Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 99 of 99

Thread: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

  1. #81
    Registered User Woodman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    1,580
    Thanks
    320
    Thanked 530 Times in 382 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    9

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    It's still The Economy Stupid agree or disagree?
    GO BUFFALO!!

  2. #82
    Well, lookie here... YardRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    A hole in your wall.
    Posts
    67,575
    Thanks
    19,363
    Thanked 20,861 Times in 11,666 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    190

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodman View Post
    It's still The Economy Stupid agree or disagree?
    I would disagree a little bit, I think his buffoonery is encroaching on that philosophy.
    YardRat Wall of Fame
    #56 DARRYL TALLEY
    #29 DERRICK BURROUGHS#22 FRED JACKSON #95 KYLE WILLIAMS

  3. Post thanked by:

    Historian (09-16-2019),JATMtheJATM (09-15-2019)

  4. #83
    Registered User DraftBoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    91,247
    Thanks
    3,990
    Thanked 17,157 Times in 9,648 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    234

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodman View Post
    It's still The Economy Stupid agree or disagree?
    Without question. It’s not a universal truth but it’s by far the largest indicator.
    COMING SOON...
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Lecter
    We were both drunk and Hillary did not look that bad at 2 AM, I swear!!!!!!

  5. #84
    Well, lookie here... YardRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    A hole in your wall.
    Posts
    67,575
    Thanks
    19,363
    Thanked 20,861 Times in 11,666 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    190

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Interesting tease leading off Meet the Press this AM...

    Sanders, Biden and Warren pictured as 'front runners'.
    Booker, Beto, Castro and Klobuchar were in the next graphic shown as the next level, trying to 'break through'.
    Kamala Harris, Mayor Pete and Andrew Yang not included at all.

  6. #85
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Woodman View Post
    It's still The Economy Stupid agree or disagree?
    I agree.

    Trump lies about how poorly the economy was doing under President Obama.

    Trump is lying about how great the economy is today.

    Trump lies about all the stupid promises he made about the economy.

    Trump's "economy" will be a huge liability in 2020 and will probably spell his defeat....IF he even ends up on the ballot in 2020.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by YardRat View Post
    Interesting tease leading off Meet the Press this AM...

    Sanders, Biden and Warren pictured as 'front runners'.
    Booker, Beto, Castro and Klobuchar were in the next graphic shown as the next level, trying to 'break through'.
    Kamala Harris, Mayor Pete and Andrew Yang not included at all.
    This is now a two person race. Warren and Biden.

  7. Post thanked by:

    Historian (09-16-2019)

  8. #86
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,696
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 1,332 Times in 743 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    18

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    Well...duh!!! We did not have to have Bernie tell us that "the overall cost of healthcare drops (as a percentage of GDP). This is math 101.

    The issue is HOW do you reduce health care spending as a percentage of GDP?!?!?!

    There are only two main ways to do that. Reduce payments to providers, and/or reduce or restrict services available to individuals.

    Bernie does one (reduce payments to providers) and does the opposite on the other side...MASSIVE increase in services.

    He will not be able to do the first (reduce payments to providers)....what would you say if the government said in order to put into place Medicare-for-all, YOUR income would drop...say by 40%?!?!? And the second part, massive increase in services....means that his plan will never reduce overall health care spending as a percentage of GDP.

    It's simple math. Not even getting into the politics of his plan, which should NOT be called "Medicare-for-all" because it does not resemble Medicare in the most important parts....cost sharing and services covered.

