Internal Poll Bad News for Dems

[Ana the Ist]

The capital S in brackets in the quoted text is bbcode for strike-through. Remove the square brackets around the s and remove the closing tag XF will have added at the end because fifo stacks rulz

ETA as for the content of the post AOC et al are the Tea Party of the left, and will end up having about as much effect.

No S in brackets, no closing tag. Thanks for the help though.

ETA as for the content of the post AOC et al are the Tea Party of the left, and will end up having about as much effect.

I guess we'll see.

 

[Veritas]

Except that the media has never covered the tea party to the extent they cover AOC & Co.

Are you serious? People have short-term memories when it comes to stuff like this. The media (pretty much owned by the left) covered it extensively and painted it in a very negative light, even referring to them as Nazi's.

 

[Veritas]

1) Non-profit.
2) Costs are shared among an entire population. Which lowers each person's cost as much as possible.
3) A single payer has the potential to lower health care costs

1) not just "non-profit" but often going in the hole. Most socialist countries with single payer are struggling to keep up with costs. Consequently, they are rationing care. It's still ends up being a 2 tier system where the rich buy private coverage for better care.

2) Completely false. We have millions of people who don't work and contribute NOTHING to the Treasury. Further, we have mass migration encouraged by leftwing democrats who come here and get FREE healthcare. During the democratic debates, every single candidate agreed with FREE healthcare for illegal aliens. Single payer is just another term for Redistributionism.

3) Potential? Maybe. But until you can get Big Pharma under control and stop lobbying, it ain't gonna happen. In addition, any reduction will be short-lived. Eventually, costs will spiral out of control as they do everywhere else and tax rates will rise accordingly. You'll also continue to see more and more forced medical procedures or be denied care.

 

[Gigimo]

either way the employed people get saddled with the cost.

And some folks claim slavery has been outlawed in this country

So when are us taxpayers going to get reparations

 

[jayem]

1) not just "non-profit" but often going in the hole. Most socialist countries with single payer are struggling to keep up with costs. Consequently, they are rationing care. It's still ends up being a 2 tier system where the rich buy private coverage for better care.

2) Completely false. We have millions of people who don't work and contribute NOTHING to the Treasury. Further, we have mass migration encouraged by leftwing democrats who come here and get FREE healthcare. During the democratic debates, every single candidate agreed with FREE healthcare for illegal aliens. Single payer is just another term for Redistributionism.

3) Potential? Maybe. But until you can get Big Pharma under control and stop lobbying, it ain't gonna happen. In addition, any reduction will be short-lived. Eventually, costs will spiral out of control as they do everywhere else and tax rates will rise accordingly. You'll also continue to see more and more forced medical procedures or be denied care.

It's all about the details. In the kind of single payer health insurance I want, everybody will have to pay something. Definitely a deductible which can be satisfied by copayments. And it should be organized on a regional basis, serving the populations in groups of contiguous states. Not a huge national bureaucracy. People are better served when their insurance is closer to home. Yes, it will cost money. Quality health care is not free. But we can do much better than we do now. I don't know what you're smoking if you really think we get corresponding value for the exorbitant prices we pay for medical care.

BTW: I agree with you about drug costs. Trump and the Republicans have talked about it for 2 1/2 years now. I'm sure the House Democrats are willing to do something. Let's see some action from both sides.

 

[FireDragon76]

Quite a dilemma. If the Dems respond by squelching AOC and her buddies in Congress it will look like the purging of Bernie all over again.
The only real solution is to start countering the lies coming form the Right about what socialism is and what it isn't.

That would be a waste of money/time for politicians to engage in. If the Left wants to do that, it needs to be done through think-tanks and public policy institutes.

 

[Tanj]

No S in brackets, no closing tag. Thanks for the help though.

*sigh*

This forum defaults to a wysiwyg editor. If you edit your post in the top right corner is what looks like a sheet of paper icon. Click on that to see the bbcode and you will see the tags.

I guess we'll see.

Ordinarily I'd probably make a snarky comment equating your bbcode skill with your understanding of politics, but I get that the kids these days rarely look under the hood of the internet.

 

[Ana the Ist]

*sigh*

It's so frustrating isn't it....

This forum defaults to a wysiwyg editor. If you edit your post in the top right corner is what looks like a sheet of paper icon. Click on that to see the bbcode and you will see the tags.

Hey....thanks guy.

Ever see that "You're Company's Computer Guy" SNL skit?

Ordinarily I'd probably make a snarky comment equating your bbcode skill with your understanding of politics, but I get that the kids these days rarely look under the hood of things like forum software.

