Election 2020

[Sour Masher]

The system maybe flawed, but your solution is also flawed. Nothing wrong with examining our tax laws, raising some rates, closing some loopholes, but why would you support an idea of a wealth tax that has demonstrably failed in Europe? And again, there are strong arguments as to its Constitutionality.

I could flip that. Why are you against universal health care that has worked in Europe?

[nots]

I could flip that. Why are you against universal health care that has worked in Europe?

I believe you can purchase supplemental private insurance in Britain, Spain, Sweden, Italy, France, Norway, Canada and probably a few others. Under the Sanders plan (and probably the Warren plan but who can be sure given her evasiveness) you wouldn’t be able to do that here so you are actually proposing something most (all?) of Europe doesn’t do.
Germany has a lot of private options. Switzerland and The Netherlands are similar to our ACA.

[Sour Masher]

I believe you can purchase supplemental private insurance in Britain, Spain, Sweden, Italy, France, Norway, Canada and probably a few others. Under the Sanders plan (and probably the Warren plan but who can be sure given her evasiveness) you wouldn’t be able to do that here so you are actually proposing something most (all?) of Europe doesn’t do.
Germany has a lot of private options. Switzerland and The Netherlands are similar to our ACA.

Fair enough, but weren't you against the ACA? Would you be in favor of a system that allowed supplemental insurance?

[nots]

Fair enough, but weren't you against the ACA? Would you be in favor of a system that allowed supplemental insurance?

I am against increasing the scope of the federal government in just about everything.
I was against the ACA and with good reason. It did not deliver average savings of $2500, premiums in a lot of state’s skyrocketed or carriers left the exchange, and we all know that ‘you can keep your doctor’ was voted ‘Lie of the Year’ by the folks at Fact-check. However, I do believe there is a frame work there to work with. Maybe limit the huge medical malpractice awards that forces or obligates doctors to recommend unnecessary tests to shield themselves from litigation. Maybe a dedicated tax increase on the ultra wealthy to defray the costs. Maybe some additional regulations on what insurance is obligated to pay for. There’s a framework there to work with.
For the record, I prefer the ACA x1000 compared to a fully run federal program with no private insurance options.

[Sour Masher]

I don't think you have to worry about a fully run federal program with no private insurance options happening for the foreseeable future, regardless of who is elected.

[revo]

You're right, my real name is Kon.

Kon!!!!!!!

[GwynnInTheHall]

The system maybe flawed, but your solution is also flawed. Nothing wrong with examining our tax laws, raising some rates, closing some loopholes, but why would you support an idea of a wealth tax that has demonstrably failed in Europe? And again, there are strong arguments as to its Constitutionality.

What's your solution then? If legality/constitutionality are paramount to ethics and morality, IS there a solution? And because the constitution was put together by wealthy landowners and most laws on the books have been geared towards protecting wealth and power can anything be realistically fixed?

The bottom-line is this--you either believe every person has a RIGHT to health care or you do not.

If you do, making that a reality should be your focus and how it happens is less important than making it happen.

Yes Tax the fuck out of the super wealthy, If they bolt tax and tariff any financial transactions they conduct with the US or companies IN the US. Reduce Military spending. Lower medical co0sts by regulating Pharma and the outrageous bills hospitals charge (yes I know much of that comes from malpractice insurance, but fix that too) I know nothing is an easy solution, but people are dying or being forced into poverty because of our current system.

It either matters to you (enough to make sacrifice) or it does not.