    It plainly is hoping to find Unicorns that **** out rainbows that taste like chocolate.
    I was going to address this line by line but I disagree with just about every premise you set forth here. So let me just ask: why is it that other countries can do it but it's rainbows and unicorns in the United States? It's the same question you ask about gun control. Why not here?
    "The Tao gives birth to the One,
    the One gives birth to the Two,
    the Two gives birth to the Three,
    the Three gives birth to the Ten Thousand Things."
    - Lao Tzu [605-531BC]

  9. Post thanked by:

    Historian (09-16-2019),YardRat (09-15-2019)

  10. #87
    Not quite Best in the World.... ckg927's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    11,534
    Thanks
    5,205
    Thanked 3,714 Times in 2,796 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    32

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucidvizion View Post
    I was going to address this line by line but I disagree with just about every premise you set forth here. So let me just ask: why is it that other countries can do it but it's rainbows and unicorns in the United States? It's the same question you ask about gun control. Why not here?
    Follow. The. Money.

    That's your answer.
    "The powerful have always preyed on the powerless. That is how they became powerful in the first place."

    -Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones/"The Wars To Come"

  11. Post thanked by:

    Lucidvizion (09-15-2019)

  12. #88
    Registered User sukie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9,639
    Thanks
    2,187
    Thanked 3,862 Times in 2,377 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    28

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucidvizion View Post
    I was going to address this line by line but I disagree with just about every premise you set forth here. So let me just ask: why is it that other countries can do it but it's rainbows and unicorns in the United States? It's the same question you ask about gun control. Why not here?
    Other countries don’t perform as many procedures, run as many tests or prescribe the mount of drugs the US does

  13. #89
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,696
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 1,332 Times in 743 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    18

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by sukie View Post
    Other countries don’t perform as many procedures, run as many tests or prescribe the mount of drugs the US does
    Wouldn't it be something if we didn't actually need to?

  14. #90
    Victimizing The Victimizer Downinfloflo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    5,181
    Thanks
    617
    Thanked 3,050 Times in 1,922 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    19

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by sukie View Post
    Other countries don’t perform as many procedures, run as many tests or prescribe the mount of drugs the US does
    The insurance companies board members each have vacation homes across the world they have to pay for.

    More test more drugs equals more profit.

  15. Post thanked by:

    Historian (09-16-2019)

  16. #91
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucidvizion View Post
    I was going to address this line by line but I disagree with just about every premise you set forth here. So let me just ask: why is it that other countries can do it but it's rainbows and unicorns in the United States? It's the same question you ask about gun control. Why not here?
    I expect you to disagree with what I wrote, because you are a Bernie supporter.

    There are many reasons. Other countries started their universal system many decades ago and have used those systems to keep provider expenses down. In many cases just a fraction of what provider rates are in the US. Additionally, all the countries use different systems to achieve their goal. They have a consensus (of sorts...they bitch about their health care system quite a bit, just not nearly as much as whiney Americans). And, most other countries still have co-pays, and limits to what they will cover. The threshold to withstand taxes are much greater than in the US....thank the "Reagan Revolution" for that. 40 years of denigrating and lying about taxation in this country has had a detrimental effect.

    Bernie's plan just does not add up in practice. Actually, what I wrote is undeniably true. Reimbursements rates from private health insurance is two, three and more times MORE than Medicare. Medicaid reimbursement rates are even lower. So, Bernie wants to drastically CUT reimbursement rates, and a MASSIVE increase of what is covered. If he stuck to an actual "MEDICARE"-for all....maintaining the premiums and co-pays and limitations to services covered.....his plan would be somewhat (but not nearly entirely) more feasible. Alas, he does not.


    If you look at it objectively and without emotion....the facts speak for themselves.

    None of this even starts to get into the politics. Mark my words....if the Democrats message during 2020 is "abolish private health insurance" and everyone will be "forced into a government plan"....they will lose. And the effort to achieve universal coverage (different than "single-payer"....that is only ONE method of many that other countries use) will be set back decades!!! Just like Clinton's failed effort in 1993 did.

  17. #92
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Downinfloflo View Post
    The insurance companies board members each have vacation homes across the world they have to pay for.

    More test more drugs equals more profit.
    This is misleading. First, Obamacare requires that a certain percentage of premiums go to actual care...payment to providers. Plans on the exchange and outside large groups it is 80%. Large groups, like from corporations, it's 85%.

