Medicare For All Fastest way to capitalism?

[JoeB131]

As bad as you feel our system is, putting the government 100% in charge will make it 100% worse. At least.

REally?

Then why do we trail in EVERY LAST metric.

We spend more per capita than any country in the world.
But we have the highest infant mortality rate in the industrialized world.
The Lowest life expectancy
the largest number of uninsured.

 

[JoeB131]

The fun starts at about 10:19

You can find just as many horror stories in the US.

Doctor Who Cut Off Wrong Leg Is Defended by Colleagues

13 Disturbing Cases of Medical Malpractice | Pittsburgh Medical Malpractice Articles

 

[sealybobo]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

 

[dblack]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

 

[danielpalos]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

What went wrong with the "health exchanges"?

 

[dblack]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

What went wrong with the "health exchanges"?

Shut the **** up, danny.

 

[sealybobo]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

What went wrong with the "health exchanges"?

Republican sabotage

 

[danielpalos]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

What went wrong with the "health exchanges"?

Shut the **** up, danny.

what would have worked better, in Your opinion.

 

[danielpalos]

Health care for all (Medicare for all) would be cheaper and better. It would replace the convoluted socialist system we have now with a simple more efficient socialist system. Then we could require published prices and higher copays until we had capitalistic price and quality controls.

How many Americans would start their own businesses if they didn’t have to worry about healthcare?

Being fired wouldn’t be so scary

And people could retire earlier. A lot don’t retire at 59 because they can’t afford private insurance

We all know companies discriminate against older people. Can’t always prove it but we know. Wouldn’t be so bad firing a 50 year old guy who’s gonna have trouble getting someone else to hire and provide him health insurance

Employer provided health care was a bad idea from the start. It gives employers far too much power over their employees. We need to remove the tax and regulatory policies that prop up the practice. But removing the dependency on an employer for healthcare, only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

What went wrong with the "health exchanges"?

Republican sabotage

how much subsidy does means testing for pre-existing conditions cost?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

As bad as you feel our system is, putting the government 100% in charge will make it 100% worse. At least.

We could just copy the Canadians and save enough to pay off the national debt in 10 years. And, if you look at all the bureaucrats, laws, and regulations in all the spaghetti mess of the health care system we have you would be hard pressed to make the case that we have less govt now than Canada has now. They simple have a far more efficient socialist system than our socialist system.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

canada uses govt right next door and they pay 1/3 of what we pay. We need to copy them and then switch to capitalism by published prices and higher copays

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

As bad as you feel our system is, putting the government 100% in charge will make it 100% worse. At least.

We could just copy the Canadians and save enough to pay off the national debt in 10 years. And, if you look at all the bureaucrats, laws, and regulations in all the spaghetti mess of the health care system we have you would be hard pressed to make the case that we have less govt now than Canada has now. They simple have a far more efficient socialist system than our socialist system.

We could just copy the Canadians and save enough to pay off the national debt in 10 years.

Yeah, but we'd miss the sickly whiners like you who can't pay for your own healthcare.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yeah, but we'd miss the sickly whiners like you who can't pay for your own healthcare.

so you lost debate and switch to personal attack? Sad.

 

[dblack]

only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

canada uses govt right next door and they pay 1/3 of what we pay. We need to copy them and then switch to capitalism by published prices and higher copays

I really don't know what the word 'capitalism' means to you. It sure as hell isn't about free markets.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, but we'd miss the sickly whiners like you who can't pay for your own healthcare.

so you lost debate and switch to personal attack? Sad.

Sickly whiners will be the first to suffer when the rationing under 100% government control occurs.
And we'd miss your whining.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

canada uses govt right next door and they pay 1/3 of what we pay. We need to copy them and then switch to capitalism by published prices and higher copays

I really don't know what the word 'capitalism' means to you. It sure as hell isn't about free markets.

wrong!! the way to get to capitalism is switch from our current socialist system to Medicare for all socialism and then to capitalism with published prices and higher copays. NOw do you understand?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Yeah, but we'd miss the sickly whiners like you who can't pay for your own healthcare.

so you lost debate and switch to personal attack? Sad.

Sickly whiners will be the first to suffer when the rationing under 100% government control occurs.
And we'd miss your whining.

I'm advocating capitalism not 100% government control.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

canada uses govt right next door and they pay 1/3 of what we pay. We need to copy them and then switch to capitalism by published prices and higher copays

I really don't know what the word 'capitalism' means to you. It sure as hell isn't about free markets.

He's under the delusion that we could give politicians complete control over 100% of our healthcare system, they'd fix it, make it cheaper and then surrender control to a new capitalist system of healthcare.

I think maybe he needs some government run mental healthcare......quickly.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, but we'd miss the sickly whiners like you who can't pay for your own healthcare.

so you lost debate and switch to personal attack? Sad.

Sickly whiners will be the first to suffer when the rationing under 100% government control occurs.
And we'd miss your whining.

I'm advocating capitalism not 100% government control.

But you want 100% government control....first.

 

[dblack]

only to replace it with a dependency on government, is even worse. It's going in the wrong direction.

canada uses govt right next door and they pay 1/3 of what we pay. We need to copy them and then switch to capitalism by published prices and higher copays

I really don't know what the word 'capitalism' means to you. It sure as hell isn't about free markets.

wrong!! the way to get to capitalism is switch from our current socialist system to Medicare for all socialism and then to capitalism with published prices and higher copays. NOw do you understand?

No. I rarely understand your posts to be honest. You're not quite the troll daniel is, but you share his lack of clarity and fixation on "custom" terminology.