And I a NOT saying --it doesn't matter to you--I'm being general in my use of the word You.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Ok, I will ask it this way then--do you think if HRC attacked Bernie right now that he'd imply she is running a secret conspiracy to destroy him, take agency away from American voters, and is really behind the scenes pulling all the strings, and a vote for anyone but Bernie is a vote for HRC? I don't think he would, especially since that sort of thing reminds me of the Protocols of Zion BS that one super suspicious poster who was here during the 2016 was spouting before he disappeared once Trump got elected. Again, I am not defending HRC here. I don't see how anything I have said can be taken that way. Everyone should call her out and remind her she had her chance, she needs to go away. No one would be more angry than me if she decides to jump into the race. I still cannot bring myself to thinking she will. I will admit I am wrong if she does and at that point, I hope all the candidates go on the offense against her. Until then, I hope that very idea is laughed off until she realizes how horrible it is. Connecting her to the other candidates is a bad idea for anyone who cares about defeating Trump. I can't think of a more damaging attack strategy than connecting other candidates to HRC. She is politically toxic.

ETA: Can you at least admit how absurdly narcissistic it is for Tulsi to suggest this election is really her vs HRC? She is damn near last place and HRC isn't even running! I think she really believes she'd be winning if it wasn't for HRC undermining her. That is some Trump level hubris.

You've used this word several times and I think it's use here is incorrect--Arrogance, ego and/or anger all play a part, but narcissistic? I disagree. Again, when someone hits you with accusations as over the top like HRCs bullshit comments, you react.

As to her--the race is between me and HRC--Every one of the candidates say-- WHEN I'm president, not IF. You HAVE to speak and think as though you are the BEST for the job in pretty much every occupation or at least you should. Every actor thinks they are the best for the role at an audition, every poker player has to feel they're the best player at the table and will tell you --I'm winning this tournament if asked and on and on. Athletes, Lawyers, pretty much everyone worth a shit at what they do has some ego and to some folks ego can come off as arrogance, but Narcissisms? That's a mental illness, it contains components in it's manifestation that Tulsi has not exhibited.

So while I agree on pretty much everything else in your post, I strongly object to your use of this word in this instance.

[Sour Masher]

I picked up the word after TW used it for hrc. I was just equating their actions of putting themselves center stage when neither are. Probably is the wrong word for Tulsi. I just wish Tulsi would not equate ither candidates with hrc.

[nots]

I don't think you have to worry about a fully run federal program with no private insurance options happening for the foreseeable future, regardless of who is elected.

I mean you can say that, but if that’s their campaign pitch, I am going to react to it.
I do appreciate the dialogue. I have been looking at various articles on health care plans most of the afternoon. It’s been a good educational experience for me.

[Teenwolf]

I mean you can say that, but if that’s their campaign pitch, I am going to react to it.
I do appreciate the dialogue. I have been looking at various articles on health care plans most of the afternoon. It’s been a good educational experience for me.

As a Canadian, I will offer that there's no way to have a 100% public health care system handling everything. Even in Canada, if Vlad Jr suffers an injury, he gets the MRI right away from a private clinic, he's not dealing with a waiting list. Not everything is covered, nor should it be. But that's like the 53 cases out of 12 million you mentioned that Ontario couldn't handle. The vast majority of health care is covered.

[Sour Masher]

Well, if I were conspiracy minded, I'd say Tulsi is really the candidate HRC is trying to get into the WH, because her attack on her is showing just how politically toxic HRC is--it is spiking interest and support for Tulsi. The best way to gain support among many is to have HRC say you are being groomed by Russia, it seems. Not all that surprising. Either HRC likes Tulsi or she is incredibly politically ignorant for making this claim. Probably the latter given her performance in 2016.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...pat/ar-AAJ3voh

[Sour Masher]

Warren says she has been working for months on a plan to pay for Med4All that she will be releasing soon. Should be interesting to see what she comes up with. Love her or loathe her, you gotta admit she often comes up with creative solutions you don't often see from other candidates.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...GEz?li=BBnb7Kz

[nots]

Warren says she has been working for months on a plan to pay for Med4All that she will be releasing soon. Should be interesting to see what she comes up with. Love her or loathe her, you gotta admit she often comes up with creative solutions you don't often see from other candidates.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...GEz?li=BBnb7Kz

Getting her to admit she has to raise taxes on the middle class would be a start.

[GwynnInTheHall]

Getting her to admit she has to raise taxes on the middle class would be a start.

What do you consider the middle class?