2 edits
@kevcvs57 saidWe are Talking about ALL OF IT, Kev. Bernie and AOC are, so we have to as well. You say ‘milking’ by insurance companies,,,,,so, may I likewise say milking taxpayers for your generous healthcare? BTW, An insurance company is a business, how they spend their money and what for is their business. You lot really DON’T get it, do you. Amazing.
But we are not talking about college we are talking about something as basic as healthcare and whether you believe everyone should have access to it.
You don’t believe they should and you’d prefer that the insurance companies to keep milking the lifeblood out of the system ( maybe something to do with that portfolio of yours Joe).
That’s your stance and your welcome to it ...[text shortened]... the viewpoint of hard nosed economics because it disagrees with your stance rather than supports it.
Edit: Whether I believe people should get free healthcare is not really in this discussion, this discussion is how in the hell money is there to pay for it. Whew.
1 edit
@AverageJoe1
A new member of RHP May sign in today and ask us all how the govt can pay for the healthcare of 330:000,000 people.
Kev will answer, ‘ Well, whether you want it or not...”, Or,,”Do you want us all to have free healthcare? Or not?” Or, “ I can’t believe you asked that question. Do you actually believe blah blah blah.........”
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidThe response from what I can see "liberals thought it all out...its hard nosed economics! Don't worry, let them do all the thinking...just sit back and collect your check!"
@AverageJoe1
A new member of RHP May sign in today and ask us all how the govt can pay for the healthcare of 330:000,000 people.
Kev will answer, ‘ Well, whether you want it or not...”, Or,,”Do you want us all to have free healthcare? Or not?” Or, “ I can’t believe you asked that question. Do you actually believe blah blah blah.........”
@averagejoe1 saidYou still have not read the report on Medicare for All in the Lancet .
@AverageJoe1
A new member of RHP May sign in today and ask us all how the govt can pay for the healthcare of 330:000,000 people.
Kev will answer, ‘ Well, whether you want it or not...”, Or,,”Do you want us all to have free healthcare? Or not?” Or, “ I can’t believe you asked that question. Do you actually believe blah blah blah.........”
You just rant and rave your usual nonsense .
1 edit
@averagejoe1 saidAnswer: The same way they pay for all those other great things they do.
@AverageJoe1
A new member of RHP May sign in today and ask us all how the govt can pay for the healthcare of 330:000,000 people.
Kev will answer, ‘ Well, whether you want it or not...”, Or,,”Do you want us all to have free healthcare? Or not?” Or, “ I can’t believe you asked that question. Do you actually believe blah blah blah.........”
This past year, $22 billion paid to farmers to continue producing non-competitive products.
This past year, $20 billion per yer in direct payments to fossil fuel companies who also can't produce globally competitive products without losing money.
About 1/2 of the Pentagon's bloated budget goes directly to fund contracts at private for-profit companies, including over $100 billion paid directly to just three corporations. Sure, they're making guns and stuff, but their CEOs are pocketing hundreds of millions of tax dollars just to retain those big cheese contracts. The contractor piece of the pie grows every year. Capitalism hard at work?
Speaking of the pentagon, the F-35 alone costs $1.4 trillion, has never been used in combat and may never. The entire point of national defense is to protect the populace and save lives.
One can make the argument that the $1.4 trillion blown on the F-35 would have better served the American people were it spent on health care.
@wildgrass saidIt’s enough to make a moon-eyed man go blind. Does Kamala have feel for balance sheets and the like? Money ? Economics? Hope so, for all those who enjoy govt dependence.
Answer: The same way they pay for all those other great things they do.
This past year, $22 billion paid to farmers to continue producing non-competitive products.
This past year, $20 billion per yer in direct payments to fossil fuel companies who also can't produce globally competitive products without losing money.
About 1/2 of the Pentagon's bloated budget goes ...[text shortened]... rillion blown on the F-35 would have better served the American people were it spent on health care.
@averagejoe1 saidRight. Kinda weird that the liberals have been supplanted by the hard right politicians as nanny state big government spenders. The GOP doesn't want the poors to have access to health care, but they are still a lot better than Democrats at burning huge piles of tax money.
