Joe Biden Exploits His Own Son's Death to Protect the Health Insurance Industry

[diamenz]

joe knows exactly what he's doing putting out an ad like this playing on people's emotions in order to get ahead. not only that, but he uses his own dead son to do it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BNS8wJerbp0

[PickernRoller]

You've seen what his boi been doing in Ukraine? :roll: :roll:

Biden as dirty as it comes. No surprises here. That is a minor brush on his "moral" character.

[ScalsFan21]

Get rid of the health insurance industry. :confusedshrug:

[MaxFly]

Lol, this is the saddest bit of spin and faux outrage I've seen in awhile. Bernie Bros seem extra sensitive of late. Say what you want about Joe Biden, but that's a guy who has an intimate understanding of tragedy and loss. It looks like he's making the argument that he and Obama worked to put a law and safeguards in place to get more people insurance and to prevent people from losing their insurance, and that he knows, intimately, the importance of health insurance and access to healthcare. Sounds like he doesn't want Republicans tearing down the ACA and doesn't want Democrats blowing it up, but instead wants to build upon it... and is using his personal experiences to explain why it's an important issue for him.

I'd be put off by the invocation of his son's death if it weren't for the fact that it's actually a pretty relevant point... prior to the ACA, his son could have been dropped from his health insurance coverage when he got sick for a number of reasons. It was an increasing salient issue (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-jun-17-fi-rescind17-story.html) prior to the passing of the ACA, and one of the things even Republicans wanted to continue to prevent in spite of their attempts to get rid of the ACA.

Chris Coons (D-DE) addressed Biden's hesitance to talk about his family a few months ago.

[Nanners]

Using your dead son to defend our profiteering, corrupt, immoral and exploitative healthcare system is beyond disgusting

[Cleverness]

It was president... my boss... who helped create a giant profit boon to the US Dept of Health Insurance, and we need to expand it further. My friends just need a few more regulations passed and a few more trillion dollars and I'll fix our system.

The Bernie Bros "Medicare for All" speeches are way more convincing

[qrich]

Disgusting...but go figure Max will jump to the defense of creepy Joe

Had this been Trump, he'd be going all in.

[MaxFly]

Disgusting...but go figure Max will jump to the defense of creepy Joe

Had this been Trump, he'd be going all in.

Lol, do you even know what you're arguing or where you stand on the issue? Sounds like you want Democrats to dismantle the current healthcare system and move to wholly government run health insurance in the next few years. You guys are so inconsistent.

[Nanners]

Lol, do you even know what you're arguing or where you stand on the issue? Sounds like you want Democrats to dismantle the current healthcare system and move to wholly government run health insurance in the next few years. You guys are so inconsistent.

yeah its so "inconsistent" to want so-called liberals to replace their profiteering, corrupt, immoral and exploitative healthcare system by expanding a cheap and efficient government run system that already exists.

who cares if literally every other developed nation on the planet has a socialized govt run healthcare system? anyone who thinks that the american people should have what literally every other developed nation has is an unrealistic fairy duster.

[qrich]

Lol, do you even know what you're arguing or where you stand on the issue? Sounds like you want Democrats to dismantle the current healthcare system and move to wholly government run health insurance in the next few years. You guys are so inconsistent.

Please tell me what I'm arguing?

As all I'm doing is pointing out you stanning one side.

[SomeBlackDude]

Using your dead son to defend our profiteering, corrupt, immoral and exploitative healthcare system is beyond disgusting

now that pocahontas aka 'i have a plan for that' has overtaken feel the bern in the primary polls, do you think che bernvara would accept a position as her vp?

if not, maybe something further down the trough- like first comrade of health care?

:confusedshrug:


Had this been Trump, he'd be going all in.

the emperor's personal assistant, who just abruptly resigned (or was fired), is on the record that our emperor refuses to be seen in pictures with his daughter tiffany because she is overweight (https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/30/trumps-personal-assistant-fired-ivanka-tiffany-1479226).

mind you, this is a man that is litrally obese. and has heart disease thanks to his poor fast food and diet coke diet.

maga.

[diamenz]

no worries folks. status quo joe is and has been on his way out of the race ever since he jumped in. his decline has been even more steady than insidehoops' over the years.

it's gonna be a1 entertainment watching the media meltdown over joe's downfall, or if he happens to somehow get the nomination - his uber epic loss to a reality tv show con man. these little bits like the video in the op or his constant gaffes r only a taste of what's to come.

[Hey Yo]

no worries folks. status quo joe is and has been on his way out of the race ever since he jumped in. his decline has been even more steady than insidehoops' over the years.

it's gonna be a1 entertainment watching the media meltdown over joe's downfall, or if he happens to somehow get the nomination - his uber epic loss to a reality tv show con man. these little bits like the video in the op or his constant gaffes r only a taste of what's to come.
Dumbfvck thought he was in Vermont when he was actually in New Hampshire.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/51016/watch-biden-new-hampshire-thinks-hes-vermont-ryan-saavedra

The Demo-comies are doomed.

[MaxFly]

The Bernie Bros "Medicare for All" speeches are way more convincing

You think the "let's get rid of private insurance completely and right away" argument is more convincing? :oldlol:

[MaxFly]

Please tell me what I'm arguing?

As all I'm doing is pointing out you stanning one side.

Just to frame this properly... Joe Biden, here, is being accused of joining in with Republicans to protect the health insurance industry because he doesn't want to completely dismantle the current system and offer only government run insurance. You disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?

[diamenz]

You think the "let's get rid of private insurance completely and right away" argument is more convincing? :oldlol:

u've had plenty of back & forths with cleverness on this forum - surely u know he leans right on most if not all economic issues. he was clowning when he said that, breh.


Just to frame this properly... Joe Biden, here, is being accused of joining in with Republicans and democrats to protect the health insurance industry because he doesn't want to completely dismantle the current system and offer only government run insurance. You disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?


fixed that for you.

[qrich]

Just to frame this properly... Joe Biden, here, is being accused of joining in with Republicans to protect the health insurance industry because he doesn't want to completely dismantle the current system and offer only government run insurance. You disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?


http://abcmouse.com

Check that out. Might help your comprehension skills.

[SomeBlackDude]

You think the "let's get rid of private insurance completely and right away" argument is more convincing? :oldlol:


kamala harris was surging in the polls following the first debate. then she released her medicare for all plan, which she explained would take 10 years to actually phase in (https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-health-care-democrats-perplexed-by-her-10-year-push). her realistic approach harpooned her momentum.

bernie bros and maga have one key similarity- they like to have complex policies turned into easy to digest sound bites with as little actual detail as possible. how will you pay for a $60 billion border-spanning wall? mexico will pay for it. how will you dismantle our massive healthcare infrastructure and replace it with a $4 trillion per year government run initiative (https://reason.com/2019/07/17/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-cost-40-trillion-obamacare-single-payer/) (obamacare has a $685 billion per year price tag)? everything will be free, rich people will pay for it.

these are not detail (or reality) oriented people.

[Norcaliblunt]

Wait a minute. The same people who thought Hillary was gonna win are now stanning Biden. Lmao. We

[MaxFly]

now that pocahontas aka 'i have a plan for that' has overtaken feel the bern in the primary polls, do you think che bernvara would accept a position as her vp?

if not, maybe something further down the trough- like first comrade of health care?


The way some Bernie Bros tell it, Warren is a plant pushed by the DNC to split the progressive base of the Democratic party and deny Bernie the nomination he rightfully deserves. Some of them hate her more than they hate Biden. And I don't use hate lightly. :confusedshrug:


the emperor's personal assistant, who just abruptly resigned (or was fired), is on the record that our emperor refuses to be seen in pictures with his daughter tiffany because she is overweight (https://www.politico.com/story/2019/08/30/trumps-personal-assistant-fired-ivanka-tiffany-1479226).

Hmmm....

