Anyone still supporting Trump?

Young Gotti said:
Bernie sanders Medicare for all proposal...so you can see the insurance that you said has your back wont be an option
Click to expand...

Well Bernie can light that proposal on fire and shove it up his wrinkly azz before it goes out.
 
You think a person who can't resist the urge to rape and kill little kids shouldn't be euthanized? So he gets set free..and it's your kid. Hmmm? Just put him down..like a rabid dog.
 
ax1 said:
Private insurance companies are health care plans. It shouldn't be that way. It should just be between a doctor and patient with no insurance company or government bureaucrat in between since they have absolutely nothing to add to health care.
Click to expand...

Yeah I somewhat agree...but we are too far gone from that at this point
 
Young Gotti said:
Bernie sanders Medicare for all proposal...so you can see the insurance that you said has your back wont be an option
Click to expand...

So Bernie and government policies have my back? Did the VA have our vets back when they were thrown in hospital basements to die just to cut costs? Government having my back my azz. They already are going to screw me out of Social Security money that they stole from me most of my life.

Ill take a private insurance policy on top of it, thanks.
 
Young Gotti said:
That again is false...you are missing the point that if the govt bails someout out...they are not owning the means of production

Straight from Marian Webster:
any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods

If bernie pushed through Medicare for all...the govt would then own the means of production for healthcare, a bail out does not work that way
Click to expand...

False
 
swimfan65 said:
You think a person who can't resist the urge to rape and kill little kids shouldn't be euthanized? So he gets set free..and it's your kid. Hmmm? Just put him down..like a rabid dog.
Click to expand...

Life in prison making license plates and processing out passports for booking international flights sounds good enough to me.
 
ax1 said:
So Bernie and government policies have my back? Did the VA have our vets back when they were thrown in hospital basements to die just to cut costs? Government having my back my azz. They already are going to screw me out of Social Security money that they stole from me most of my life.

Ill take a private insurance policy on top of it, thanks.
Click to expand...

I agree with that...I want my private insurance, it's better and cheaper
 
Young Gotti said:
Wrong...again

As currently written we wouldnt have private insurance companies...the only exception is things like plastic surgery... being on a board like this we know a lot of insurance companies dont even consider that "healthcare" and more so cosmetic

So his medicare for all plan isnt something like canada where you have public and private insurance, it is much different

If someone says health care, what do you think? Not sure what you need clarity on....insurance companies gone..govt steps in and plays the role of insurance companies...minus competition and the govt dictating what they will pay for services
Click to expand...

I only do consulting work for pharma, so bare with my limited knowledge. Insurance companies are only the payers, that literally what they're referred to as. Under Sanders' plan, insurance companies wouldn't exist at all. There is nothing to own. The government would distribute payments.

Health care means everything from the payers to a school nurse. It's everything, not just insurance companies.

So using your criteria for what defines socialism, the government doesn't own anything. They're not taking over insurance companies. On top of that, insurance companies aren't the only entity that drives drug and treatment prices.
 
Only disagree because of all of the legal loopholes..and we pay for that dude, that raped our children, to breathe, to laugh, to get BJs..nah...just kill him
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I only do consulting work for pharma, so bare with my limited knowledge. Insurance companies are only the payers, that literally what they're referred to as. Under Sanders' plan, insurance companies wouldn't exist at all. There is nothing to own. The government would distribute payments.

Health care means everything from the payers to a school nurse. It's everything, not just insurance companies.

So using your criteria for what defines socialism, the government doesn't own anything. They're not taking over insurance companies. On top of that, insurance companies aren't the only entity that drives drug and treatment prices.
Click to expand...

The govt putting insurance companies out of business and taking over what they provided is literally the govt owning that industry haha...but ok
 
Aleksandar37 said:
I only do consulting work for pharma, so bare with my limited knowledge. Insurance companies are only the payers, that literally what they're referred to as. Under Sanders' plan, insurance companies wouldn't exist at all. There is nothing to own. The government would distribute payments.

Health care means everything from the payers to a school nurse. It's everything, not just insurance companies.

