spending.

So yes, you can get to M4All with an employer mandate to raise revenues. And if you’re short, you can deficit spend a couple hundred billion.

TWO OF PRIMUS’S five objections to single payer before the Blue Cross audience related to such alleged fiscal challenges. That argument, though, runs headlong into a surge of new interest among Democrats in Modern Monetary Theory, the idea that policymakers are still constrained by a mindset that was justifiable when the U.S. was on the gold standard, but is no longer defensible. Now that the U.S. issues a currency independent of its gold reserves, the obstacle to government spending is inflation, not the debt or deficit, proponents of MMT say. “This zero-sum mentality has no place in a post-Bretton Woods world,” said economist Stephanie Kelton in reaction to Primus’s argument that spending on Medicare for All would foreclose other priorities. (Post-Bretton refers to the global agreement that the dollar will be the global economy’s reserve currency, ultimately decoupled from gold.)

“The U.S. dollar is no longer tethered to gold, which means the federal government is not constrained in its spending by the need to raise revenue. The federal government cannot run out of dollars. This should be painfully obvious, but the gold-standard mentality continues to grip many lawmakers,” Kelton said.

As long as inflation remains low, the government can continue to authorize additional spending. That’s not so much an argument as it is simply an observation of the post-gold-standard reality that austerity advocates like Peterson have spent billions to distort. “The government can afford any new program it chooses to fund. The limits are in the real economy — if producers can’t keep up with the additional demand, inflation will result,” said Kelton, a former adviser to the Senate Budget Committee when it was chaired by Sen. Bernie Sanders. “The federal government — as the issuer of the U.S. dollar — can create all the money that is needed to guarantee health care for all of its people. It’s the rest of us — who merely use the dollar — who have to worry about costs and where to come up with the money to pay a huge medical bill when our private insurer refuses to cover the cost of care.”

This reality has been recognized by former Federal Reserve Chairs Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, as well. “The United States can pay any debt it has because we can always print money to do that. So, there is zero probability of default,” Greenspan once said.

 

[hayesc0]

and they dont have to at least not in the next decade. that shyt is dead without one of these candidates laying out how it gets paid for without barely raising taxes

Hasn't it been proven to be cheapee than what we currently have? Also the dems are winning the taxing the rich argument imo.

 

[Maschine_Man]

and they dont have to at least not in the next decade. that shyt is dead without one of these candidates laying out how it gets paid for without barely raising taxes

Then the answer is to raise taxes.

The small tax raise that would be required to pay for this is still lower than the average persons insurance payment.

Reducing the military budget can still happen as a separate issue for sure though

 

[Hood Critic]

Click bait title and wildly sensationalized conversation that followed:

Democrats, Primus said, are united around the concept of universal coverage, but see strengthening the Affordable Care Act as the means to that end. He made his presentation to the Blue Cross executives on December 4. “We don’t discuss private meetings, if there was such a meeting,” said a BCBS spokesperson. Primus said that he did not discuss any kind of deal with the insurers. Henry Connelly, a spokesperson for Pelosi, said that the assessment of single payer was not related to any dealmaking with the industry. “We’re not going to barter lower prescription drug costs for inaction in the rest of the health care industry. The presentation was a broad look at the health care environment and some of House Democrats’ legislative priorities over the next two years in a period of GOP control of the Senate and White House,” Connelly said.

 

[the cac mamba]

Hasn't it been proven to be cheapee than what we currently have? Also the dems are winning the taxing the rich argument imo.

no its been speculated in articles. the difference between writing an article and actually doing it is enormous

 

[Reece]

Easy and this is one of the few things I agree with AOC types on...

Instead of pumping billions into defense contractors to kill people, pump it into doctors to heal people...

1/4 of the current military budget will get it done and we will still have the biggest military budget in the world by a wide margin...

They ain’t cutting military spending Not with Russia designing jets so fast we can’t even track them and flexing their influence all over the ME, EE and the Balkans or with China quickly becoming our peers on an economic level. Ain’t happening playboy.

 

[hayesc0]

no its been speculated in articles. the difference between writing an article and actually doing it is enormous

So hasn't it been studies on this?

 

[Donald J Trump]

Under Bernie Sanders plan, the federal government would spend an average of 2.8 trillion...His plan would actually end up saving us more in the long run though...On its current trajectory, the United States is projected to spend $7.65 trillion annually on health care by 2031...That number would drop to $7.35 trillion if Sanders’s plan were implemented for a net savings of about $2.1 trillion...

Keep in mind I only support this for American citizens and not sure if Sanders factored in others into his plan...

Affordable healthcare IMO is a fundamental right a government is responsible for providing its citizens...

7.65
-
7.35
=
.30