Madeleine Westerhout, who left her White House job suddenly on Thursday as President Trump’s personal assistant, was fired after bragging to reporters that she had a better relationship with Trump than his own daughters, Ivanka and Tiffany Trump, and that the president did not like being in pictures with Tiffany because he perceived her as overweight.

Westerhout also jokingly told the journalists that Trump couldn’t pick Tiffany out of a crowd, said one of the people. “She had a couple drinks and in an uncharacteristically unguarded moment, she opened up to the reporters,” the person said.


Chick is delusional, my man. Look, she's spot on about Tiffany; Trump probably couldn't care less about her. But there's no way Trump pines for Westerhout the way he pines for Ivanka. The only thing Trump loves more than Ivanka is himself. Oh, and his money. Himself, his money, and Ivanka... in that order.

Hmmm.... add in his standing and reputation... he cares about that more than her too... Ok, so new list: himself, his money, his standing, Ivanka. There may be one more thing in there before her, but she's definitely top 5... definitely top 5.

[MaxFly]

http://abcmouse.com

Check that out. Might help your comprehension skills.

You didn't answer the question. Do you disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?

[qrich]

You didn't answer the question. Do you disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?


As soon as you tell me what I'm arguing buddy, as that was your claim when I brought up that you slurp on anything with a D next to it.

Don't expect you to though, as you deflected, yet again.

[MaxFly]

yeah its so "inconsistent" to want so-called liberals to replace their profiteering, corrupt, immoral and exploitative healthcare system by expanding a cheap and efficient government run system that already exists.

who cares if literally every other developed nation on the planet has a socialized govt run healthcare system? anyone who thinks that the american people should have what literally every other developed nation has is an unrealistic fairy duster.

Qrich is a Trump supporter. With that bit of context, do you now better understand my response to him?

[qrich]

Qrich is a Trump supporter. With that bit of context, do you now better understand my response to him?

Spewing lies, no surprise.

It's okay buddy, if I supported someone that implemented racist policies and used the death of their child to get pity, I'd do the same.

[MaxFly]

As soon as you tell me what I'm arguing buddy, as that was your claim when I brought up that you slurp on anything with a D next to it.


I didn't tell you where you stood or what you are arguing. I asked you a question.


Lol, do you even know what you're arguing or where you stand on the issue?

That was a question... one that you don't seem to want to answer. So let me ask again: "Do you disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?" No need to deflect or equivocate.

[MaxFly]

Spewing lies, no surprise.

It's okay buddy, if I supported someone that implemented racist policies and used the death of their child to get pity, I'd do the same.

So you're not a Trump supporter?

Deflection in 3.....2.....1

[qrich]

I tell you where you stood or what you are arguing. I asked you a question.



That was a question... one that you don't seem to want to answer. So let me ask again: "Do you disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?" No need to deflect or equivocate.

All I did was call Biden disgusting for using his kid, and call you out for being an ignorant stan.

It's cute really. ABCMouse has some great deals going on, it'll help your comprehension!

:sleeping


So you're not a Trump supporter?

Deflection in 3.....2.....1

Already been answered, again, ABCMouse.

Glad to see you finally admitting to supporting a racist :applause:

[MaxFly]

kamala harris was surging in the polls following the first debate. then she released her medicare for all plan, which she explained would take 10 years to actually phase in (https://www.thedailybeast.com/kamala-harris-health-care-democrats-perplexed-by-her-10-year-push). her realistic approach harpooned her momentum.


Didn't help that she acknowledged that her stance on Bussing was practically the same as Biden's after trying to hit him hard on Bussing during that first debate. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy...


bernie bros and maga have one key similarity- they like to have complex policies turned into easy to digest sound bites with as little actual detail as possible. how will you pay for a $60 billion border-spanning wall? mexico will pay for it. how will you dismantle our massive healthcare infrastructure and replace it with a $4 trillion per year government run initiative (https://reason.com/2019/07/17/bernie-sanders-medicare-for-all-cost-40-trillion-obamacare-single-payer/) (obamacare has a $685 billion per year price tag)? everything will be free, rich people will pay for it.

these are not detail (or reality) oriented people.

They've finally gotten around to acknowledging that taxes will go up on not just the rich, but everyone in order to offset insurance premiums. Still waiting for them to tackle how they're going to deal with the money lost from employer contributions to employee health insurance plans after already raising taxes on corporations to pay for other things. No... not particularly detail oriented people at all.

[MaxFly]

All I did was call Biden disgusting for using his kid, and call you out for being an ignorant stan.


Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance?

[qrich]

Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance?

What is the relevance of him being disgusting for using his son for attention and you slurping him up like when he said poor kids are as talented as white kids to your question?

[diamenz]

Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance?

i'm curious - do u support joe biden, along with his cronies like schumer, pelosi and the criminal clintons? do u support their corruption of money & power?

[SomeBlackDude]

Didn't help that she acknowledged that her stance on Bussing was practically the same as Biden's after trying to hit him hard on Bussing during that first debate. Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy...

true. she had other issues, but she was the first of the 'medicare for all' band wagoners to finally admit that implementing something like that would take at least a decade to even begin pushing through in reality.




They've finally gotten around to acknowledging that taxes will go up on not just the rich, but everyone in order to offset insurance premiums.

took bern guevara how many decades of ranting to FINALLY ADMIT taxes would have to go up for everyone (https://www.politico.com/video/2019/06/27/bernie-sanders-taxes-2020-debate-068403) to fund his agenda? There is no such thing as "free" in this world. him claiming everything will be free and paid for by a relative handful of millionyears and billionyears is no different than maga convincing a whole mess of rubes that mexico was going to buy them a wall.

bern needs to hold a town hall or rally where he sits down the bros and gets real with them just once.

"listen bros, i know i've been telling you everything will be free and paid for by jeff bezos. but i've been crunching some numbers and medicare for all will cost $4 trillion per year and take at least a decade to even implement. a 70% top tax rate on millionyears and billionyears would generate about $700 billion (https://beta.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/01/05/ocasio-cortez-wants-higher-taxes-very-rich-americans-heres-how-much-money-could-that-raise/?noredirect=on). that leaves about $3.4 trillion i'd have to come up with every year, just to cover healthcare. nevermind i have a 'free' college plan too. so... run your pockets, bros. run your pockets."



No... not particularly detail oriented people at all.

as long as mexico is footing the bill for everything, it's all good.

:applause:

[Nanners]

now that pocahontas aka 'i have a plan for that' has overtaken feel the bern in the primary polls, do you think che bernvara would accept a position as her vp?

if not, maybe something further down the trough- like first comrade of health care?

:confusedshrug:


Elizabeth Dolezal should enjoy her polls while they last... she is going to wind up in the same dumpster that Tulsi threw Kamala Harris into.

[bladefd]

You didn't answer the question. Do you disagree with Biden? Are you stanning for a government run "Medicare for All" only system?

Let me answer it on his behalf. Richieboy and most Republicans want medicare/medicaid/ACA abolished and insurance 100% privatized. They don't give a sh!t about anyone except the rich, even if they are poor themselves. Makes no sense if you ask me. Their only goal is to divide the Democrat party so their puppets from top 0.1% can advance to overrun the country like they have last 40yrs.

Having said that, I do believe Biden has no business running for President or anything for that matter. If I didn't know the guy and I just saw the debate, I would estimate his age to be 80 (in comparison, I would estimate Bernie to be late-60s, Warren early-60s, Pete mid-30s, Trump mid-70s). He does not belong up there. Yes, he would probably win the presidency but so would couple other candidates like Warren, Bernie and Mayor Pete.

