Bernie Sanders/Single Payer Plan

[gimmethesimplelife]

I understand that Bernie Sanders is about to introduce a proposal for Single Payer Health Care in the US. Now this time I'm not all excited because this being the US, I can't see the plan actually happening....too many interests along the way would block such as they cash in on the lack of human rights/low quality of life in the US.

But the wonderful thing is that these discussions are happening and more and more people are offshoring their health care and going forward, more and more of us are not going to have any other realistic option but to offshore our health care.....the costs are simply getting too high to do otherwise. So some good is coming of Sander's proposal - more awareness of the offshoring of health care out of the US option. It's better than nothing and a nod towards human rights, and more people becoming aware that US health care works against them and not for them. Rob

[iris lilies]

You mean he is introducing it in the
senate?

I expect that to go as far as Rand Pauls's annual "balance the budget" proposal, or his sit in last week to end funding for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

[ToomuchStuff]

He was on one of those late night talk shows the other night. (it was in the Trending section of Youtube)
It was a push to get Trump to support medicare for all. (bipartisan) Without that, I expect it will be tabled quickly.

[Williamsmith]

As soon as the last generation that has good private health care gets too old to matter anymore. We will have it.

[Alan]

I think the time is not yet right for Bernie and his crew to go full socialist. He doesn't have a plan to pay for it, making it no different than the various state initiatives in California, Vermont and Colorado that failed once ideology met reality.

[bae]

He doesn't have a plan to pay for it, making it no different than the various state initiatives in California, Vermont and Colorado that failed once ideology met reality.

I was puzzled by this. If California, one of our wealthiest states with a vibrant economy and a good population base, couldn't afford to do it individually, how then would the country as a whole be able to afford it?

[Alan]

I was puzzled by this. If California, one of our wealthiest states with a vibrant economy and a good population base, couldn't afford to do it individually, how then would the country as a whole be able to afford it?

I think the entire enterprise is based upon the principle of 'take it from bae', while the reality is there aren't enough bae's around to seal the deal.

[Ultralight]

I think the entire enterprise is based upon the principle of 'take it from bae', while the reality is there aren't enough bae's around to seal the deal.

There aren't? Then how do all the other 30+ nations do it?
Does Canada have more bae types? Sweden? Australia?

Cut the crap here. You know this is not about money. It is about will and ideology. Just own up to this. We'll have a more mature debate this way.

[Alan]

Cut the crap here. You know this is not about money.

Sure it is. If we take the example of California, they discovered that their single payer health care initiative would impose an annual cost roughly double their annual budget. Now, their graduated state income tax schedule averages roughly 9 to 10% per payor. In order to pay for the scheme, that would have to be increased to approximately 27 to 30%. They realized that their citizens didn't have the will or strong enough ideology to support it, ergo, the initiative failed.

Then how do all the other 30+ nations do it?

By force.

Just own up to this. We'll have a more mature debate this way.

A mature debate requires numbers and other real world effects. I'll be interested to hear your take on how the money is procured and what effects it will have on the economy.

[iris lilies]

There aren't? Then how do all the other 30+ nations do it?
Does Canada have more bae types? Sweden? Australia?

Cut the crap here. You know this is not about money. It is about will and ideology. Just own up to this. We'll have a more mature debate this way.

For one thing, The "It" they are doing is not, in most cses, the "it" or health care that our citizens think they deserve. It is a lsser product.

For me it would be fine. For many many Americans, no--they deserve higher care, or so they thnk. That is why bae hets to pay for it.

And of course it is a out mmey. For gods sake, the last thing we need is another huge program to add to deficit spending. If you all balance the budget, I might be ok with single payer even if bae pays a lot more.