Awww...I appreciate that. I used to stay off the political forum back in the day, mainly because people didn't understand half the stuff they pretended to. Before that, I used to go around correcting everyone who didn't understand what capitalism was or socialism or communism etc. Eventually I just accepted not everyone can know everything...even stuff I figured was pretty basic.

 

[Tanj]

Hey....thanks guy.

Ever see that "You're Company's Computer Guy" SNL skit?

Welcome to my world.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

The results? They hate AOC, Omar, and aren't that fond of socialism.
And these are things increasingly defining the Democratic party.

If we throw in and their love of people who disrespect the American Flag that's kind of it in a nutshell.

M-Bob

 

[KCfromNC]

yes and there are plenty of people who do not want that.

Yeah, those people would hate to take advantage of "socialist" policies like Social Security benefits. For heaven's sake, most of the word is even in the name of it. No self-respecting non-socialist would accept that sort of government interference in their lives.

 

[KCfromNC]

Americans love what socialism we have. Try running for office on a platform of eliminating Medicare, SS, or unemployment. See how far you get. That’s what scares conservatives. Once the voters get a taste of publicly funded social insurance (which is what those programs are) there’ll be no going back.

See also - GOP promises to eliminate the ACA.

 

[cow451]

And what makes you think it would be 'a little more'? IIRC the estimate from independent sources of Bernie's 'medicare for all' was approx $33 trillion over 10 years even given the substantially lower reimbursement rates medicare pays versus private health plans. $3.3 trillion/year (for the mathematically challenged) versus 2018 total federal revenue of $3.33 trillion and expenditures of $4.1 trillion. Anyone see a politician willing to raise taxes by $3.3 trillion to pay for this? .

My employer plan requires Three months of my take home pay to meet my deductible. Medicare beats the daylights out of that.

 

[civilwarbuff]

My employer plan requires Three months of my take home pay to meet my deductible. Medicare beats the daylights out of that.

Then maybe you should consider using a health ministries plan.....

 

[iluvatar5150]

Because right now you pay (and your company) for YOUR healthcare. Under the lefts socialist system you get to pay for your healthcare and for others who cannot or are not employed to pay for theirs. Remember how insurance works: the risks and costs are spread across those who make premium payments. If you take in people who won't be paying then those who are able will see their costs go up. And if the gov pays for them then the debt goes up; either way the employed people get saddled with the cost.

You're missing the other half of the equation with insurance - people who use it more heavily also make the premiums go up. Yes, the other people in my risk pool may be employed, but my premiums are subsidizing the people who have to go in for gastric bypass, or surgery to repair injuries suffered while playing sports, cirrhosis, pregnancy, and a host of other things brought about as consequences of their actions. Why am I helping to pay for them when they're not paying for me (I rarely use medical care)? Because that's how insurance works and I like having the safety net there if I need it. Social services (including government-provided health insurance) are no different. The phenomenon you describe already exists.

 

[Speedwell]

You're missing the other half of the equation with insurance - people who use it more heavily also make the premiums go up. Yes, the other people in my risk pool may be employed, but my premiums are subsidizing the people who have to go in for gastric bypass, or surgery to repair injuries suffered while playing sports, cirrhosis, pregnancy, and a host of other things brought about as consequences of their actions. Why am I helping to pay for them when they're not paying for me (I rarely use medical care)? Because that's how insurance works and I like having the safety net there if I need it. Social services (including government-provided health insurance) are no different. The phenomenon you describe already exists.

But you're talking about fellow employees. None of those people are lazy poor people who don't deserve it. That's the real issue.

 

[cow451]

Then maybe you should consider using a health ministries plan.....

Or voting for someone willing to support universal care.

Nice dodge.

 

[98cwitr]

Exclusive poll: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez defining Democrats among crucial 2020 swing voters

If you don't understand the schism on the left....take a look...


The results? They hate AOC, Omar, and aren't that fond of socialism.

And these are things increasingly defining the Democratic party.

Liberals vs. Leftists. Finally America can see past Fox News calling all Democrats "The Left"

 

[civilwarbuff]

Or voting for someone willing to support universal care.

Nice dodge.

Not a dodge....you should seriously look at healthcare ministry plans.....they might save you a lot of money......

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

What the OP seems to mean by socialism is how it is being presented by the most shrill figures of the Democratic party. It's certainly not about Social Security or Medicare. It's not a pretty picture to most.

"As with the Christian religion, the worst advertisement for Socialism is its adherents...

...there is the horrible--the really disquieting--prevalence of cranks
wherever Socialists are gathered together. One sometimes gets the
impression that the mere words 'Socialism' and 'Communism' draw towards
them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer,
sex-maniac, Quaker, 'Nature Cure' quack, pacifist, and feminist in England."

George Orwell, "The Road to Wigan Pier".

...and he was a socialist himself.