[qrich]

Let me answer it on his behalf. Richieboy and most Republicans want medicare/medicaid/ACA abolished and insurance 100% privatized. They don't give a sh!t about anyone except the rich, even if they are poor themselves. Makes no sense if you ask me.

https://media.giphy.com/media/3oz8xLd9DJq2l2VFtu/giphy.gif


Their only goal is to divide the Democrat party so their puppets from top 0.1% can advance to overrun the country like they have last 40yrs.

https://media.giphy.com/media/l0HlQ6FqiqyCQIsAU/giphy.gif


Having said that, I do believe Biden has no business running for President or anything for that matter. If I didn't know the guy and I just saw the debate, I would estimate his age to be 80 (in comparison, I would estimate Bernie to be late-60s, Warren early-60s, Pete mid-30s, Trump mid-70s). He does not belong up there. Yes, he would probably win the presidency but so would couple other candidates like Warren, Bernie and Mayor Pete.


:roll:

[Hawker]

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_082619/

This monmouth poll is pretty informative.


On the issue of health care, 58% of party voters say it is very important to them that the Democrats nominate someone who supports “Medicare for All.” Another 23% say it is somewhat important, 10% say it is not important, and 9% are unsure. However, it is not clear that Medicare for All means the same thing to all voters. When asked specifically about what type of health insurance system they prefer, 53% of Democratic voters say they want a system that offers an opt in to Medicare while retaining the private insurance market. Just 22% say they want to move to a system where Medicare for All replaces private insurance. Another 7% prefer to keep insurance private for people under 65 but regulate the costs and 11% want to leave the system basically as it is now.

I was always suspect of Nanners and Scalsfan when they post articles saying, "the majority of americans support medicare for all" when americans are actually confused at what that actually means.

To bernie supporters, that means getting rid of private insurance altogether whereas other democrats just want a public option. The public option is more popular amongst democrats at the moment which means there's no way single payer has the support of all Americans.

And all the other industrial nations have a private health insurance option. You still need private health insurance if you have a public option.

[Hawker]

Let me answer it on his behalf. Richieboy and most Republicans want medicare/medicaid/ACA abolished and insurance 100% privatized. They don't give a sh!t about anyone except the rich, even if they are poor themselves. Makes no sense if you ask me. Their only goal is to divide the Democrat party so their puppets from top 0.1% can advance to overrun the country like they have last 40yrs.

Having said that, I do believe Biden has no business running for President or anything for that matter. If I didn't know the guy and I just saw the debate, I would estimate his age to be 80 (in comparison, I would estimate Bernie to be late-60s, Warren early-60s, Pete mid-30s, Trump mid-70s). He does not belong up there. Yes, he would probably win the presidency but so would couple other candidates like Warren, Bernie and Mayor Pete.

It's certainly fun pouring gas on the fire but democrats are doing this without any help really.

The Bernie chants and booing back in 2016 were hilarious. Hillary and her baby boomer democrat friends created these millenials and now they're stuck with them.

[Nanners]

I was always suspect of Nanners and Scalsfan when they post articles saying, "the majority of americans support medicare for all" when americans are actually confused at what that actually means.

The main reason that some americans are confused about what medicare for all means is because of relentless propaganda from the private insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies, the mainstream media, and useful idiots such as yourself.

Bernie has never said that he wants to abolish private insurance, and neither have I... so you are just projecting here. I am guessing that almost nobody is going to be interested in paying hundreds or thousands of dollars a month for private healthcare when they can get public for free, and no employer is going to pay for an employee health plan when they dont need to... but if you really want to continue to buy insurance then more power to you.

Anyway, once medicare for all is passed the private insurance companies will basically be losing 100% of their customers overnight... collapse is inevitable for them.

[Hawker]

The main reason that some americans are confused about what medicare for all means is because of relentless propaganda from the private insurance industry, pharmaceutical companies, the mainstream media, and useful idiots such as yourself. question that the vast majority of americans

Bernie has never once said that he wants to abolish private insurance, and neither have I... so you are just projecting here. Barely anybody is going to be interested in paying hundreds or thousands of dollars a month for healthcare when they can get it for free, and no employer is going to pay for an employee health plan when they dont need to. Anyway, once medicare for all is passed the private insurance companies will basically be losing 100% of their customers overnight.. the insurance industry will collapse.

So you don't want to abolish it - just create a plan that accomplishes in abolishing it. How come private health insurance companies still exist where they have this btw? I have private health insurance here in Aus/NZ because I don't want to wait a year for surgery. I guarantee you there will be a lot of people buying private health insurance.

Sounds like you want a public option with the option for private health insurance.

[SomeBlackDude]

Bernie has never said that he wants to abolish private insurance

:biggums:

Sanders: 'You're damn right' health insurance companies should be eliminated (https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/436033-sanders-youre-damn-right-health-insurance-companies-should-be-eliminated)


I am guessing that almost nobody is going to be interested in paying hundreds or thousands of dollars a month for private healthcare when they can get public for free


there is no such thing as free in this life.

comrade bern himself has pegged his plan to cost $4 trillion per year.

as i pointed out earlier, a 70% top marginal tax rate on millionyears and billionyears would generate about $700 billion annually.

that leaves $3.3 trillion that needs to be raised every single year.

guess where that's coming from.

everyone will have a 70% tax rate.

good luck selling that to the 'murrican public.

stick with the 'everything will be free' talking point.

:yaohappy:

[Nanners]

So you don't want to abolish it - just create a plan that accomplishes in abolishing it. How come private health insurance companies still exist where they have this btw? I have private health insurance here in Aus/NZ because I don't want to wait a year for surgery. I guarantee you there will be a lot of people buying private health insurance.

Sounds like you want a public option with the option for private health insurance.

If private insurance disappears, it will be because it cannot compete with medicare... I thought thats how your beloved free market is supposed to work?

I dont think you understand why I think medicare for all is so important. Its not about replacing all of the private plans with a public ones, its about getting healthcare to the 30 MILLION americans who are currently uninsured, and providing affordable care to the TENS OF MILLIONS more who are underinsured and unable to afford their co-pays and medicine.

Currently 1/4th of american diabetics are rationing insulin because they cant afford refills... insulin, a one hundred year old drug that costs $20-30 a vial in most of Europe is $300 (and climbing) in the USA, and your fellow americans are dying because of this. This is why we need medicare for all.

Medical bills are the #1 cause of bankruptcy in the USA, approx half a million families fall victim to this every year. Many of these people had insurance, or they had it until they their medical ailment forced them to stop working and therefore lose their insurance. Its preposterous that people are going bankrupt just because they had the misfortune of getting cancer or whatever. This is why we need medicare for all.

This isnt about you. People like you that have money will continue to be just fine, of course there will be private insurance for you if you really want to buy it. This is about helping the enormous chunk of americans who are getting completely ****ed by our corrupt and broken system.

[Nanners]

:biggums:

Sanders: 'You're damn right' health insurance companies should be eliminated (https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/436033-sanders-youre-damn-right-health-insurance-companies-should-be-eliminated)


Bernies healthcare bill is publicly available to read, show me the part that abolishes private insurance


bbbbut we cant afford pay for a healthcare system that would ultimately cost less than our current one

Literally every single developed nation on the planet has a socialized healthcare system... except the wealthiest nation on the planet which "cant afford" to switch to a system that would be cheaper than their current one.

[diamenz]

what i wanna know is who all of the supposed moderate democrats on this forum - at least two in this thread support if they're not in it for sanders, warren or harris.

who u be about, dawgs?

[SomeBlackDude]

Literally every single developed nation on the planet has a socialized healthcare system... except the wealthiest nation on the planet which "cant afford" to switch to a system that would be cheaper than their current one.

look, if el comandante bern sits 'murricans down and tells them the truth- says "hey, you can live in a socialist paradise like sweden or denmark but you'd have to pay a 60%+ tax rate and wait a decade for it to be implemented" and 'murrica is like 'cool', so be it.

but by claiming everything will be 'free'... that's no different than maga convincing ignorant rubes mexico will buy them a wall.

it's a flat out lie.

everyone's taxes, not just the millionyears and billionyears would have to be increased exponentially in order to fund the socialist agenda.

be straight with the public, tell them the cost. tell them how bigly their taxes will increase. and if they still think it's a great idea, then hopefully they'll vote for you and people who think like you to the senate/house so your agenda will be passed.

otherwise, it's just the flipside of the maga empty fantasy coin.

and who's gonna pay for it?!

