Well Bernie can light that proposal on fire and shove it up his wrinkly azz before it goes out.Bernie sanders Medicare for all proposal...so you can see the insurance that you said has your back wont be an option
Well Bernie can light that proposal on fire and shove it up his wrinkly azz before it goes out.Bernie sanders Medicare for all proposal...so you can see the insurance that you said has your back wont be an option
Evidence? I'd like to see these debates.Nope sorry, it isnt
There's been much debate over this topic and the end result in many of the cases is...not socialism
Yeah I somewhat agree...but we are too far gone from that at this pointPrivate 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.
Quick google or youtube search hahaEvidence? I'd like to see these debates.
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.Bernie sanders Medicare for all proposal...so you can see the insurance that you said has your back wont be an option
FalseThat 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
Life in prison making license plates and processing out passports for booking international flights sounds good enough to me.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.
Either way the discussion wasnt about if it'll go through or if it was goodWell Bernie can light that proposal on fire and shove it up his wrinkly azz before it goes out.
NopeFalse
I agree with that...I want my private insurance, it's better and cheaperSo 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.
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.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
The govt putting insurance companies out of business and taking over what they provided is literally the govt owning that industry haha...but okI 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.
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?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.
That guys a doof
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.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
Nope hes just getting rid of them, you dont even get the optionSo 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?
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.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
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?
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.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.
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....?The govt putting insurance companies out of business and taking over what they provided is literally the govt owning that industry haha...but ok
YesSo 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.
Um..well anyone can see the differences and I feel like I laid them out pretty clearlyInsurance 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....?
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.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
Thats pretty hardcore.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.”.
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.Um..well anyone can see the differences and I feel like I laid them out pretty clearly
Not to difficult to grasp though
Huh? It leaves it open to the kinds of Cadillac plans you're talking about to cover cosmetic and elective procedures.Thats pretty hardcore.
Again...no, that is not accurateNot 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.
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.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.”.
Yeah yeah....I read it to fast without thinking, ignore my very previous post. I got it now thanks. Im getting tired lol.Huh? It leaves it open to the kinds of Cadillac plans you're talking about to cover cosmetic and elective procedures.
Your own definition.The govt putting insurance companies out of business and taking over what they provided is literally the govt owning that industry haha...but ok
If its accurate...I'll use itYour own definition.
Do you really not see what I'm saying or are you being purposely obtuse?If its accurate...I'll use it
That's saying we can get insurance for stuff not covered in the act which is stuff like plastic surgeryPage 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.”.
I really don't, you havent made a point yetDo you really not see what I'm saying or are you being purposely obtuse?
| |||||||||||
Bahaha
Farm Bailout Medicare For All Gov Uses taxpayer money Gov Uses taxpayer money If the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. would If the Gov. didn't do it a private insurance co. would Even though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately owned Even though Gov. pays, the physical means of production remains privately owned
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.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
Ok, so in your eyes the govt replacing a whole private insurance industry by outlawing them...the govt being in control..essentially foreverBut 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.
They don't pay it back, that's why it's a bailout and not a loan.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
Bailout can be in the form of loans, cash...amongst other thingsThey 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.
The fact that the government basically owns crop insurance is more the thrust of the debate here, IMO...Bailout can be in the form of loans, cash...amongst other things
Its notThe fact that the government basically owns crop insurance is more the thrust of the debate here, IMO...
... 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.Its not
Now there’s something I can get behind!For example, I believe there is no cure for pedophilia and that they should be killed. Certainly not a liberal statement.
Now there’s something I can get behind!For example, I believe there is no cure for pedophilia and that they should be killed. Certainly not a liberal statement.
Using his logic, State Farm encompasses the auto industry.Your own definition.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Anyone still use this website? | Anabolics | 0 | ||
Anyone still sell plcar in powder? | Supplements | 1 | ||
Does anyone still use MST products? | Supplements | 5 | ||
Anyone still taking soy lecithin for the phosphatidic acid? | Supplements | 63 | ||
CL Green Magnitude : Anyone Still Take This? | Supplements | 30 |