Card Game - Let's Bankrupt America!

[MorkandMindy]

I guess I'm the ultimate conspiracy theorist, I think the Elite would love to bankrupt the country to gain complete control of it and seize the assets and sell them off to the highest bidder.

Paranoid I may be but that really does appear to be what is going right now, so why not follow it like it's just some huge Monopoly game?

 

[MorkandMindy]

The costs given are the candidate's own estimates and are additional costs produced by the new initiatives.

 

[MorkandMindy]

If you add those two together that comes to about the complete net assets of the US.

Even if one of them isn't picked there are a multitude of other pointless and really expensive plans being proposed right now.

 

[MorkandMindy]

This is a bipartisan effort, the first real budget buster was Ronald Reagan, and another was G W Bush and his wars, or Cheney and Rumsfeld, and W Clinton although his National Debt was fine the trade balance was totally bad news.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Verifying those costs is a bit involved, I'll quote CNN:

'Exact cost projections on all of Sanders' proposals aren't available, in part because he hasn't fully fleshed out some of the ideas he's embraced (such as universal pre-K and child care). But a wide variety of estimates put the likely cost of the single-payer health care plan he has endorsed around $30 trillion or more over the next decade. Depending on the estimates used, including projections from his own campaign, the other elements of the Sanders agenda -- ranging from his "Green New Deal" to the cancellation of all student debt to a guaranteed federal jobs program that has received almost no scrutiny -- could cost about as much, or even more than, the single-payer plan. That would potentially bring his 10-year total for new spending to around $60 trillion, or more.' I've also seen estimates ranging up to 93 Trillion, but that all his policies in total...

And Elizabeth Warren stated that her Medicare-for-All plan would cost just 'under 52 Trillion' over the next decade. That isn't including what she would spend on a Green plan, so her plan could actually beat Bernie's by a lot.

 

[Goonie]

On being Bankrupt, Donald trumps them all.

 

[Tanj]

I guess I'm the ultimate conspiracy theorist, I think the Elite would love to bankrupt the country to gain complete control of it and seize the assets and sell them off to the highest bidder.

Paranoid I may be but that really does appear to be what is going right now, so why not follow it like it's just some huge Monopoly game?

Sell it to whom, exactly? Also, I do hope you have refused that socialist indigent care you get for the drugs you need to live, otherwise you sound like a complete hypocrite.

 

[Richard T]

Technically, I would argue the USA is already bankrupt. However, by printing money the government can continue to create debt until people lose faith in the currency. Japan has an even bigger government debt percentage than the USA. So a currency collapse, when it comes, might be from others first. It likely will be preceded by some severe inflation. As long as a country can print new money to pay off old bills, there will not be a bankruptcy. Kind of like a person would never go bankrupt if they could get new credit cards (without limit) whenever they needed them to pay the other credit cards.
I do think elites are involved in allowing the debts to pile up. Their end game likely is a collapse and the ushering in of a new world currency.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Contrary to all those fiat money people I think the US Dollar is backed by 145 Trillion Dollars in net assets.

That includes things like the oil in the North slope of Alaska, and yes they want that, and the highest bidders could be any of many countries including of course China.

 

[Richard T]

If you have an unsecured loan, why would you turn over any assets to pay claims, especially when you can just print more money? Not to mention, what would the voters do to any politician that sells national treasures?

 

[MorkandMindy]

Sell it to whom, exactly? Also, I do hope you have refused that socialist indigent care you get for the drugs you need to live, otherwise you sound like a complete hypocrite.

Yes I do pay for my medicines. And I have never used the ER like a lot of uninsured, I travel to a federally funded clinic staffed by younger people than I've seen anywhere else, might be training or newly qualified, but I trust the govt in this case to keep costs down.

If you have an unsecured loan, why would you turn over any assets to pay claims, especially when you can just print more money? Not to mention, what would the voters do to any politician that sells national treasures?

Now that most voters have finally worked out that neo liberalism doesn't work, what are they going to do to the politician who started it? That was Ronald Reagan here and Margaret Thatcher in Britain?

 

[gaara4158]

If you add those two together that comes to about the complete net assets of the US.

Even if one of them isn't picked there are a multitude of other pointless and really expensive plans being proposed right now.

If only there were a way to requisition a portion of everyone’s assets, especially monetary, every year. Around mid-April, let’s say. If we have ten years to do produce this money, we’d only have to collect a tenth of it every year. Has anyone come up with a system like this before?

 

[MorkandMindy]

If only there were a way to requisition a portion of everyone’s assets, especially monetary, every year. Around mid-April, let’s say. If we have ten years to do produce this money, we’d only have to collect a tenth of it every year. Has anyone come up with a system like this before?

Yes, Thomas Paine wrote about it around 1775, I read all four of the books he wrote around the start of the American war of Independence and can't remember which one it is in, three of them are short enough to describe as pamphlets IIRC.

But the amounts of money we are talking about here are absolutely huge.

Most voters are unaware how crazy these proposals are but for Senators who vote on budgets regularly to be unaware seems to indicate a deeper problem

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Verifying those costs is a bit involved, I'll quote CNN:

'Exact cost projections on all of Sanders' proposals aren't available, in part because he hasn't fully fleshed out some of the ideas he's embraced (such as universal pre-K and child care). But a wide variety of estimates put the likely cost of the single-payer health care plan he has endorsed around $30 trillion or more over the next decade. Depending on the estimates used, including projections from his own campaign, the other elements of the Sanders agenda -- ranging from his "Green New Deal" to the cancellation of all student debt to a guaranteed federal jobs program that has received almost no scrutiny -- could cost about as much, or even more than, the single-payer plan. That would potentially bring his 10-year total for new spending to around $60 trillion, or more.' I've also seen estimates ranging up to 93 Trillion, but that all his policies in total...

And Elizabeth Warren stated that her Medicare-for-All plan would cost just 'under 52 Trillion' over the next decade. That isn't including what she would spend on a Green plan, so her plan could actually beat Bernie's by a lot.

On costs, we currently spend $3.6 trillion annually on healthcare with our current system. Assuming costs never increase (which is silly), that means we will spend $36 trillion on healthcare over the next ten years. That's more than Bernie's plan is projected to cost. Warren's is more, but she's also provided information of how she plans to pay for her program.

 

[MorkandMindy]

The US pays twice as much as it should pay for healthcare, I lived in England 42 years and most of what I've seen here has been nothing short of appalling.

There an annual check up took 3 or 4 minutes of the doctor's time. There my record was on the computer already and routine checks were done which included an ECG, and results added to the record, then I went to see the doctor who reviewed it, asked a few questions, hit a button to print my prescription, supplied a printed copy of the results of the meeting including a note to return if this or that happened.

Here I filled in a multi page form with the technician, even though I had been with a doctor the year before. Then another half hour with the doctor filling in the remaining items on the form, then off to get blood work, then back to establish that everything was OK and for a repeat blood pressure check...

I've talked to a lot of people about this and although there are variations, the basic trend is the more time they waste the more they get paid.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Knowing the horrendous waste in the US medical system both Pres. Obama and Pres. Trump wanted to simplify the system and get it working right.

Why E Warren wants to put more money into the system totally mystifies me, unless that's what the lobbyists want...

 

[Pommer]

Knowing the horrendous waste in the US medical system both Pres. Obama and Pres. Trump wanted to simplify the system and get it working right.

Why E Warren wants to put more money into the system totally mystifies me, unless that's what the lobbyists want...

Doesn’t Warren want to craft an entirely “new system”?

 

[MorkandMindy]

Doesn’t Warren want to craft an entirely “new system”?

That would be a good idea and it would cost half as much as the existing system, so the amount the government presently pays would be enough to cover everyone. Total cost including both government money and private payments at present comes out at 3.5 Trillion dollars, so the total would then come out at 1.75 Trillion dollars, so the government could pay it all or people could contribute as much as they want.

So why is she talking about wanting 52 Trillion dollars over 10 years extra?

Warren is planning to health care expenditure alone to 8.7 Trillion dollars a year, I've no idea how or why. The entire federal budget at present is 4 Trillion dollars a year for everything.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

That would be a good idea and it would cost half as much as the existing system, so the amount the government presently pays would be enough to cover everyone. Total cost including both government money and private payments at present comes out at 3.5 Trillion dollars, so the total would then come out at 1.75 Trillion dollars, so the government could pay it all or people could contribute as much as they want.

So why is she talking about wanting 52 Trillion dollars over 10 years extra?

Warren is planning to health care expenditure alone to 8.7 Trillion dollars a year, I've no idea how or why. The entire federal budget at present is 4 Trillion dollars a year for everything.

Where do you get that it's $52 trillion extra? The article you quoted earlier just says $52 trillion.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Where do you get that it's $52 trillion extra? The article you quoted earlier just says $52 trillion.

Excellent point, total cost at present from both federal and private sources is about 3.6 T/yr so 36 Trillion in 10 years so she is only saying she will need 52 Trillion and that's 16 Trillion more than the current rate or an increase of 44 percent. And given what inflation and immigration might be that might come out the same as funding the existing P.O.S. system for ten years.

But the direction expenses should be going is down. Firstly because the US system is so inefficient, and secondly because just as automation is saving money everywhere else it should be saving money in the healthcare system.

People may say 'I want to keep my doctor... ' but when a clinic nearby is charging half as much for better care, they'll change.