Kind of the warning sign I'm eluding to, and I'm just not sure why it's not obvious that having the government in control of healthcare is a bad thing.
Kind of the warning sign I'm eluding to, and I'm just not sure why it's not obvious that having the government in control of healthcare is a bad thing.
Anytime the federal government is involved, they screw up something that is working and give us a broken system that is costly and offers less.
Correct and who's screwing them over? Yet you want to give them MORE control?!
I don't know what your family size or income level but what am I missing here?
College is what you make it, and in a lot of cases, not needed. Scholarships and hard work are a thing, no need to wait for someone to hand you something.
Yes, "we" can, but "they" should stay out of it.
You're still not making sense. You said...
"So what do you do with the folks who have paid into the system but have not drawn down from the system? I have paid into the system for going on 40 years, or the folks who are elderly drawing down from the system?"
Can you clarify what you're talking about with regards to under 65 coverage? Namely, why would anything change for those on Medicare?
Last edited:
This is the result of government handling the economy. We have seen the same outcome with healthcare since Obamacare. Apply the same logic to everything the .gov touches. They don’t care about the results of their actions, The only care that they did “something”.
You want to remove the .gov from control and regulation for those who have to buy health insurance yet it sounds like you are OK with the .gov control of medicare, SSI and SS.
So if I understand your point of view, you are not ok with .gov having its hands in those who buy health insurance but have no issues with the .gov having its hands in medicare, which would mean its going to be funded as it always has been by payroll taxes, so nothing really changes, folks like me still get shafted by being forced to pay for the healthcare of others while having to purchase my own plan.
Its a all in or all out game here.
Either we end it all, and start over or keep trudging along as usual.
Not asking for handouts. Come on guy, you don’t get that it’s immoral, the system that is in place? Not once in this thread have I asked for a handout. I’m illustrating the patently unjust and immoral system that is forming/has formed in this country and how it’s going to end the middle class.
Using the old principled conservative reply of “quit asking for free stuff” doesn’t work.
Everything I’ve talked about require paying into the system to pay for it. No handouts.
No. That's YOUR argument and assumptions, not mine.
The reality is that Medicare is established and pulling the rug out from under everyone would be catastrophic. Would there have been a better way about going about it? I think so. Changes? Yep. Burning down the house or giving the government full control as our only options? Nah...Retarded.
According to an estimate by the Mercatus Center, "Medicare for All" would cost $32.6 trillion over its first 10 years. Even doubling corporate and individual income taxes wouldn't be enough to fund it.
‘Medicare for All’ will never work, so let’s stop pushing it
If Medicare for all can’t work in Vermont, one of the wealthiest, healthiest and smallest states in the union, it can’t work nationally.
thehill.com
I'm not sure why I'm arguing against Bernie Sanders talking points on this board but here I am.
Similar threads
