Make Your Weekends Even Longer. Add an Extra Day With Easy and Affordable Ideas From AARP Travel. Let's Go

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

371 Views
Message 1 of 66

rk9152 wrote:

 

 


The welfare of the non productive paid by the productive is non existant in this system. 

Where does the money come from??

 

BTW, better reduce your font - mimi gets upset at anything over #3.


Well,  at least I erase the posts that I am not answering which is a lot better than reading unreadable posts.
People are paying within their taxes. but like I have said, read and see how other countries have tackle this problem and see how they have done it. and stop trying to tell me that a system doesn't work until you can prove that it has failed in other countries.  

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

389 Views
Message 2 of 66

rker321 wrote:

I reallyt hate to start a discussion with you because you are going to divert and twist everything that I have to say but here it goes.


 HUH!!!!!!  where did you get that idea? Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Canada, Germany, Switzerland Spain, and many others? Are all of those countries the ones that you call have socialized medicine?

(about those who can afford it buying their own insurance under socialized medicine) I got it from your "I do know that private insurance companies do exist in all of the countries that have National health care system".

 

So, basically, you are talking about a welfare system under which the productive members of society pay for their own insurance and the other folks' too. A welfare system is a system in which no private sector is included in the implementation and in a National Health Care system not only they work in tandem but the country sets the  HOW IT MAY  BE  IMPLEMENTED.
It is a welfare system for the non-productive paid for by the productive - as is the case in any welfare system.
Ok  here  it goes. the people that don't want to have private insurances in those coutries have a basic program that they still pay thru their taxes and that will cover basic health care system. 
The welfare of the non productive paid by the productive is non existant in this system. 
Again, read, read how those countries apply their programs and what happens to those that will not have any private insurance coverage and how it is paid. 

 

 


The welfare of the non productive paid by the productive is non existant in this system. 

Where does the money come from??

 

BTW, better reduce your font - mimi gets upset at anything over #3.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

391 Views
Message 3 of 66

Richva wrote:

So, to summarize, the right does not want to add the option of medicare in the mix of coverages offered on the ACA exchanges but the only reason they offer is the vague charge of socialism?  Kind of like the miliary is socialism right?


The military is not means tested.

 

As to the "vague charges of socialism" - they aren't vague, they are clearly stated.

 

When you think about it - except for the wealth redistribution stuff, have you ever heard anyone speak positively about doing business with a government bureaucracy? And yet some are more and more in favor of the government providing for more and more of our necessities. Why is that? Think about it, it is just about always about wealth redistribution. 

 

In other words, just about any call for socialism in any aspect of our lives is based on either class warfare ("it's not fair that he is rich and I am not") or greed ("he has it, I want it").

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

394 Views
Message 4 of 66

I reallyt hate to start a discussion with you because you are going to divert and twist everything that I have to say but here it goes.


 HUH!!!!!!  where did you get that idea? Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Canada, Germany, Switzerland Spain, and many others? Are all of those countries the ones that you call have socialized medicine?

(about those who can afford it buying their own insurance under socialized medicine) I got it from your "I do know that private insurance companies do exist in all of the countries that have National health care system".

 

So, basically, you are talking about a welfare system under which the productive members of society pay for their own insurance and the other folks' too. A welfare system is a system in which no private sector is included in the implementation and in a National Health Care system not only they work in tandem but the country sets the  HOW IT MAY  BE  IMPLEMENTED.
It is a welfare system for the non-productive paid for by the productive - as is the case in any welfare system.
Ok  here  it goes. the people that don't want to have private insurances in those coutries have a basic program that they still pay thru their taxes and that will cover basic health care system. 
The welfare of the non productive paid by the productive is non existant in this system. 
Again, read, read how those countries apply their programs and what happens to those that will not have any private insurance coverage and how it is paid. 

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

395 Views
Message 5 of 66

afisher wrote:

   We get it, the libertarians and far right (wealthy) Republicans et al remain deeply faithful to being followers of John C. Calhoun, then James Buchanan and his funders.     They believe that the 1% should only pay for things that benefit them directly and under no circumstances should a nickel of their money be spent on the remainder of the society that may dare to demand something that will help them, like public schools, etc.   

     That directly implies the racism that drove Calhoun and others forward.    They will never admit it, because then they couldn't sell their imperialistic:   capitalism is always more important than democracy line to the rank and file.   (Or the whines that will eminate are those of people who refuse to acknowledge history).  