So using your criteria for what defines socialism, the government doesn't own anything. They're not taking over insurance companies. On top of that, insurance companies aren't the only entity that drives drug and treatment prices.
Click to expand...

So under his plan not only is he having the government take over, but he is by law abolishing every-bodies personal option to get insured on the side?

Or is he saying insurance companies wouldnt exist at all because he think the demand for them would be by nature wiped out?
 
swimfan65 said:
Only disagree because of all of the legal loopholes..and we pay for that dude, that raped our children, to breathe, to laugh, to get BJs..nah...just kill him
Click to expand...

Im not really going to waste my energy defending pedophiles rights, lol but this better damn be based of definitive evidence because people do go to prison for things for 20-30 years only to find dna evidence that they are innocent.
 
ax1 said:
So under his plan not only is he having the government take over, but he is by law abolishing every-bodies personal option to get insured on the side?

Or is he saying insurance companies wouldnt exist at all because he think the demand for them would be by nature wiped out?
Click to expand...

Nope hes just getting rid of them, you dont even get the option

Some other ppl want to give everyone an option to keep their insurance if they want but not bernie
 
Young Gotti said:
Nope hes just getting rid of them, you dont even get the option

Some other ppl want to give everyone an option to keep their insurance if they want but not bernie
Click to expand...

So just to be clear, its a law in the proposal to abolish them? Just want to be sure since it sounds like you read it.
 
ax1 said:
So under his plan not only is he having the government take over, but he is by law abolishing every-bodies personal option to get insured on the side?

Or is he saying insurance companies wouldnt exist at all because he think the demand for them would be by nature wiped out?
Click to expand...


There would be insurance companies for elective surgeries and cosmetic work but it would be illegal for a private company to offer the same services M4A is already providing because the person has already paid for that through their taxes; they'd essentially be getting charged twice.
 
nostrum420 said:
There would be insurance companies for elective surgeries and cosmetic work but it would be illegal for a private company to offer the same services M4A is already providing because the person has already paid for that through their taxes; they'd essentially be getting charged twice.
Click to expand...

They wouldnt be getting charged twice, someone would first be choosing to (well by law they have to) pay into the M4A system and getting a backup just in case M4A doesnt fall though for them in a timely or quality fashion. M4A wouldnt have anything to lose since this would be a fully covered matter by outside sources and nobody opt out of the M4A tax system.
 
Young Gotti said:
The govt putting insurance companies out of business and taking over what they provided is literally the govt owning that industry haha...but ok
Click to expand...

Insurance is not all of health care, though. It's just the financing. In your bailout defense the government is financing the losses instead of a private insurance company, sooo....?
 
ax1 said:
So just to be clear, its a law in the proposal to abolish them? Just want to be sure since it sounds like you read it.
Click to expand...

Yes

However I wouldnt be honest if I didnt say...he did backtrack a little bit when unions wanted to keep their insurance...not sure if anything changed overall tho and I believe that would only be offered to union employees
 
nostrum420 said:
Insurance is not all of health care, though. It's just the financing. In your bailout defense the government is financing the losses instead of a private insurance company, sooo....?
Click to expand...

Um..well anyone can see the differences and I feel like I laid them out pretty clearly

Not to difficult to grasp though
 
Young Gotti said:
Yes

However I wouldnt be honest if I didnt say...he did backtrack a little bit when unions wanted to keep their insurance...not sure if anything changed overall tho and I believe that would only be offered to union employees
Click to expand...

He is one shady dude, not only did he have the election stolen from him he then endorsed all he pretended to stand against and gets himself a 4th 700k+ vacation home in Vermont. Then the fact that he is a 1% himself its all comical.

Id bet if by some miracle he had M4A passed, most of the gremlins that have put the health care system to shyts over the past couple of decades would be the same people running his system.
 
Page 8, Section 107, Part b

“nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act.”.
 
nostrum420 said:
Page 8, Section 107, Part b

“nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act.”.
Click to expand...

Thats pretty hardcore.
 
Young Gotti said:
Um..well anyone can see the differences and I feel like I laid them out pretty clearly

Not to difficult to grasp though
Click to expand...