    This 15% or 20% of premiums cover ALL expenses....employees, advertising, maintaining buildings for offices, office expenses, executive compensation and profit. This is certainly where much of the savings moving to single payer can be found....but not nearly as much as you think.

    Health Insurance Coverage of the Total Population

    Employer - 49%
    Non-group - 7%
    Medicaid - 21%
    Medicare - 14%
    Other Public - 1%
    Uninsured - 9%
    Administration costs, even if they went down to 3% to 5%, translates to maybe a 1% to 1.5% cost savings. Liz Warren said, quite accurately, that private health insurance companies earned $23 billion in profits".

    Well....that accounts for less than 1% of the $3.5 TRILLION we spend every year on health care.

    The movement sway from private heath insurance, in and of itself, will account for a reductio of overall health care costs of maybe 3% Remember, relatively few people consume most of health care cost. The elderly, already on Medicare, consume the most....and providers are able to do so because private heath insurance reimburses at MUCH higher rates.

    It's ALL ABOUT the reimbursement rates....and individual payments...co-pay, deductibles etc.... And that does not take into consideration the plan to cover dental, eye care....and ESPECIALLY long term care (nursing home).

    Sure, it's fun to blame " insurance companies board members each have vacation homes across the world"....but, that is silly and does not effect the overall cost of health care in this country in the least.

  18. #93
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,696
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 1,332 Times in 743 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    18

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    I expect you to disagree with what I wrote, because you are a Bernie supporter.
    Enough with the labels, I can think for myself. I support ideas, not people.


    Bernie's plan just does not add up in practice. Actually, what I wrote is undeniably true. Reimbursements rates from private health insurance is two, three and more times MORE than Medicare. Medicaid reimbursement rates are even lower.

    And who is currently paying for that? Me and you, right now. Sure, Bernie's plan doesn't add up because his solutions to the ailments of this country are holistic. We don't need a defense budget of world conquest proportions. We can also save by adding a focus in healthcare to keeping healthy people healthy instead of just keeping sick people surviving long enough for their next treatment.


    So, Bernie wants to drastically CUT reimbursement rates, and a MASSIVE increase of what is covered. If he stuck to an actual "MEDICARE"-for all....maintaining the premiums and co-pays and limitations to services covered.....his plan would be somewhat (but not nearly entirely) more feasible. Alas, he does not.
    What increase of what is covered are you talking about? I only know about the "no copay" line, which I am not sure I agree with (because, again, I can think for myself).
    None of this even starts to get into the politics. Mark my words....if the Democrats message during 2020 is "abolish private health insurance" and everyone will be "forced into a government plan"....they will lose. And the effort to achieve universal coverage (different than "single-payer"....that is only ONE method of many that other countries use) will be set back decades!!! Just like Clinton's failed effort in 1993 did.
    "Abolish private health insurance" is the message the right wing is trying to push. Private health insurance will go out of business (or adapt) all by itself when this country finally decides it's not okay for faceless investors to profit from real people's health and sickness.

    I'm an optimist so I see this as an inevitability, but unfortunately a lot of people are going to suffer until we can get our heads out of our own asses.

  19. #94
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucidvizion View Post
    Enough with the labels, I can think for myself. I support ideas, not people.
    Sorry. How about "I expect you to disagree because you support Bernie's Medicare-for-all plan.

    And who is currently paying for that? Me and you, right now. Sure, Bernie's plan doesn't add up because his solutions to the ailments of this country are holistic. We don't need a defense budget of world conquest proportions. We can also save by adding a focus in healthcare to keeping healthy people healthy instead of just keeping sick people surviving long enough for their next treatment.
    What's your point? The fact that reimbursements rates from private health insurance is two, three and more times MORE than Medicare IS the BIGGEST issue concerning cost containment. How do you think hospitals, doctors, technicians, nurses, janitors and all the other people (14% of US total employment) is going swallow HUGE cuts in pay???