:confusedshrug:

[qrich]

So you don't want to abolish it - just create a plan that accomplishes in abolishing it. How come private health insurance companies still exist where they have this btw? I have private health insurance here in Aus/NZ because I don't want to wait a year for surgery. I guarantee you there will be a lot of people buying private health insurance.

Sounds like you want a public option with the option for private health insurance.

And then you will have all these leftists cry and say that's not fair.....leading us back to square one.

[Nanners]

"but how you are gonna afford to pay for something thats cheaper than the thing its replacing?"

I dunno, why dont we go ask France, Japan, Germany, South Korea, the UK, Canada or literally any other developed country how they pulled it off?

Anyway, the whole foundation of your tax narrative rests on a false assumption. Ever heard of the deficit? We pay for healthcare for the poor the same way Trump paid for his $1.5 trillion tax cut to the rich, we pay the same way we paid for $6+ trillion in middle eastern wars, we pay the american way... toss that shit on the credit card!

[SomeBlackDude]

Anyway, the whole foundation of your tax narrative rests on a false assumption. Ever heard of the deficit? We pay for healthcare for the poor the same way Trump paid for his $1.5 trillion tax cut to the rich, we pay the same way we paid for $6+ trillion in middle eastern wars, we pay the american way... toss that shit on the credit card!

smh :facepalm

maga has added $2 trillion to the national debt in 2 1/2 years, bringing us to the brink of unsustainability.

but yeah, let's add a cool $4 trillion every year on the ole credit card (and that's just for 'free' healthcare) with absolutely no plan to pay for it.

this is exactly what i'm talking about- just different sides of the same rube coin. it's either mexico is paying or everything will be 'free'.

meanwhile, in reality, it's actually the public being saddled with outrageous debt.

absolute frauds.

and suckers eating it all up.

[Nanners]

The US currently spends $3.5 trillion per year on healthcare, Bernies plan will replace this and cost between $3-4 trillion per year.

"bbbut how will we pay for it"

[Norcaliblunt]

SomeBlackDude you do realize if you and your kind keep behaving this way Trump is gonna be reelected?

[SomeBlackDude]

SomeBlackDude you do realize if you and your kind keep behaving this way Trump is gonna be reelected?

fool me once situation.

would mean another term of absolutely none of his nonsense agenda being accomplished in reality.

but maybe a second term will finally see that check from mexico get delivered?

:confusedshrug:

[Norcaliblunt]

fool me once situation.

would mean another term of absolutely none of his nonsense agenda being accomplished in reality.

but maybe a second term will finally see that check from mexico get delivered?

:confusedshrug:


So you rather see Trump in office for a lame duck term then Bernie as prez. Okay gotcha.

[SomeBlackDude]

So you rather see Trump in office for a lame duck term then Bernie as prez. Okay gotcha.

bernie has no friends in congress. presidents aren't wizards who make things magically happen. you need allies in the house and senate to get things done. and absolutely no one who wants a future in politics is putting their name on a 60-70% tax rate for the middle class.

bernie would be a crippled duck.

so it's either people come back down to earth, get more realistic... or be prepared for more nothing and broken promises.

[MaxFly]

What is the relevance of him being disgusting for using his son for attention and you slurping him up like when he said poor kids are as talented as white kids to your question?

I think it's pretty clear Biden has dealt with some pretty serious tragedies in his life and referenced them to explain why this health care debate is personally important to him and why he doesn't want to completely gut the current system.

So now that I've answered your question, answer mine. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? It's a simply policy question that, for some reason, you've been dodging.

[MaxFly]

Bernies healthcare bill is publicly available to read, show me the part that abolishes private insurance



If private insurance disappears, it will be because it cannot compete with medicare... I thought thats how your beloved free market is supposed to work?


Sanders' bill bans any private health coverage that duplicates the coverage offered by the government. That is to say, private insurance companies would not be able to offer plans that cover individuals for anything the government's public option also covers. Competition isn't allowed. This would, in effect, eliminate private health insurance in the United States with the exception of companies that offer supplemental plans for things the government will not cover. His plan doesn't directly abolish private insurance, but in effect, it does just that, and Sanders has called for eliminating private health insurance companies a few times? He did so during the debate and again here...


Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president in 2020, late Tuesday reiterated his call for the elimination of private health insurance companies and moving to a single-payer, "Medicare for all" system of health care.

"You're damn right," Sanders wrote in a tweet in response to a Republican National Committee (RNC) Research tweet pointing out that he called for eliminating private health insurance during an interview earlier in the day.

In that MSNBC interview, Sanders said the "current system is incredibly dysfunctional and wasteful" and said universal health care can't be achieved "unless you get rid of the insurance companies."

"You are not going to be able, in the long run, to have cost-effective, universal health care unless you change the system, unless you get rid of the insurance companies, unless you stand up to the greed of the drug companies and lower prescription drug costs," he said during an appearance on MSNBC's "All In With Chris Hayes."

"That’s the only way that you can provide quality care to all people," he said.

Why does he keep saying that he wants to eliminate private health insurance if he doesn't want to eliminate private health insurance?

[MaxFly]

i'm curious - do u support joe biden, along with his cronies like schumer, pelosi and the criminal clintons? do u support their corruption of money & power?

And Obama, right... Warren too. In fact, almost all the Democrats who have taken campaign cash from the DNC, DCCC or from Congressional colleagues.

Lol, while you guys are focused on Biden, Schumer and Pelosi, Republicans like Duncan Hunter (funded vacations and extramarital affairs with campaign cash), Chris Collins (insider trading), Steve King (general racism and white nationalism) keep getting re-elected. Republicans ran someone who was almost assuredly a pedophile in Alabama and almost won. The Secretary of State in Georgia (who oversees elections) refused to step down from those duties even as he ran for governor of the state... and he took actions that likely helped him win (put 35k minority voter registration applications on hold and purged over 100K voters from the rolls.) The country is dealing with gerrymandering in several states, actual election fraud in North Carolina, and Trump and the myriad issues that come with him. Are we really concerned about Hillary Clinton, her e-mails and her paid speeches from years ago? People are seriously upset that Biden is talking about tragedies he dealt with and why, as a result, health insurance is such a personally important issue to him?

[qrich]

I think it's pretty clear Biden has dealt with some pretty serious tragedies in his life and referenced them to explain why this health care debate is personally important to him and why he doesn't want to completely gut the current system.

So now that I've answered your question, answer mine. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? It's a simply policy question that, for some reason, you've been dodging.

My opinion on the health care/insurance industry has nothing to do with Biden being a disgusting tool that used his dead son for political gain (kinda like Buffoon Obama using the Genocide). Nor does it have to do with the fact that you have a weird obsession with Biden.

You have yet to answer my question of what the relevancy is, instead, you go on your tangents.

But then again, you defend someone that thinks poor kids are just as talented as white kids.

[MaxFly]

My opinion on the health care/insurance industry has nothing to do with Biden being a disgusting tool that used his dead son for political gain (kinda like Buffoon Obama using the Genocide). Nor does it have to do with the fact that you have a weird obsession with Biden.

You have yet to answer my question of what the relevancy is, instead, you go on your tangents.

But then again, you defend someone that thinks poor kids are just as talented as white kids.

I'm asking you for you opinion on the health insurance debate. I understand you don't like Biden's ad... which is fine. Now let's talk about the substance of the issue that he was addressing. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? I'm assuming you have a stance on the issue?

[MaxFly]

bernie has no friends in congress. presidents aren't wizards who make things magically happen. you need allies in the house and senate to get things done.