The only racism in the above is the assumption that there are no rich black people.

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

398 Views
Message 6 of 66

afisher wrote:

   We get it, the libertarians and far right (wealthy) Republicans et al remain deeply faithful to being followers of John C. Calhoun, then James Buchanan and his funders.     They believe that the 1% should only pay for things that benefit them directly and under no circumstances should a nickel of their money be spent on the remainder of the society that may dare to demand something that will help them, like public schools, etc.   

     That directly implies the racism that drove Calhoun and others forward.    They will never admit it, because then they couldn't sell their imperialistic:   capitalism is always more important than democracy line to the rank and file.   (Or the whines that will eminate are those of people who refuse to acknowledge history).  


 

Report Inappropriate Content
Treasured Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

411 Views
Message 7 of 66

So, to summarize, the right does not want to add the option of medicare in the mix of coverages offered on the ACA exchanges but the only reason they offer is the vague charge of socialism?  Kind of like the miliary is socialism right?

Report Inappropriate Content
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

414 Views
Message 8 of 66

   We get it, the libertarians and far right (wealthy) Republicans et al remain deeply faithful to being followers of John C. Calhoun, then James Buchanan and his funders.     They believe that the 1% should only pay for things that benefit them directly and under no circumstances should a nickel of their money be spent on the remainder of the society that may dare to demand something that will help them, like public schools, etc.   

     That directly implies the racism that drove Calhoun and others forward.    They will never admit it, because then they couldn't sell their imperialistic:   capitalism is always more important than democracy line to the rank and file.   (Or the whines that will eminate are those of people who refuse to acknowledge history).  

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

437 Views
Message 9 of 66

rker321 wrote:

rk9152 wrote:

rker321 wrote:


  If I had the solution for the US  I would probably be paid millions.

Agreed. That is why I was wondering about you getting on my case for not understanding your solution (or some solution).

 

 HUH!!!!!!  where did you get that idea? Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Canada, Germany, Switzerland Spain, and many others? Are all of those countries the ones that you call have socialized medicine?

(about those who can afford it buying their own insurance under socialized medicine) I got it from your "I do know that private insurance companies do exist in all of the countries that have National health care system".

 

So, basically, you are talking about a welfare system under which the productive members of society pay for their own insurance and the other folks' too. A welfare system is a system in which no private sector is included in the implementation and in a National Health Care system not only they work in tandem but the country sets the  HOW IT MAY  BE  IMPLEMENTED.
It is a welfare system for the non-productive paid for by the productive - as is the case in any welfare system.

 

If that is the vision, fine. I'm not being critical, I'm just trying to define what we are talking about.
i am glad that you are not being critical but simply like I have said take a look at the implementation of a National Health Care system in other countries see how they work and then try to see on how it could be implemented in the US


 


 

Report Inappropriate Content
Valued Social Butterfly

Re: A path to single payer?

480 Views
Message 10 of 66

rk9152 wrote:

rker321 wrote:


 


An interesting approach, "RK  what I like best about you is that you refuse to understand how little you seem to know about a National Health Care System. You keep on harping that the government in those cases will run everything. and guess what ?  they don't but I guess that you refuse to see the light and simply have gotten stuck on socialized medicine". I refuse to understand, and I can't see, and I harp. But, when asked for an explanation, all you've got is, "I can't do that RK  because each and every country has desinged their own National Health Care system". If I had the solution for the US  I would probably be paid millions.

 

Then you come up with people in countries with socialized who can afford it buying their own insurance.  HUH!!!!!!  where did you get that idea? Australia, New Zealand, Britain, Canada, Germany, Switzerland Spain, and many others? Are all of those countries the ones that you call have socialized medicine?

 

So, basically, you are talking about a welfare system under which the productive members of society pay for their own insurance and the other folks' too. A welfare system is a system in which no private sector is included in the implementation and in a National Health Care system not only they work in tandem but the country sets the  HOW IT MAY  BE  IMPLEMENTED.

 

If that is the vision, fine. I'm not being critical, I'm just trying to define what we are talking about.
i am glad that you are not being critical but simply like I have said take a look at the implementation of a National Health Care system in other countries see how they work and then try to see on how it could be implemented in the US


 

Report Inappropriate Content