    Hospitals will go out of business in droves. Already poor access in rural areas will get exponentially worse. If there is a solution for these very real issues, that are addressed with any of the Bernie inspired MFA plans...I'd love to hear them. When I study the plans...they gloss over it.

    What increase of what is covered are you talking about? I only know about the "no copay" line, which I am not sure I agree with (because, again, I can think for myself).
    Deductibles, and services not covered by Medicare. Medicare has several deductibles. In fact, Medicare is expected to cover only 80% of one's health care....for the services covered. Additionally, Medicare does not cover many of the services Bernie wants to add. Especially long term care....dental...and vision.

    The average senior (I study this stuff very carefully because I'm going on Medicare next year) is expected to spend over $250,000 in health care costs during retirement...WITH MEDICARE. Some more (and quite a bit more if they require long term care than could run $15,000 PER MONTH...with NO Medicare coverage) some less. I am budgeting at least $1,000 a month for health care costs AFTER I get on Medicare. That's $240,000 over 20 years.

    "Abolish private health insurance" is the message the right wing is trying to push. Private health insurance will go out of business (or adapt) all by itself when this country finally decides it's not okay for faceless investors to profit from real people's health and sickness.
    Yes....and "abolish private health insurance" is what most people will perceive is the result (which it IS, under Bernie's and Warren's plans). Bernie has an incredibly short ramp to making private insurance illegal.

    That is a LOSING message.That is why I support...."Medicare who wants it". Expand the existing structure of Obamacare exchanges to included a public option (like it was in the House bill passed in 2009) and give people the choice. Companies will slowly but surely provide a benefit to buy insurance on the marketplace.

    If we are so sure that Medicare for everyone will reduce costs that much (and I believe they will eventually...with adjustments to the reimbursement rates that are higher than traditional Medicare) then that is the logical end result.

    Eventually, it will make sense to just formalize the whole thing under one universal single payer plan.

    I'm an optimist so I see this as an inevitability, but unfortunately a lot of people are going to suffer until we can get our heads out of our own asses.
    No one got poor betting against the average American to get their head out of their asses.

    I was stuck by a tweet I read from Bernie's health care advisor Lori Kearns....a person that has been with him since 2012...

    to be fair, there are a lot of people who can't tell the difference between a premium and a deductible, and this is why arguing we need "choice" in health insurance plans is so useless
    Basically, she is saying that Americans are too stupid to make their own choices in health care...and daddy government has to do it for them.This is a shockingly tin eared message, that would be roundly rejected my a huge majority of Americans...no matter if it's true or not.

    Listen...I'm with you on universal health care, and I firmly believe that either a fully run government model, or very strongly regulated market is the only way forward. It's all a matter of HOW DO WE GET THERE.I have posted this opinion piece from Paul Krugman before....I suggest you read it in full, with an open mind....and you will understand where I am coming from.If one ignores the myriad of very difficult issues surrounding this....they are destined for total failure.

    Trying to reflect other countries systems, that they have had and refined over 50, 60, 70 or more years...in one fell swoop in the US, is begging for failure.
    Last edited by notacon; 09-16-2019 at 01:38 PM.

  20. #95
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,696
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 1,332 Times in 743 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    18

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    Listen...I'm with you on universal health care, and I firmly believe that either a fully run government model, or very strongly regulated market is the only way forward. It's all a matter of HOW DO WE GET THERE.I have posted this opinion piece from Paul Krugman before....I suggest you read it in full, with an open mind....and you will understand where I am coming from.If one ignores the myriad of very difficult issues surrounding this....they are destined for total failure.
    Wrong link?

  21. #96
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Whoops. Sorry about that...


    Don't Make Health Care a Purity Test

  22. Post thanked by:

    Lucidvizion (09-16-2019)

  23. #97
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Oh...BTW...Krugman fails to address the reimbursement problem. Every single MFA plan reduces costs by drastically cutting reimbursement rates as represented by Medicare. In my opinion, it's not a sustainable plan.