Bernie Sanders is an interesting fellow and has helped push forward debate on some key issues, but we have to acknowledge that he hasn't been particularly effective in the House or the Senate. In his 28 years in Congress, he's had 3 laws passed, 2 post offices named and got to designate Vermont Bicentennial Day. He hails from the least populated, most economically negligible state in the country, and quite frankly, I'm not a fan of White Democrats from one of the the least diverse states in the union telling black people that their attempts to address their political and social concerns is identity politics... all while going after investment bankers, CEOs, specific companies, etc... and dabbling in identity politics.


and absolutely no one who wants a future in politics is putting their name on a 60-70% tax rate for the middle class.

bernie would be a crippled duck.

so it's either people come back down to earth, get more realistic... or be prepared for more nothing and broken promises.

The country needs to move to a public option at some point, but the way some of these candidates are talking about it is sloppy and constitutes political malpractice. The very spectre of accelerated tax hikes on the middle class is a losing proposition, and you're sure to see a Tom Cotton like individual in the White House in 2024 when Democrats bungle their messaging... which they will. You're also sure to lose the Joe Manchin and Mark Warners of the Senate in the blow back.

[Cleverness]

You think the "let's get rid of private insurance completely and right away" argument is more convincing? :oldlol:

Nah I was just trolling - check out the quote from Biden: "It was president... my boss... who helped create a giant profit boon to the US Dept of Health Insurance, and we need to expand it further. My friends just need a few more regulations passed and a few more trillion dollars and I'll fix our system."


Rand Paul is the politician who's ideas I find myself agreeing with the most

And regarding healthcare, he seems to be the only one looking for actual fixes to the system by addressing the root causes like high prices due to heavy regulation and lack of competition.

For example, drug costs

A single drug company will get billions of dollars from taxpayers just to help drug addicts with Hepatitis C. Do you think that's a good idea?

Mylan lobbied hard, taxpayers were forced to pay Mylan big dollar for Epipens to be put in gov't schools, and then schools required children to bring Mylan's Epipen rather than an alternative. Anyone surprised that Mylan had record profits? In the congress hearing (clown show) all the politicians (except maybe Mick Mulvaney) seemed clueless AF to what was going on.

Jared Polis (D) recently put price caps on insulin in Colorado. It's another "feel good" policy, but what are the effects? Well ofc the premiums and deductibles will go up, but another thing he's missing is... the damn insulin companies still collect top dollar for their product :lol

Fed gov't regulation protects the insulin oligopoly from competition. Rand Paul is the only politician who speaks out against this. He's also advocated for allowing Americans to use medicine from other countries. One of my friends' coworkers actually travels back and forth to Mexico to buy insulin. The gov't says he makes too much to be on Medicaid, but he has a tough time affording insulin in the US.

[qrich]

I'm asking you for you opinion on the health insurance debate. I understand you don't like Biden's ad... which is fine. Now let's talk about the substance of the issue that he was addressing. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? I'm assuming you have a stance on the issue?

This thread is about how despicable Biden is for exploiting his dead son.

But that is what Democrats tend to do.

[Cleverness]

Big Gov't regulations that protect big insurance/big pharma and reduce competition
Big Gov't regulations that increase administration costs while having no impact on patient outcomes
Low reimbursement from Medicaid/Medicare
Hospitals/ ambulances forced by law to treat people who won't pay anything, including homeless bums and junkies
No price transparency

=

High costs, low liberty, and middle class is f----d


Should healthcare providers be forced by law to take care of a homeless bum?
Should taxpayers be forced to pay for a drug addict's hepatitis C with most expensive treatment?
Should hospitals be forced to provide services to illegal immigrants?
What do you think happens when we start subsidizing all this?



The Bernie Bros "Medicare for All" speeches are way more convincing

Poll came out showing two-thirds of dems support Medicare for All (though at the same time most do not want to abolish private insurance...)

[SomeBlackDude]

In his 28 years in Congress, he's had 3 laws passed, 2 post offices named and got to designate Vermont Bicentennial Day.

if i'm a communista, i'd be very skeptical of all the empty promises comrade bern has been making considering he's been in public service since the time of pharaoh and has little to nothing to show for it. dude was even in an executive government position when he was mayor. did he pass or even attempt to pass all the 'free' initiatives he's promising now?

i know he was pushing for medicare for all in his state (one where he won 86% of the primary vote when up against crooked hillary) and that was a spectacular failure.


Poll came out showing two-thirds of dems support Medicare for All (though at the same time most do not want to abolish private insurance...)

yup, it's inaccurate to claim that 2/3 of dems want medicare for all. the actual most popular choice for the crooked dems (and 'murrica as a whole) is medicare for those who want it, while keeping private insurance intact.


A poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit focusing on heath care issues, found that 73% of people support establishing a government-run health plan option.

Support for Medicare for All or a similar single government plan has been over 50% for about a year, according to KFF researcher Liz Hamel. An April poll found that 56% of people support such a plan and 38% oppose it. But support for Medicare for All dropped to 37% in favor with 58% opposed, when Kaiser asked respondents if they would support Medicare for All if it eliminated private health insurance companies.


that is what creepy joe is pushing, hence why he is dominating polling despite his brains being mush now.

[SomeBlackDude]

"bbbut how will we pay for it"

give me a run down of why medicare for all initiatives in these libruhl states collapsed:

colorado (https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/9/14/16296132/colorado-single-payer-ballot-initiative-failure)

california (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/24/california-proves-single-payer-health-care-is-too-expensive-commentary.html)

vermont (aka new havana) (https://www.npr.org/2017/09/13/550757713/why-bernie-sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-failed-in-vermont)

there's a common theme there.

http://cdn.virtualnerd.com/tutorials/Alg1_8_1_12/assets/Alg1_8_1_12_D_01_07.png

https://media1.giphy.com/media/BmmfETghGOPrW/source.gif

[bladefd]

if i'm a communista, i'd be very skeptical of all the empty promises comrade bern has been making considering he's been in public service since the time of pharaoh and has little to nothing to show for it. dude was even in an executive government position when he was mayor. did he pass or even attempt to pass all the 'free' initiatives he's promising now?

i know he was pushing for medicare for all in his state (one where he won 86% of the primary vote when up against crooked hillary) and that was a spectacular failure.



yup, it's inaccurate to claim that 2/3 of dems want medicare for all. the actual most popular choice for the crooked dems (and 'murrica as a whole) is medicare for those who want it, while keeping private insurance intact.



that is what creepy joe is pushing, hence why he is dominating polling despite his brains being mush now.

I don't believe anything Grandpa Joey is saying. People in Grandpa Joey's state (age appearing to be that of someone in mid-80s) say a lot of things, but you have no idea if they even know what they are saying. I don't trust for a second that Grandpa Joey will fight for public option or fight for anything for that matter. He should not be running for anything including President of Boy Scouts, let alone President of the United States.

Grandpa Joey's entire campaign is "Obama this.. Obama that.. Obama Obama Obama.." and Obama is also why he is up on the polls. There is nothing about where he differs from Obama. Every argument he makes returns to Obama. He is just reciting and verbally repeating what Obama did like a broken clock. Last I checked, Obama is not running for President in 2020.. Stop this tomfoolery.

If you really want to argue for public option, go argue for Mayor Pete or someone whose brain is not mush from age.

[MaxFly]

Nah I was just trolling - check out the quote from Biden: "It was president... my boss... who helped create a giant profit boon to the US Dept of Health Insurance, and we need to expand it further. My friends just need a few more regulations passed and a few more trillion dollars and I'll fix our system."


Rand Paul is the politician who's ideas I find myself agreeing with the most

And regarding healthcare, he seems to be the only one looking for actual fixes to the system by addressing the root causes like high prices due to heavy regulation and lack of competition.

For example, drug costs

A single drug company will get billions of dollars from taxpayers just to help drug addicts with Hepatitis C. Do you think that's a good idea?

