***Official Political Discussion Thread***

[youngogjosh]

If we funded the military as 0 a year, still not enough to pay for it famb. The numbers are don't add up. That's all I am saying. I am not defending military spending, I am just pointing out that if we are talking funding, the money is not there.

It is not a meme, it is facts about the differences between Bernie's plans and the rest of the world. It is a meme, go ahead disprove it. Sure there are similarities, the Tweet points those out too. However I am pretty sure I have been consistent with my phrasing.

But this should be easy: Show me a developed country that does it exactly like Bernie proposes? If M4A is the only way to get to universal coverage, just list the countries that use a plan just like Bernie's?

Brah, leftist love liberal plans. They cite the liberal economist and academics that write them all the time. If leftist are going to be the ones that get those plans into place, then great, I am all for it. I want people to get helped I don't give a **** about how the help comes. I just think the Bernie coalition tells themselves convenient lies to handwave legit criticisms people raise. If you guys want to ignore political history, macroeconomics, and structural barriers, and just get **** done. Then cool, I hope the strategy works.

Calling those binary choices of yes and no "facts" is like saying someone who's been pardoned is innocent. There were frequent posters from the various countries in the comments disputing some of the claims as half truths which is a by-product of the meme format and why I laughed at you being usually being very analytical linking it. Not to mention the fact that many of those system were put into place shortly after WWll, they've becoming weaker over time and have private insurance carry some of the brunt of them, not saying they're inadequate but they're not the end all be all. They do have a better shot of being implemented in the US but Bernie's plan is still far and away more ambitious than they are in their current states.

Lastly, cutting the military budget won't be the primary way the plan would be funded it'd be through his progressive tax proposal. (which imo is still way too low)

 

[RustyShackleford]

Calling those binary choices of yes and no "facts" is like saying someone who's been pardoned is innocent. There were frequent posters from the various countries in the comments disputing some of the claims as half truths which is a by-product of the meme format and why I laughed at you being usually being very analytical linking it. Not to mention the fact that many of those system were put into place shortly after WWll, they've becoming weaker over time and have private insurance carry some of the brunt of them, not saying they're inadequate but they're not the end all be all. They do have a better shot of being implemented in the US but Bernie's plan is still far and away more ambitious than they are in their current states.

Lastly, cutting the military budget won't be the primary way the plan would be funded it'd be through his progressive tax proposal. (which imo is still way too low)

-Saying that healthcare plans are nuanced is one thing, and of course they are. Whether or not the ban private insurance, or have copays, or covers dental and visions, are kinda yes or no questions.

-Ok, then just name a country that does it like Bernie proposed. It should be easy, you say the meme is misleading, then disprove it. Simple

Bernie routinely says his plan is how other countries do it, you said act like Bernie's M4A is the only form is the only way to get to universal coverage. Then this should be an easy fact check.

-Ok cool. What's the plan to fund it then? It can't be just Bernie tax plan, because he comes up way short of funding his agenda. We need middle class tax increases to pay for it.

If Prime wanna raise my taxes 10-20% to fund economic justice, I'm completely down. I just don't see why he and his supporters can't keep it real with over as to what the number will be.

 

[rolaholic]

Funny turn of events after all the hand wringing over the whole thing with the culinary union leadership beefing with the campaign only for their workers to overwhelmingly back it in the end

 

[RustyShackleford]

Funny turn of events after all the hand wringing over the whole thing with the culinary union leadership beefing with the campaign only for their workers to overwhelmingly back it

How is it a turn of events? The Leadership never told their workers don't vote for Bernie.

 

[Nike Jordan]

Goonberg received a major celebrity endorsement today:

 

[rolaholic]

How is it a turn of events? The Leadership never told their workers don't vote for Bernie.

Not saying they did but they tried to paint the campaign as against their interests and it became such a story that they spent a lot of time addressing it at the actual debate only for it to have zero impact on their actual members votes

That's a funny bit of irony to me *shrugs*

 

[youngogjosh]

-Saying that healthcare plans are nuanced is one thing, and of course they are. Whether or not the ban private insurance, or have copays, or covers dental and visions, are kinda yes or no questions.