    Ask any doctor the difference in payments for same procedure from private insurance and Medicare...or worse yet, Medicaid.

    If we had NO political issues, and everyone acted in good faith (a totally impossible goal)....the best way is a wellness payment....not procedure. Obamacare tried to slowly enact that plan as well.

    Basically, there is a payment to treat a patient overall...no procedure by procedure money grab. Maybe that will be possible in my daughter's lifetime (if that)....its impossible to accomplish in mine...and probably yours.

  24. #98
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,696
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 1,332 Times in 743 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    18

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by notacon View Post
    Whoops. Sorry about that...


    Don't Make Health Care a Purity Test
    I agree with everything stated in the article. I guess the core of where we disagree is what we think Americans will vote for. IMO there has never been a better opportunity (in my lifetime) to have a progressive democratic presidential candidate than we have right now. I think a lot of the swing voters that were intrigued by Trump have learned their lesson and will be ready to make amends.

    I won't be upset if any of the top 7 candidates win the primary but I'm afraid that picking Biden might be like picking Hillary again... a centrist and a re-tread. We saw how well that worked last time. The democrats lost the presidential election during their own primary. If he makes it to the general I hope I am wrong.

  25. Post thanked by:

    notacon (09-16-2019)

  26. #99
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    13,409
    Thanks
    8,437
    Thanked 5,970 Times in 3,645 Posts
    Power to Give Rep
    36

    Re: Democratic Debate #3 Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucidvizion View Post
    I agree with everything stated in the article. I guess the core of where we disagree is what we think Americans will vote for. IMO there has never been a better opportunity (in my lifetime) to have a progressive democratic presidential candidate than we have right now. I think a lot of the swing voters that were intrigued by Trump have learned their lesson and will be ready to make amends.

    I won't be upset if any of the top 7 candidates win the primary but I'm afraid that picking Biden might be like picking Hillary again... a centrist and a re-tread. We saw how well that worked last time. The democrats lost the presidential election during their own primary. If he makes it to the general I hope I am wrong.

    We've had several discussions about the race...and we are closer to agreement than disagree. My favorite is Warren. She is adopting virtually the same message on MFA that Bernie is. I think she will modulate her message if she wins the nomination (something I do not think Bernie is capable of). That does mean she abandons the ambitious MFA plan, but gives herself enough wiggle room so that she avoids the "make all private health insurance illegal" , or "abolish all private health insurance"....whcih EVERY media person will try and have her say so they can blare it in a headline. Same goes with "raising taxes".

    I disagree with your "centrist" message. Hillary won that election by over 3 million votes. It was a "perfect storm" of 77,000 vote difference in three states out of several million cast in WI. MI & PA. Hillary ran on the MOST PROGRESSIVE agenda in recent history. It could be said that her running on such a progressive agenda is what cost her the election in MI, WI & PA.

    In any event, I don't want Biden to win the Dem primary. But, as you know, I will support him wholeheartedly if he does.

    I have come to realize that my stance on the issues is in a small minority. I travel all over the country, and am amazed at just how conservative...or better yet....ANTI-LIBERAL, a huge amount of people (mainly outside big cities) are.

    The most relevant three paragraphs of Krugman's opinion piece in this context was this...

    A Medicare for All plan would in effect say to these people, “We’re going to take away your current plan, but trust us, the replacement will be better. And we’re going to impose a bunch of new taxes to pay for all this, but trust us, it will be less than you and your employer currently pay in premiums.”

    The thing is, both of these claims might well be true! A simple, single-payer system would probably have lower overall costs than a hybrid system that preserves some forms of private coverage.

    But even if optimistic claims about Medicare for All are true, will people believe them? And even if most people do, if a significant minority of voters doesn’t trust the promises of single-payer advocates, that could easily either doom Democrats in the general election or at least make it impossible to get their plan through Congress.
    The left distrusts government just about as much as the right. The "trust us" meme will not be accepted by a majority of Americans.

  27. Post thanked by:

    Lucidvizion (09-16-2019)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •