Ocasio-Cortez defends $40 trillion price tag for progressive proposals

[saveliberty]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

 

[danielpalos]

it is about not spending money on incarceration. more cost effective options become available.

Oh I am all for making prisoners work in prison to repay their costs of incarceration and restitution to victims.

it is Labor that would be more productive, in any other sector of our economy.

 

[danielpalos]

nothing but spam?

Go ahead report it as spam. Mods will see it as an accurate debate point.

i don't bother. not worth the effort, when i can easily get you to resort to fallacy for Your cause.

 

[saveliberty]

it is about not spending money on incarceration. more cost effective options become available.

Oh I am all for making prisoners work in prison to repay their costs of incarceration and restitution to victims.

it is Labor that would be more productive, in any other sector of our economy.

Prisoners have exhibited antisocial behaviors, that is why they are in prison. Thinking they are all of a sudden productive is funny.

 

[danielpalos]

i love it when modern women proclaim; they love picking up the slack.

 

[danielpalos]

it is about not spending money on incarceration. more cost effective options become available.

Oh I am all for making prisoners work in prison to repay their costs of incarceration and restitution to victims.

it is Labor that would be more productive, in any other sector of our economy.

Prisoners have exhibited antisocial behaviors, that is why they are in prison. Thinking they are all of a sudden productive is funny.

Depends on the crime.

And,

anyone who cannot obey Ten simple Commandments from a God, is immoral.

what is your point, Original Sinner? Because of People like You, we need the Expense of Government.

 

[saveliberty]

i love it when modern women proclaim; they love picking up the slack.

Might as well hit sexism too. Nice run of wrong all day.

 

[danielpalos]

i love it when modern women proclaim; they love picking up the slack.

Might as well hit sexism too. Nice run of wrong all day.

so what; it is September.

 

[saveliberty]

Depends on the crime.

And,

anyone who cannot obey Ten simple Commandments from a God, is immoral.

what is your point, Original Sinner? Because of People like You, we need the Expense of Government.

I seem to have broken you, rest up and try again tomorrow.

 

[McRocket]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

Sorry pal...it does not work like that.

YOU made the initial, matter-of-fact statement. That means it is up to you to show supporting evidence to back it up...not the opposite.

So, once again,

Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

 

[saveliberty]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

Sorry pal...it does not work like that.

YOU made the initial, matter-of-fact statement. That means it is up to you to show supporting evidence to back it up...not the opposite.

So, once again,

Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

80% don't get treatment.

 

[McRocket]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

Sorry pal...it does not work like that.

YOU made the initial, matter-of-fact statement. That means it is up to you to show supporting evidence to back it up...not the opposite.

So, once again,

Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

80% don't get treatment.

LOL...because you say it - that makes it fact? And you are not addressing the question.

I will ask again:

Prove that addicts don't want treatment?

You matter-of-factly said it...now prove it. Or at least have the guts to admit that you cannot.

 

[saveliberty]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

Sorry pal...it does not work like that.

YOU made the initial, matter-of-fact statement. That means it is up to you to show supporting evidence to back it up...not the opposite.

So, once again,

Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

80% don't get treatment.

LOL...because you say it - that makes it fact? And you are not addressing the question.

I will ask again:

Prove that addicts don't want treatment?

You matter-of-factly said it...now prove it. Or at least have the guts to admit that you cannot.

One in seven people in the United States is expected to develop a substance use disorder at some point, the report said. But as of now, only one in 10 will receive treatment.

Fraction of Americans With Drug Addiction Receive Treatment, Surgeon General Says

Actually I was being kind it is less.

 

[McRocket]

Prove it? You clearly know almost NOTHING about hard drugs/drug addicts...so, where is your proof?

And I will ask you again...Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

Prove that addicts want treatment. Most go untreated, so the weight of proving this seems to fall on you.

Sorry pal...it does not work like that.

YOU made the initial, matter-of-fact statement. That means it is up to you to show supporting evidence to back it up...not the opposite.

So, once again,

Prove that addicts don't want treatment.

80% don't get treatment.

LOL...because you say it - that makes it fact? And you are not addressing the question.

I will ask again:

Prove that addicts don't want treatment?

You matter-of-factly said it...now prove it. Or at least have the guts to admit that you cannot.

One in seven people in the United States is expected to develop a substance use disorder at some point, the report said. But as of now, only one in 10 will receive treatment.

Fraction of Americans With Drug Addiction Receive Treatment, Surgeon General Says

Actually I was being kind it is less.

First, your link is talking about ALL addictions...not just hard, recreational drug users.


Also, you said 'want' - not 'are not getting'.

Plus, even your link proves your original statement is wrong as it shows some are getting treatment. You said 'addicts' - as in 'ALL addicts'. You did NOT say 'some do not want treatment'.

You said 'Addicts do not want treatment, they want drugs, that is why they're addicts.'

I will ask yet again...Prove that addicts don't WANT treatment?


LOL...just be an adult and admit your original statement is wrong...it is ridiculously obvious that it was.

 

[Theowl32]

 

[WillowTree]

'Progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday defended what could accrue to a $40 trillion price tag for progressive policy programs, including Medicare for all, over the next 10 years, citing the success in some European countries that have similarly developed health care models.

CNN "State of the Union" anchor Jake Tapper asked where that estimated $40 trillion -- which would include the costs for Medicare for all, jobs guarantees, student loan forgiveness, free college programs, paid family leave, and Social Security expansion -- would come from. Medicare for all would be the costliest initiative, coming in at about $32 trillion, according to the Mercatus Center, a free market-oriented think tank at George Mason University, as well as an earlier study by the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center.'

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defends $40 trillion price tag for progressive proposals - CNNPolitics

Two thoughts.

1) Dang...she is good looking (especially for a politician) and seems to have her heart in the right place.