It’s enough to make a moon-eyed man go blind. Does Kamala have feel for balance sheets and the like? Money ? Economics? Hope so, for all those who enjoy govt dependence.
@averagejoe1 saidKamala hasn't gone bankrupt 4 times. Is it 5 ? Is it 4 ? Bah !! We've lost count.
It’s enough to make a moon-eyed man go blind. Does Kamala have feel for balance sheets and the like? Money ? Economics? Hope so, for all those who enjoy govt dependence.
4 edits
@wildgrass saidThe 1.4 trillion for the jet was a one time deal. We spend nearly the summation of all that pork you mention including the jet ( less Social Security -Medicare ) annually on social welfare programs already. Taking over the Health Insurance business would be an additional multi trillion dollar expense to the contributing public annually.
Answer: The same way they pay for all those other great things they do.
This past year, $22 billion paid to farmers to continue producing non-competitive products.
This past year, $20 billion per yer in direct payments to fossil fuel companies who also can't produce globally competitive products without losing money.
About 1/2 of the Pentagon's bloated budget goes ...[text shortened]... rillion blown on the F-35 would have better served the American people were it spent on health care.
@joe-shmo saidI'd believe you about the one time deal thing if the pentagon budget ever went down.
The 1.4 trillion for the jet was a one time deal. We spend nearly the summation of all that pork you mention including the jet ( less Social Security -Medicare ) annually on social welfare programs already. Taking over the Health Insurance business would be an additional multi trillion dollar expense to the contributing public annually.
Conservatives spend more than liberals. That's a modern day fact.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidThey didn't spend 140% of the annual US defense budget on the development of the F15 year after year. That 1.4 trillion was the cumulative cost to develop/improve it over the course of 5 decades or so...
I'd believe you about the one time deal thing if the pentagon budget ever went down.
Conservatives spend more than liberals. That's a modern day fact.
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html
@joe-shmo saidWow...some leftist baffoon thumbed down a fact...big surprise.
They didn't spend 140% of the annual US defense budget on the development of the F15 year after year. That 1.4 trillion was the cumulative cost to develop/improve it over the course of 5 decades or so...
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html
😵
@joe-shmo saidAnd that’s just one jet being tweaked so that they than can put another number in front of it. Can you imagine how much they’ll Chuck at corporate America if they actually have to develop a whole new jet.
They didn't spend 140% of the annual US defense budget on the development of the F15 year after year. That 1.4 trillion was the cumulative cost to develop/improve it over the course of 5 decades or so...
https://www.cnbc.com/2014/07/31/how-dods-15-trillion-f-35-broke-the-air-force.html
Poor old average Joe tax payer and when he's finished buying the shiny new toy for the pentagon he can sell his house to buy that kidney his wife needs. The land of the duped.
@joe-shmo said"What is your justification that universal healthcare will be cheaper to the average economic contributor than the current system?"
Your full of crap meter is calibrated by the function:
f(z) = 1- 1/(z^z)
where z = the number of times you've used the term "hard nosed economics" without any rationalization.
What is your justification that universal healthcare will be cheaper to the average economic contributor than the current system?
Skips an entire level of intermediaries. Removes administrative costs related with processing insurance claims.
Not to mention, you know, the tiny issue that maybe healthcare might be a right and not a luxury product leeches could make profit on. Neah you're not ready for that yet.
For now we will just stick to proving that single payer healthcare is actually cheaper, even with increased taxes
@joe-shmo said"Taking over the Health Insurance business would be an additional multi trillion dollar expense to the contributing public annually."
The 1.4 trillion for the jet was a one time deal. We spend nearly the summation of all that pork you mention including the jet ( less Social Security -Medicare ) annually on social welfare programs already. Taking over the Health Insurance business would be an additional multi trillion dollar expense to the contributing public annually.
What you fail to mention (or maybe you're ignorant) is that the US healthcare will cost trillions anyway in the next 10 years. What you fail to mention is that going single payer would actually be less expensive than keeping it as is.