Mylan lobbied hard, taxpayers were forced to pay Mylan big dollar for Epipens to be put in gov't schools, and then schools required children to bring Mylan's Epipen rather than an alternative. Anyone surprised that Mylan had record profits? In the congress hearing (clown show) all the politicians (except maybe Mick Mulvaney) seemed clueless AF to what was going on.

Jared Polis (D) recently put price caps on insulin in Colorado. It's another "feel good" policy, but what are the effects? Well ofc the premiums and deductibles will go up, but another thing he's missing is... the damn insulin companies still collect top dollar for their product :lol

Fed gov't regulation protects the insulin oligopoly from competition. Rand Paul is the only politician who speaks out against this. He's also advocated for allowing Americans to use medicine from other countries. One of my friends' coworkers actually travels back and forth to Mexico to buy insulin. The gov't says he makes too much to be on Medicaid, but he has a tough time affording insulin in the US.

So a complete free market system with little regulation and oversight is the way to go then? Competition will keep prices low?

We have a wealth of economic history in this country that we can draw from. Has deregulation and reduced oversight ever led to higher prices for goods and services in certain industries? In which industries has deregulation and reduced oversight led to consistently lower prices and fairer practice by corporations?

[MaxFly]

This thread is about how despicable Biden is for exploiting his dead son.

But that is what Democrats tend to do.

People here are also talking about the policy implications behind Biden's ad. Again, you've made it clear that you don't like the ad. Where do you stand on the substance of the issue. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away?

[MaxFly]

vermont (aka new havana) (https://www.npr.org/2017/09/13/550757713/why-bernie-sanders-single-payer-health-care-plan-failed-in-vermont)


I'll post just a snippet of this conversation because I think it gets to the crux of the problem.


SHAPIRO: Was the lack of funding the reason that this plan ultimately didn't work?

BLUMBERG: I think there's a combination of causes why it didn't work. So the lack of funding is clearly part of it because once they sat down and assessed what types of taxes they would need in order to make the plan feasible, they were, on the face of them, pretty high. And so they figured that they would not be politically palatable.

But I think part of it aside from just the sheer tax revenue that would be needed to finance a program like this - what they ran into was a real administrative and process problem also because they weren't explaining to people in a clear way over time, here's what the costs are going to be; here's what the benefits are going to be. Here's who's going to pay more. Here's who's going to pay less. This is why it's worth it for us to move from the system we're in to another one. And because this is such a big change, then when you just see the price tag, it's very shocking if you don't have an understanding of what is the core value behind doing this kind of change.

Democrats are terrible at explaining their initiatives and policy plans. If they could effectively communicate that everyone's taxes would go up with a public option, but that people would no longer have to pay insurance premiums, deductibles and copays, which would more than offset the tax increases, we could have a serious conversation about Medicare for All, what the implementation process would look like, and how we could ensure quality, timely care for everyone. But in struggling to address the tax implications, they allow Republicans plenty of room to simply frame their plans as a massive tax increase that would result in people waiting months for standard care and surgery. Look how effective Republicans were in framing Obamacare shortly after it passed and during implementation. It took years of people using it (some of them tricked into doing so with plans like Kentucky's Kinect plan) for it to become overwhelmingly popular... and still as recently as last year, Republicans were trying to gut it.

Honestly, they're going to need to get their narrative and talking points together and tighter before coming to the full American electorate with these plans. It's not enough to have your plan on your website. Another poster said that Sanders' plan does not call for abolishing the private insurance companies, but Sanders has repeatedly called for it in interviews and in public appearances. Get your messaging together, guys...

[SomeBlackDude]

Democrats are terrible at explaining their initiatives and policy plans. If they could effectively communicate that everyone's taxes would go up with a public option, but that people would no longer have to pay insurance premiums, deductibles and copays, which would more than offset the tax increases, we could have a serious conversation about Medicare for All, what the implementation process would look like, and how we could ensure quality, timely care for everyone. But in struggling to address the tax implications, they allow Republicans plenty of room to simply frame their plans as a massive tax increase that would result in people waiting months for standard care and surgery. Look how effective Republicans were in framing Obamacare shortly after it passed and during implementation. It took years of people using it (some of them tricked into doing so with plans like Kentucky's Kinect plan) for it to become overwhelmingly popular... and still as recently as last year, Republicans were trying to gut it.

Honestly, they're going to need to get their narrative and talking points together and tighter before coming to the full American electorate with these plans. It's not enough to have your plan on your website. Another poster said that Sanders' plan does not call for abolishing the private insurance companies, but Sanders has repeatedly called for it in interviews and in public appearances. Get your messaging together, guys...

yeah, the problem is bernie and his ilk are not being straight with the bros.

'free' healthcare sounds great on paper. who wouldn't want everything in life to be 'free'?

only problem is, as those 3 states found out after having those single payer initiatives pass through their legislatures, there is no such thing as free in this life. as soon as the actual bill came in, everyone was like "f*** that."

[QUOTE]Vermont made the mistake of adopting an extraordinarily costly overhaul of the entire healthcare system without waiting for a fiscal estimate or establishing exactly how the state would pay for it. When the estimates came in, they were stratospheric. In a wealthy state with the second-lowest uninsured rate in the country (3.7 percent, compared to a national average of 8.8 percent), [B]the state

[MaxFly]

I don't believe anything Grandpa Joey is saying. People in Grandpa Joey's state (age appearing to be that of someone in mid-80s) say a lot of things, but you have no idea if they even know what they are saying. I don't trust for a second that Grandpa Joey will fight for public option or fight for anything for that matter. He should not be running for anything including President of Boy Scouts, let alone President of the United States.

Grandpa Joey's entire campaign is "Obama this.. Obama that.. Obama Obama Obama.." and Obama is also why he is up on the polls. There is nothing about where he differs from Obama. Every argument he makes returns to Obama. He is just reciting and verbally repeating what Obama did like a broken clock. Last I checked, Obama is not running for President in 2020.. Stop this tomfoolery.

If you really want to argue for public option, go argue for Mayor Pete or someone whose brain is not mush from age.

In all fairness, Pete has way less of a chance at winning the Presidency than Biden does. His candidacy would result in cultural war 2020 in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Missouri and Iowa.

[bladefd]

In all fairness, Pete has way less of a chance at winning the Presidency than Biden does. His candidacy would result in cultural war 2020 in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio, Florida, Michigan, Missouri and Iowa.

Have you watched Biden speak at debates? It's a complete mess, and I can't see him being capable of fighting for anything. People say age is just a number, but it depends on the person. Some people are more affected by age than others. I have a great-uncle in his late-80s who talks like a 60yr old, and my grandma is in her 90s who is unable to remember things you told her beyond a minute. Age affects everyone differently.

I'm sorry but Biden is not the same as 10 years ago or even a few years ago. He should retire, travel the world and take it easy. He should not be running for President.

[Cleverness]

So a complete free market system with little regulation and oversight is the way to go then? Competition will keep prices low?

We have a wealth of economic history in this country that we can draw from. Has deregulation and reduced oversight ever led to higher prices for goods and services in certain industries? In which industries has deregulation and reduced oversight led to consistently lower prices and fairer practice by corporations?

A single drug company received billions of dollars from taxpayers just to help drug addicts with Hepatitis C.

Do you think that's a good idea?


Mylan lobbied hard, taxpayers were forced to pay Mylan big dollar for Epipens to be put in gov't schools, and then schools required children to bring Mylan's Epipen rather than an alternative. Anyone surprised that Mylan had record profits? In the congress hearing (clown show) all the politicians (except maybe Mick Mulvaney) seemed clueless AF to what was going on.

Do you understand that the above regulations and gov't protections increase prices, leading to an epinephrine epidemic?


Jared Polis (D) recently put price caps on insulin in Colorado. It's another "feel good" policy, but what are the effects? Well ofc the premiums and deductibles will go up, but another thing he's missing is... the damn insulin companies still collect top dollar for their product

Do you understand that the above regulations feel good, but do nothing to bring the price of insulin down?