-Ok, then just name a country that does it like Bernie proposed. It should be easy, you say the meme is misleading, then disprove it. Simple

Bernie routinely says his plan is how other countries do it, you said act like Bernie's M4A is the only form is the only way to get to universal coverage. Then this should be an easy fact check.

-Ok cool. What's the plan to fund it then? It can't be just Bernie tax plan, because he comes up way short of funding his agenda. We need middle class tax increases to pay for it.

If Prime wanna raise my taxes 10-20% to fund economic justice, I'm completely down. I just don't see why he and his supporters can't keep it real with over as to what the number will be.

-If you can post me a link of him saying on record that he plans to do M4A "How the Europeans do it" then I'll concede my point

-Again, my problem with the meme is that it's a meme, it only allows for a very shallow analysis of what yes and no means. You even critiqued me on using this very same logic a page or two ago which is why I'm pointing out the disparity.

-Of all things, I don't think Neon Deion has ever shied away from saying taxes will go up, he may not mention specifics but that's for when this whole thing goes to congress.

-Lastly, I want to touch on what's important here, again which is the idea of M4A I doubt we will get but it's the bargaining chip that we need atm

 

[-Red-]

Bernie has passed 7 bills in 30 years but he is going to be the guy that passes the most comprehensive medical reform in modern American history while getting 60 votes in the senate. Got it

You're right, I guess Klobuchar should be president since she has the most bills!!

 

[junglejim]

You're right, I guess Klobuchar should be president since she has the most bills!!

just saying that the guy who has an idea of M4A and no way to actually implement it likely isn’t going to pass the M4A plan he is running on. At this point it’s almost disingenuous to even call it a plan since it will never get passed in its current form since the current “plan” will raise the deficit by $10T-$20T over a 10 year span. Hell bernie doesn’t even know how much this thing is going to cost. His team scored it at $13T but pretty much every other governmental entity has said it will cost anywhere from $25T-$35T and he has only proposed $15T of tax increases to pay for it.

But hey, the least efficient member of congress will get it passed

 

[-Red-]

just saying that the guy who has an idea of M4A and no way to actually implement it likely isn’t going to pass the M4A plan he is running on. At this point it’s almost disingenuous to even call it a plan since it will never get passed in its current form.

Are all of Elizabeth Warren's "plans" actually plans, since none of them are likely to get passed in their current form? She also has as few bills as Bernie, so...

 

[junglejim]

Are all of Elizabeth Warren's "plans" actually plans, since none of them are likely to get passed in their current form? She also has as few bills as Bernie, so...

Warrens plan has about a zero percent chance of passing as well since it creates $6T in deficit over the 10 year budget window and will require 60 votes as a result.

At the end of the day we will more likely end up with either Biden or Pete’s plan

 

[-Red-]

Warrens plan has about a zero percent chance of passing as well since it creates $6T in deficit over the 10 year budget window and will require 60 votes as a result.

At the end of the day we will more likely end up with either Biden or Pete’s plan

I'm referring to any of her plans—or "plans."

 

[junglejim]

I'm referring to any of her plans—or "plans."

The only two I really know of that she has actually laid out a plan for are her M4A plan and the social security increase and neither will get passed in current form.

also, it’s kind of misleading to use Warren as an example since she has been a senator for 7 years versus Bernies 30.

But Bernie passed the postal service of Vermont act in 1992 so he will obviously be able to gather the 60 votes for a “plan” that will double the national deficit

 

[-Red-]

The only two I really know of that she has actually laid out a plan for are her M4A plan and the social security increase and neither will get passed in current form.

also, it’s kind of misleading to use Warren as an example since she has been a senator for 7 years versus Bernies 30.

But Bernie passed the postal service of Vermont act in 1992 so he will obviously be able to gather the 60 votes for a “plan” that will double the national deficit

Okay, so those don't count as "plans," either. You can also check out the 500 or so other "plans" that Warren has put together and form your take on those.

And you're saying that Warren has 23 years less experience as a legislator than Bernie does, but apparently that should somehow make her more qualified. Okay.

 

[junglejim]

Okay, so those don't count as "plans," either. You can also check out the 500 or so other "plans" that Warren has put together and form your take on those.

And you're saying that Warren has 23 years less experience as a legislator than Bernie does, but apparently that should somehow make her more qualified. Okay.

im saying Bernie has been a senator for 30 years and hasnt passed a major piece of legislation in that span. I didn’t bring up Warren, you did. Her plans are just as much a pie in the sky as Bernies but she is getting docked for actually outlining how she will implement her plans while Bernie is getting applauded for avoiding those questions because he has no god damn clue how he is going to get is passed

 

[-Red-]

Dude, I am an economist by trade, so I care about how **** works, I would happily accept if it could work. I understand you are passionate about people getting healthcare, that why I what a serious discussion and proposals to make things better, that can get us to affordable universal coverage as quickly as possible. I can't take the plan seriously because there not being the votes for it. There is not widespread public support for it, and the math doesn't work at the moment. And the plan to overcome all those things, by next year this time, sounds utterly stupid. Instead of discussing how to make it work so we can get the votes and get the support, it just becomes purity testing season. And once the purity test starts, all serious discussions about other reforms stop. Hell M4A is not even the most progressive plan someone can propose, nor is it a panacea. So even the purity test is kind of trash.

Secondly, M4A, as Bernie purposes it is not the only way to get to universal coverage. Tons of other countries have universal coverage, NONE, of them, do it the way Sanders proposes. So stop with the "if you are against M4A, you are against universal health insurance". Plain and simple. Here, this should reinforce my point...


But M4A cost more than a single war; it cost more than landing someone on the moon, it cost more than an individual tax cut. It is a significant restructuring of a large part of the economy that will cost trillions above any of those things, and no one will say honestly where the revenue will come from.

All those policy papers that leftists like to cite to make their case for M4A are usually written by liberal academics/economist. There are very few Marxist economists out there. The wonk class that writes and proposes so many of the plans filled his policy platform with are mainly liberals. Hell, most liberal would happily admit that if we were starting from scratch on health insurance, you do single payer, not a hybrid system. So can fall back to this petty leftist vs. liberals thing but is don't give two ****s about it. There are people that care on both sides of that ideological divide. I find it ridiculous that because someone is a liberal, especially progressive liberal, and doesn't handwave the roadblocks, that they somehow don't care. That they are somehow okay with all the waste that happens, elsewhere, and all the cruelty inflicted on the most vulnerable.

I was to help as many people as possible, as quickly as possible. I want our socioeconomic system to be fundamentally restructured. That is why I have little patience for people that use a healthcare plan as mainly a political attack, and not a serious piece of business to make things better.

If being a leftist is ignoring the legislative roadblocks, if being a leftist is being insincere in discussions about positive change, if being leftist is just having a vision and not a plan, then that is precisely why I am more liberal progressive and not a leftist. But I don't think that is what being a leftist is. So offer me the same respect and please stop acting like accepting the status quo is what being a liberal is.

This is what I don't understand and have never understood about your argument that no other country has a medical system like what's being proposed with Medicare for All—who cares? Who is saying that M4A is based specifically on the model of another country? No one that I'm aware of. Bernie has articulated a number of reasons for why his specific proposal would be good. Universal coverage is obviously one of those reasons, but there are many others that are specific to his proposal and that would not happen under any other current proposal being discussed—making medical care free at the point of service and eliminating all premiums, deductibles, co-pays, etc., eliminating the bureaucracy and frustration around navigating health care plans, arguing with insurance companies, being rationed out care, etc., de-commodifying health insurance and destroying the predatory for-profit insurance industry.

Looking at that graphic specifically: Why would we want to settle for a system where people have to buy supplemental insurance? Why would we want to settle for a system that doesn't cover dental, vision, long-term care, mental health, prescriptions, hospital stays, and primary care for all? Why would we want to settle for a system where co-pays and deductibles are retained? All that graphic shows is that M4A would make healthcare in the United States perhaps the most comprehensive in the entire world. Okay, wonderful! What is the issue?

So can we please drop this talking point?

 

[-Red-]

im saying Bernie has been a senator for 30 years and hasnt passed a major piece of legislation in that span. I didn’t bring up Warren, you did. Her plans are just as much a pie in the sky as Bernies but she is getting docked for actually outlining how she will implement her plans while Bernie is getting applauded for avoiding those questions because he has no god damn clue how he is going to get is passed

So who is your candidate of choice? I brought up Warren because I thought that was your preferred candidate.

Warren has no clue about how she's going to get anything passed, either. Let's be clear, the main obstacle to passing any meaningful policy is getting it through Congress, and that's a political problem that's not going to be solved with technocratic expertise.

 

[handullz]

My dude, you go no idea what you talking about with this

Even after your plan, we are still trillions short.

For M4A to be paid for, a sizable increase in middle class taxes are needed. There is no way around that.

Like I'm down for it, but let us keep it #1HUNNA about what that means.

And we care about how much it is gonna cost because funding something this big permanent through deficit spending would cause the plan to implode on itself and cause a debt crisis. When is gonna **** over a ton of vulnerable people.

And you raise taxes.

instead of paying $400 / person / month on private tax (insurance) , you pay $300 / month in public tax (M4A).


Healthcare is way cheaper than we make it

the healthcare, insurance, pharmacy industries are BLOATED. There’s so much money that does not go to care, trust me family.

there’s a multi billion dollar industry around CODING and HEALTH RECORDS. does that sound necessary?


people can and will have supplemental insurance If they choose. The private sector will fill on the gaps.

 

[RustyShackleford]

-If you can post me a link of him saying on record that he plans to do M4A "How the Europeans do it" then I'll concede my point

-Again, my problem with the meme is that it's a meme, it only allows for a very shallow analysis of what yes and no means. You even critiqued me on using this very same logic a page or two ago which is why I'm pointing out the disparity.

-Of all things, I don't think Neon Deion has ever shied away from saying taxes will go up, he may not mention specifics but that's for when this whole thing goes to congress.

-Lastly, I want to touch on what's important here, again which is the idea of M4A I doubt we will get but it's the bargaining chip that we need atm

-I'm not in the mood to dig through Bern's Twitter, but here, he name drops the other countries in this video around the 10 min mark...


And I can already see the deflection coming.

-Dude, if the analysis is so shallow, then I have asked you plenty of times to expand the conversation. You keep harping on about it being a meme. If Bernie wants us to guarantee health insurance to all people as a right like most developed countries so, then I agree, as do most Dems. However, Bernie plans has differences to other nations, and when people suggest we consider doing it like other nations he mentions, Bernie and his supporters gets pissed that someone is half stepping. So what is the goal, passing M4A as is, or getting to universal coverage?

And he routinely says in is pitch for M4A, believe he mentions it in the video, is that we are just gonna expand the Medicare program to all citizens. But Medicare now doesn't function like the plan he is proposing.

-Sure Bernie has said taxes will go up, he has never come close to putting a real number on it. Also, you said it will be paid for by his tax plan, I am just pointing out that is not true. Not getting specific and just putting trust in the great plan sounds exactly like the GOP's whole "Repeal and Replace" stuff. Even if you tell people expect taxes, I don't think people still expect what is actually coming. But I understand he doesn't want to do it now because it will tank him. The Governor of Vermont played coy about the price of single payer to get it passed. Then when it came time to write the bill, it was abandoned because when voters saw the real cost it lost support. The same things might happen here.

In 2006-2010, we had a healthcare debate. Bernie could have proposed a detailed M4A plan, he didn't, he put out a outline that and didn't get it scored by the CBO. Anthony Weiner was the main single payer guy and he got Pelosi to agree to drop the public option to appease blue dogs. Obama and Pelosi were been this plan and it worked in the House because the marginal voters was cool with it. In the Senate Bernie pushed to keep the public option, but it was drop because Joe Liebermann's *** *** was the marginal voter and he tanked it.