2) SHE IS OUT OF HER MIND on this.

$4 TRILLION per year for 10 years?!?

Now, I personally do not think Medicare will cost that much (about $10,000 per person? It only costs about $5,000 per person in Canada) - though it will still cost TONS. But I at least get that part. I personally am for full healthcare coverage for children. But it HAS to be two-tiered - full Medicare for the poor and private healthcare for everyone else.

But just the rest will add $800 billion to the budget every year.

There is no frigging way she will be able to raise that just through more taxes on the rich and higher corporate taxes...not without driving business out of America.

This is progressivism at it's worst...nice, pie-in-the-sky ideas but no remote ideas as to how to pay for them.

And in the above linked interview...she gave no clue WHATSOEVER of how she was going to pay for it (in remotely practical ways).

Let's end the drug war;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for being naturally unemployed in our at-will employment States, along with Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Danny says....
”we need to pay $15 per hour to wetbacks and other low iQ filth to work brainless jobs or to sit at home and smoke weed....AND we need to automate industry to reduce the number of humans needed within the workforce so we can pay more in welfare benefits.”

He says it in every single post he posts. That makes him a spammer!

 

[danielpalos]

'Progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday defended what could accrue to a $40 trillion price tag for progressive policy programs, including Medicare for all, over the next 10 years, citing the success in some European countries that have similarly developed health care models.

CNN "State of the Union" anchor Jake Tapper asked where that estimated $40 trillion -- which would include the costs for Medicare for all, jobs guarantees, student loan forgiveness, free college programs, paid family leave, and Social Security expansion -- would come from. Medicare for all would be the costliest initiative, coming in at about $32 trillion, according to the Mercatus Center, a free market-oriented think tank at George Mason University, as well as an earlier study by the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center.'

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defends $40 trillion price tag for progressive proposals - CNNPolitics

Two thoughts.

1) Dang...she is good looking (especially for a politician) and seems to have her heart in the right place.

2) SHE IS OUT OF HER MIND on this.

$4 TRILLION per year for 10 years?!?

Now, I personally do not think Medicare will cost that much (about $10,000 per person? It only costs about $5,000 per person in Canada) - though it will still cost TONS. But I at least get that part. I personally am for full healthcare coverage for children. But it HAS to be two-tiered - full Medicare for the poor and private healthcare for everyone else.

But just the rest will add $800 billion to the budget every year.

There is no frigging way she will be able to raise that just through more taxes on the rich and higher corporate taxes...not without driving business out of America.

This is progressivism at it's worst...nice, pie-in-the-sky ideas but no remote ideas as to how to pay for them.

And in the above linked interview...she gave no clue WHATSOEVER of how she was going to pay for it (in remotely practical ways).

Let's end the drug war;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for being naturally unemployed in our at-will employment States, along with Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Danny says....
”we need to pay $15 per hour to wetbacks and other low iQ filth to work brainless jobs or to sit at home and smoke weed....AND we need to automate industry to reduce the number of humans needed within the workforce so we can pay more in welfare benefits.”

He says it in every single post he posts. That makes him a spammer!

it makes You, ignorant if you cannot debate any issues.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Medicare for all will not cost $32 trillion

Money formerly spent by employers and employees will be diverted

I agree. Whatever price tag the government gives you it always doubles

 

[WillowTree]

'Progressive Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Sunday defended what could accrue to a $40 trillion price tag for progressive policy programs, including Medicare for all, over the next 10 years, citing the success in some European countries that have similarly developed health care models.

CNN "State of the Union" anchor Jake Tapper asked where that estimated $40 trillion -- which would include the costs for Medicare for all, jobs guarantees, student loan forgiveness, free college programs, paid family leave, and Social Security expansion -- would come from. Medicare for all would be the costliest initiative, coming in at about $32 trillion, according to the Mercatus Center, a free market-oriented think tank at George Mason University, as well as an earlier study by the Urban Institute's Health Policy Center.'

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defends $40 trillion price tag for progressive proposals - CNNPolitics

Two thoughts.

1) Dang...she is good looking (especially for a politician) and seems to have her heart in the right place.

2) SHE IS OUT OF HER MIND on this.

$4 TRILLION per year for 10 years?!?

Now, I personally do not think Medicare will cost that much (about $10,000 per person? It only costs about $5,000 per person in Canada) - though it will still cost TONS. But I at least get that part. I personally am for full healthcare coverage for children. But it HAS to be two-tiered - full Medicare for the poor and private healthcare for everyone else.

But just the rest will add $800 billion to the budget every year.

There is no frigging way she will be able to raise that just through more taxes on the rich and higher corporate taxes...not without driving business out of America.

This is progressivism at it's worst...nice, pie-in-the-sky ideas but no remote ideas as to how to pay for them.

And in the above linked interview...she gave no clue WHATSOEVER of how she was going to pay for it (in remotely practical ways).

Let's end the drug war;

we really just need a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for being naturally unemployed in our at-will employment States, along with Industrial Automation to help with social costs.

Danny says....
”we need to pay $15 per hour to wetbacks and other low iQ filth to work brainless jobs or to sit at home and smoke weed....AND we need to automate industry to reduce the number of humans needed within the workforce so we can pay more in welfare benefits.”

He says it in every single post he posts. That makes him a spammer!

it makes You, ignorant if you cannot debate any issues.

You are a one trick pony. You cannot debate issues!

 

[rightwinger]

Hey! Dummies! Medicare is going broke now especially after democrats stole 960 billion to fund Obamacare! What makes you dumbasses think Medicare for all is going to get paid for especially in a country where only 50% of the people pay taxes and the other 50%leech?

Medicare is going strong
It has survived over 50 years despite constant conservative predictions of its demise

Ask how many retirees want to go on the open insurance market