Not really. You made a particular exception for farm bailouts the logic of which should apply for M4A. I don't know how you can't see that. With the farm bailouts the government is stepping in and doing what a private insurance would normally handle.
 
nostrum420 said:
Not really. You made a particular exception for farm bailouts the logic of which should apply for M4A. I don't know how you can't see that. With the farm bailouts the government is stepping in and doing what a private insurance would normally handle.
Click to expand...

Again...no, that is not accurate
 
nostrum420 said:
Page 8, Section 107, Part b

“nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act.”.
Click to expand...

Hold on, this is funny but the way it was written was a little to English for me, lol. Did I get this right? I re-read it and as this act does not get in the way of someone getting additional insurance on their own. Right? Lol, Im having a long day.
 
nostrum420 said:
Huh? It leaves it open to the kinds of Cadillac plans you're talking about to cover cosmetic and elective procedures.
Click to expand...

Yeah yeah....I read it to fast without thinking, ignore my very previous post. I got it now thanks. Im getting tired lol.
 
nostrum420 said:
Page 8, Section 107, Part b

“nothing in this Act shall be construed as prohibiting the sale of health insurance coverage for any additional benefits not covered by this Act.”.
Click to expand...

That's saying we can get insurance for stuff not covered in the act which is stuff like plastic surgery
 
Young Gotti said:
I really don't, you havent made a point yet

Not sure how you are trying to make similarities that do not exist
Click to expand...

Farm BailoutMedicare For All
Gov Uses taxpayer moneyGov Uses taxpayer money
If the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. wouldIf the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. would
Even though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately ownedEven though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately owned
 
nostrum420 said:


Farm BailoutMedicare For All
Gov Uses taxpayer moneyGov Uses taxpayer money
If the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. wouldIf the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. would
Even though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately ownedEven though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately owned
Click to expand...
Bahaha

Well that sure is a reach

Giving a private company money to run the company
Vs
Outlawing the companies and have the govt run the industry

Much much different

If the govt came in and put the farms out of business and then made the nation get their food from the govt....then you'd have a point
 
Young Gotti said:
Bahaha

Well that sure is a reach

Giving a private company money to run the company
Vs
Outlawing the companies and have the govt run the industry

Much much different

If the govt came in and put the farms out of business and then made the nation get their food from the govt....then you'd have a point
Click to expand...

But that's not what's happening in M4A. The gov. won't own the doctor's offices or hospitals in the same way the gov. won't own the farms. In both cases the gov. is handling the financing the way an insurance company would in a strictly private system.
 
nostrum420 said:
But that's not what's happening in M4A. The gov. won't own the doctor's offices or hospitals in the same way the gov. won't own the farms. In both cases the gov. is handling the financing the way an insurance company would in a strictly private system.
Click to expand...

Ok, so in your eyes the govt replacing a whole private insurance industry by outlawing them...the govt being in control..essentially forever

Is the same as giving money to a private company and letting them run it independently until the bailout is paid back or whatever the agreement is

Is the same? I'm sorry but that logical is very flawed
 
Young Gotti said:
Ok, so in your eyes the govt replacing a whole private insurance industry by outlawing them...the govt being in control..essentially forever

Is the same as giving money to a private company and letting them run it independently until the bailout is paid back or whatever the agreement is

Is the same? I'm sorry but that logical is very flawed
Click to expand...

They don't pay it back, that's why it's a bailout and not a loan.

The government has taken that whole sector of farm insurance over which is why farm insurance doesn't cover losses from market price fluctuations; it's all property and liability insurance.
 
nostrum420 said:
They don't pay it back, that's why it's a bailout and not a loan.

The government has taken that whole sector of farm insurance over which is why farm insurance doesn't cover losses from market price fluctuations; it's all property and liability insurance.
Click to expand...

Bailout can be in the form of loans, cash...amongst other things
 
Young Gotti said:
Its not
Click to expand...

... It is, though... That's what would determine if the farm bailouts are socialist. 84% of farmers have crop insurance through the FCIC which is subsidized by federal taxes. The bailouts will not be paid back, the crop insurance is overwhelmingly federally owned. I don't know how you can still say that's not socialism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top