Like the time came in Congress in 2010, and nothing. Dude been talking about this for how long? Decades, and never once he asked a health economist to right a serious bill and get is scored.

-M4A is not a bargaining chip like you think. I don't know why people think that if you start off further to the left that somehow the compromise will be more in your favor. We get the plan the marginal voter is comfortable with, that's it. If you want to use it as a bargaining chip, you have to be ready to walk away from the negotiating table, progressive are not willing to do that on healthcare. We are getting something closer to Biden's plan, because that is what the centrist in the House and Senate support. It is the sad reality. That is why I said that if we want more progressive plans, progressive have to find a way to win in red areas. Even with electoral reform, this had to change.

 

[handullz]

im saying Bernie has been a senator for 30 years and hasnt passed a major piece of legislation in that span. I didn’t bring up Warren, you did. Her plans are just as much a pie in the sky as Bernies but she is getting docked for actually outlining how she will implement her plans while Bernie is getting applauded for avoiding those questions because he has no god damn clue how he is going to get is passed

The conservative twitter taking point



just last year, he worked across the aisle w/ Republicans (w/ rho khana in the house) to get a bill passed that would stop the war in Yemen and reign in the president war powers

Trump vetoed it

 

[RustyShackleford]

And you raise taxes.

instead of paying $400 / person / month on private tax (insurance) , you pay $300 / month in public tax (M4A).


Healthcare is way cheaper than we make it

the healthcare, insurance, pharmacy industries are BLOATED. There’s so much money that does not go to care, trust me family.

there’s a multi billion dollar industry around CODING and HEALTH RECORDS. does that sound necessary?


people can and will have supplemental insurance If they choose. The private sector will fill on the gaps.

You realize that you are proposing a plan very different than Bernie's? Right?

Bernie's healthcare plan calls for no monthly premiums, and it bans supplemental plans for anything outside of cosmetic procedures.

Bernie may call it Medicare for All, but his plan is would be different can Medicare is right now.

 

[junglejim]

So who is your candidate of choice? I brought up Warren because I thought that was your preferred candidate.

Warren has no clue about how she's going to get anything passed, either. Let's be clear, the main obstacle to passing any meaningful policy is getting it through Congress, and that's a political problem that's not going to be solved with technocratic expertise.

i would take either Biden, Pete, or Amy over those two but would also take Warren over Bernie as I think she will be more likely to compromise to get the needed bills pushed through the Senate.

I’m not against any of Bernies ideas, I just don’t think there is a way he will be able to get them passed without the Nuclear option of only needing 51 votes in the senate and I don’t think he is willing to compromise enough on his bills to get the 10-year deficit window down enough to do that.

 

[handullz]

You realize that you are proposing a plan different than Bernie's? Right?

Bernie's healthcare plan calls for no monthly premiums, and it bans supplemental plans for anything outside of cosmetic procedures.

Bernie may call it Medicare for All, but his plan is would be different can Medicare is right now.

Supplemental care will always find it’s way into the world. Capitalism will prevail in that aspect, so I don’t worry about it.

That is one part of the plan that WILL change, I guarantee it.




edit: I ain’t read it, so I’m taking your word for it that that’s what it says.

 

[RustyShackleford]

Supplemental care will always find it’s way into the world. Capitalism will prevail in that aspect, so I don’t worry about it.

That is one part of the plan that WILL change, I guarantee it.




edit: I ain’t read it, so I’m taking your word for it that that’s what it says.

So you are against Bernie's plan then?

This is amazing, you are arguing in favor of Bernie's plan by saying his plan will never work as written.

Bruh,

 

[junglejim]

You realize that you are proposing a plan very different than Bernie's? Right?

Bernie's healthcare plan calls for no monthly premiums, and it bans supplemental plans for anything outside of cosmetic procedures.

Bernie may call it Medicare for All, but his plan is would be different can Medicare is right now.

The crazy thing is that what Bernie is saying is his plan and what very little he has written about his plan differ drastically. Like his written plan on his website says there will be a 4% income based premium but what he has been saying in debates is there won’t be a premium at all