Fed gov't regulation protects the insulin oligopoly from competition. Rand Paul is the only politician who speaks out against this. He's also advocated for allowing Americans to use medicine from other countries. One of my friends' coworkers actually travels back and forth to Mexico to buy insulin. The gov't says he makes too much to be on Medicaid, but he has a tough time affording insulin in the US.

Do you understand that allowing Americans to use insulin from other countries, such as New Zealand, Canada, and Mexico, will increase competition and decrease prices, making it more affordable for the middle class?


I'm sure if I spent more time in my life on politics I could find 100 more examples, but it's pretty obvious that our focus needs to be on increasing competition and decreasing costs, while putting the power in the hands of the consumer rather than the lobbyists and bureaucracies of Washington DC.

Let me know when Joe Biden is more focused on ending the excessive regulations that protect big pharma/big insurance/select lobbying groups, and not on healthcare for illegal immigrants.

[iamgine]

Well why not. Son already dead anyway. Might as well be useful for something.

[GimmeThat]

somehow there are minds who can perceive this as "Joe Biden Exploits His Own Son's Death to Protect the Life Insurance Industry"

[DukeDelonte13]

just let us self employed /small business owners have an option to buy into federal employee healthcare plans at an increased premium price. I'd be all over that.

That's a start.

In reality our pay for healthcare system has to go. It's unbelievably f*cked up. It's not better. Our pay-per system is the reason why our healthcare costs in this country have skyrocketed totally out of control.

[MaxFly]

Have you watched Biden speak at debates? It's a complete mess, and I can't see him being capable of fighting for anything. People say age is just a number, but it depends on the person. Some people are more affected by age than others. I have a great-uncle in his late-80s who talks like a 60yr old, and my grandma is in her 90s who is unable to remember things you told her beyond a minute. Age affects everyone differently.

I'm sorry but Biden is not the same as 10 years ago or even a few years ago. He should retire, travel the world and take it easy. He should not be running for President.

I have.. but I also spend a lot of time around more moderate Democrats... yes, even in Massachusetts, and know people in Pennsylvania, Florida and North Carolina. For whatever reason, they love Biden in those states. Perhaps it takes them back to 2009 and the now foreign notion of stable leadership. Perhaps they view him as someone of strong character, especially given all the tragedy he has experienced. Perhaps it's because he is exceptionally hard to paint as extreme, but he generally has strong support among people who vote consistently. Warren, Sanders, Harris and others are going to have to properly appeal to his more moderate supporters in order to draw them. If they are going to run to the left, they need to take pains to clearly and effectively articulate what their plans are, how Americans will be affected, and how their plans will be implemented. Promises of free stuff will only take them so far.

Here's the thing, it's nice to have a slew of plans and policy prescriptions, but if you have no strategy to pass them in the House and Senate, it simply becomes another broken promise. Republicans learned that with their attempted repeal of Obamacare. For instance, if Elizabeth Warren becomes President or Vice President, Charlie Baker, the Republican governor of Massachusetts, will appoint her temporary replacement. Coupled with the fact that the Senate won't be a cakewalk to win back in 2020, what is her strategy for passing Medicare for All with a Republican Senate? Even if we get a Democratic majority, what's Sanders' plan to get Manchin and Warner on board after Phil Scott appoints his replacement? What happens if Democrats lose Manchin's seat if he decides to run again for Governor of West Virginia? They're talking about their plans, but they are playing too cute with the strategy and processes for implementing these plans... which is always a disaster for Democrats. These guys have to get their messaging on point if they want to wrest these voters from Biden.

[MaxFly]

Let me know when Joe Biden is more focused on ending the excessive regulations that protect big pharma/big insurance/select lobbying groups, and not on healthcare for illegal immigrants.

Your post was long, and you repeated things you said already, but you did not answer the question.


We have a wealth of economic history in this country that we can draw from. Has deregulation and reduced oversight ever led to higher prices for goods and services in certain industries? In which industries has deregulation and reduced oversight led to consistently lower prices and fairer practice by corporations?

[qrich]

People here are also talking about the policy implications behind Biden's ad. Again, you've made it clear that you don't like the ad. Where do you stand on the substance of the issue. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away?

Again, keep trying to deflect from the fact that Biden is despicable for using a dead person in this manner.

But then again, you defend those with a D no matter what, so I'm not shocked.

[MaxFly]

Again, keep trying to deflect from the fact that Biden is despicable for using a dead person in this manner.

But then again, you defend those with a D no matter what, so I'm not shocked.

Again, you've made it abundantly clear that you don't like the ad. There's no deflection on my end; I've made it abundantly clear that I think it's a good ad and that I think it personalizes the issue for Biden. It's fine that we disagree on how he chose to address the matter.

However, I've also made my views clear regarding the substance of the issue he was addressing in the ad. For whatever reason, you've been afraid to address the substance of the health insurance policy debate and have defaulted to simply bashing Biden. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and seasonally, Bernie Sanders, all have a "D" behind their names and as you've seen in this thread, I've disagreed with how they have approached the issue.

So again, where do you stand on the substance of the issue. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? Why do you keep deflecting? It's a simple question. As I asked before, do you know what your stance is? If so, what is it? :confusedshrug:

[qrich]

Again, you've made it abundantly clear that you don't like the ad. There's no deflection on my end; I've made it abundantly clear that I think it's a good ad and that I think it personalizes the issue for Biden. It's fine that we disagree on how he chose to address the matter.

However, I've also made my views clear regarding the substance of the issue he was addressing in the ad. For whatever reason, you've been afraid to address the substance of the health insurance policy debate and have defaulted to simply bashing Biden. Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris and seasonally, Bernie Sanders, all have a "D" behind their names and as you've seen in this thread, I've disagreed with how they have approached the issue.

So again, where do you stand on the substance of the issue. Do you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance right away? Why do you keep deflecting? It's a simple question. As I asked before, do you know what your stance is? If so, what is it? :confusedshrug:

Of course you like the ad.

You also defend those who pass EOs promoting racial discrimination, defend the subject of Genocide bring turned into a political joke and have no issues with one saying that poor kids are as talented as white kids.

Try your tangents all you want, it shows how despicable you, like Biden, are.

[Cleverness]

To Biden/MaxFly's credit, politics is a dirty game

Just recently we saw Kamala unfairly attack him for a busing issue a long ass time ago when times were way different, to make it seem Biden wasn't woke enough or something.. Mayor Pete unfairly went after Mike Pence / Tucker Carlson in poor taste.. and Trump said things that were out of bounds 100 times during the republican primaries (and still continues to do so)

Biden knows Obama still has a very high approval % .. these kind of ads will help him win votes. That's what it's all about folks

And the "talented white kids" thing was a gaff.. who cares.. he's an old guy doing 1-2 hour town halls/talks and he's going to make a tad more gaffs than the rest of them. We knew what he meant.



Your post was long, and you repeated things you said already, but you did not answer the question.



It wasn't that long. It asked a few simple questions. I repeated them because you didn't answer any of them or address my main point. I'll repeat it since you haven't agreed or disagreed with any of it. I stated the following:

Big Gov't regulations that protect big insurance/big pharma and reduce competition
Big Gov't regulations that increase administration costs while having no impact on patient outcomes
Low reimbursement from Medicaid/Medicare
Hospitals/ ambulances forced by law to treat people who won't pay anything, including homeless bums and junkies
No price transparency

=

High costs, low liberty, and middle class is f----d

Should healthcare providers be forced by law to take care of a homeless bum?
Should taxpayers be forced to pay for a drug addict's hepatitis C with most expensive treatment?
Should hospitals be forced to provide services to illegal immigrants?
What do you think happens when we start subsidizing all this?


Now you can agree/disagree with each of those things, and if you disagree, then tell us why. Don't ignore common sense and try to immediately jump into a history lesson of deregulating certain industries.

[MaxFly]

Of course you like the ad.

You also defend those who pass EOs promoting racial discrimination, defend the subject of Genocide bring turned into a political joke and have no issues with one saying that poor kids are as talented as white kids.

Try your tangents all you want, it shows how despicable you, like Biden, are.

I don't know what you're talking about in regard to racial discrimination and genocide. I asked you to simply express what your stance is on the issue of health insurance and whether you agree with Biden that the US should not get rid of private insurance in favor of only government run insurance. You can't answer the question because I suspect you don't know much about the subject.

The only reason I've bothered to continue this back an forth with you is to see how much you would wiggle, contort and deflect in order to not answer the question. Other posters, for the last few pages, have been providing their views on the substance of the debate, as have I. You've been unable to do so likely because you don't know enough to add anything to the discussion. Given the way you generally post, repeating limited and vague talking points about matters you struggle to explain when questioned, I'm not surprised that your understanding of these matters follows suit: limited and vague. Thanks for helping me openly prove my point about you; this will make for great reference material. You can kindly see yourself out of the thread so that the grownups can continue this discussion about health care and government intervention. :cheers:

[MaxFly]

It wasn't that long. It asked a few simple questions. I repeated them because you didn't answer any of them or address my main point. I'll repeat it since you haven't agreed or disagreed with any of it. I stated the following:

Big Gov't regulations that protect big insurance/big pharma and reduce competition
Big Gov't regulations that increase administration costs while having no impact on patient outcomes
Low reimbursement from Medicaid/Medicare
Hospitals/ ambulances forced by law to treat people who won't pay anything, including homeless bums and junkies
No price transparency

=

High costs, low liberty, and middle class is f----d

Should healthcare providers be forced by law to take care of a homeless bum?
Should taxpayers be forced to pay for a drug addict's hepatitis C with most expensive treatment?
Should hospitals be forced to provide services to illegal immigrants?
What do you think happens when we start subsidizing all this?


Now you can agree/disagree with each of those things, and if you disagree, then tell us why. Don't ignore common sense and try to immediately jump into a history lesson of deregulating certain industries.

You didn't tag me in this question so I skipped right over it. Are you saying those questions are for me?

I can definitely answer them if they are. In the meantime, answer this...

Has deregulation and reduced oversight ever led to higher prices for goods and services in certain industries?

In which industries has deregulation and reduced oversight led to consistently lower prices and fairer practice by corporations?

[Cleverness]

You didn't tag me in this question so I skipped right over it. Are you saying those questions are for me?

I can definitely answer them if they are. In the meantime, answer this...

Has deregulation and reduced oversight ever led to higher prices for goods and services in certain industries?

In which industries has deregulation and reduced oversight led to consistently lower prices and fairer practice by corporations?

1) Again, your non sequitur is irrelevant to our current healthcare situation. If you want to post about deregulation of alcohol in the 30s, feel free, but again, that conversation isn't the one we should be having when I've clearly stated things relevant to our healthcare situation. My questions were clearly stated. Feel free to let me/us know what you agree and disagree with.


2). If you want to talk about "regulations and prices" relevant to the topic at hand, then let's take a look results from Obamacare in terms of costs and freedom.

costs increased
premiums increased
deductibles increased
drug prices increased
taxes increased

freedom decreased
people's plans disappeared

while the co-authors of Obamacare (big insurance and big pharma) got rich.

[Nanners]

Biden should look into getting some healthcare for himself.

Biden has had a long political career, and despite his many shortcomings he has always spoken coherently and intelligently... until recently. Lately it feels like the guy can barely open his mouth without letting out some kind of gaffe, and in general he just comes off like he is lost and confused.

Given Bidens medical history, his recent mental decline should be very concerning to his supporters (if he actually has any legitimate ones). Biden had two brain aneurysms a couple decades ago, and two brain surgeries to correct them. I am no neurologist but I would imagine that its not a good thing when a guy with a history of brain issues has a fairly sudden and dramatic decline in mental ability, and its also probably not a good thing for a person with this history to randomly develop a bloody eye during a CNN interview.

https://i.postimg.cc/Hs9ffBYM/biden.png

[Cleverness]

Biden should look into getting some healthcare for himself.

Biden has had a long political career, and despite his many shortcomings he has always spoken coherently and intelligently... until recently. Lately it feels like the guy can barely open his mouth without letting out some kind of gaffe, and in general he just comes off like he is lost and confused.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV8_-zK6vzs

[Nanners]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BV8_-zK6vzs

jimmy dore is a national treasure :rockon:

[Hawker]

Biden should look into getting some healthcare for himself.

Biden has had a long political career, and despite his many shortcomings he has always spoken coherently and intelligently... until recently. Lately it feels like the guy can barely open his mouth without letting out some kind of gaffe, and in general he just comes off like he is lost and confused.

Given Bidens medical history, his recent mental decline should be very concerning to his supporters (if he actually has any legitimate ones). Biden had two brain aneurysms a couple decades ago, and two brain surgeries to correct them. I am no neurologist but I would imagine that its not a good thing when a guy with a history of brain issues has a fairly sudden and dramatic decline in mental ability, and its also probably not a good thing for a person with this history to randomly develop a bloody eye during a CNN interview.

https://i.postimg.cc/Hs9ffBYM/biden.png

Pretty funny.

If you google "Joe Biden eye" you don't get any articles at all from the mainstream media outlets like NYT, Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC etc. They want him to be the frontrunner so bad.

[MaxFly]

1) Again, your non sequitur is irrelevant to our current healthcare situation. If you want to post about deregulation of alcohol in the 30s, feel free, but again, that conversation isn't the one we should be having when I've clearly stated things relevant to our healthcare situation. My questions were clearly stated. Feel free to let me/us know what you agree and disagree with.

Hold on... you said...


Fed gov't regulation protects the insulin oligopoly from competition.

That's why I asked the question about deregulation. The issue can either be that regulation in general is bad and that there needs to be deregulation in that market, or that how the regulation is structured is poor and that there needs to be improved regulation. It sounds like you are calling for deregulation, hence the question. That will allow me to better respond to your question.



2). If you want to talk about "regulations and prices" relevant to the topic at hand, then let's take a look results from Obamacare in terms of costs and freedom.

costs increased
premiums increased
deductibles increased
drug prices increased
taxes increased

freedom decreased
people's plans disappeared

while the co-authors of Obamacare (big insurance and big pharma) got rich.

Costs, premiums and deductibles were all predicted to increase at much faster rates prior to the ACA (https://www.factcheck.org/2015/02/slower-premium-growth-under-obama/). At full strength, before opposition started chipping away at it, the ACA actually depressed the rate of increase in those items.

One thing you didn't include in that list: the number of people with health insurance coverage increased as well, including some people who found that they desperately needed the ACA shortly after they enrolled. Certain plans did disappear, and "freedom" did decrease, but let's not leave out the proper context. The plans that disappeared were terrible, low cost plans with high deductibles that did not cover much of anything. Many individuals with those plans prior to the ACA found themselves with huge bills and fell into bankruptcy when they got sick, even though they had insurance. Still others were dropped from their low cost insurance when they got sick or found that their insurance coverage severely limited the kind or care they could get or where they could get care. So yes, people lost the freedom to enroll in some of these useless insurance plans that only sought to exploit them, steal their money, and offer very little in return.

The ACA is an imperfect law... Obama has actually said so on numerous occasions, but we need to be careful that we don't spread misinformation. Even with implementation of the ACA, insurance companies continued to rake in billions of dollars, but they did not do so simply because of the ACA. For instance, regulations on the the medical loss ratio, as a provision of the ACA, requires that private insurance companies spend 85% of premium dollars they receive on patient care. If their administrative costs exceed 15%, the insurance companies are forced to send rebates to the patients. When the provision was implemented, the Wall Street Journal said that it would practically destroy private health insurance companies.

[diamenz]

jimmy dore talks about the dem debate.

:lol https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c5BVBJpjNZo :lol