An Exclusive Interview With Bernie Sanders
Moderators: kiore, Blip, The_Metatron
laklak wrote:Mismanagement? OUR government? Why, we spend more on defense than the next 5 fucking countries combined, but we still can't conn a fucking ship in a straight line. Or maybe it's we can only conn a ship in a straight line, and anything that gets in out way we just run it the fuck over.
Our government couldn't organize a piss up in a fucking brewery. They can't even keep the goddamn thing functioning from one year to another because they are completely ignorant of anything even approaching realistic taxation and spending policy. These are the same fucking idiots that spend $700 for a special hammers that doesn't do any fucking thing more than a $10 Ace Hardware claw hammer. These are the same imbeciles that just voted in a 700 BILLION dollar defense budget. These are the same wet-brained morons who, Jesus wept, just read the newspaper. You want these numbnut fucking idiots in charge of your healthcare?
Oldskeptic wrote:Single payer? Sure, damn good idea. But not single payer riddled with all of the problems that Medicare currently has. First of all Bernie's "Medicare for All" won't be single payer if the system if left as is; Not with required supplemental insurance policies. It's still a mix of government and private programs.
Secondly, even if passed Bernie's is not the bold leap forward that so many Bernie fans demand. It is incremental, and there is no guarantee and little confidence that the increments beyond the initial provisions of inclusion of under 18 years of age and allowing a buy in at 55.
Thirdly, its grand standing. The bill has 16 co-sponsors but little hope of passage and even less hope that the plan would work. It's just so some Democrats can point to their support of health care and Republicans' lack of support in the next election.
Fourth, no one knows how much Bernie's "Medicare for All" is going to cost - no one has a clue. But one thing is certain: Backers of Bernie's bill significantly under estimate the cost while opponents significantly over estimate the cost. And there in lies the main sticky point; two thirds of the people are not ready to buy a pig in a poke. They want to know what it's going to cost and who's paying. Bernie doesn't have an answer, or to put it more precisely, he has too many answers for who's paying, and the answer is everyone. And still, if every one of Bernie's funding methods were used he'd still be short by the same amount or more (16 trillion dollars over ten years).
Willie71 wrote:Oldskeptic wrote:Single payer? Sure, damn good idea. But not single payer riddled with all of the problems that Medicare currently has. First of all Bernie's "Medicare for All" won't be single payer if the system if left as is; Not with required supplemental insurance policies. It's still a mix of government and private programs.
Secondly, even if passed Bernie's is not the bold leap forward that so many Bernie fans demand. It is incremental, and there is no guarantee and little confidence that the increments beyond the initial provisions of inclusion of under 18 years of age and allowing a buy in at 55.
Thirdly, its grand standing. The bill has 16 co-sponsors but little hope of passage and even less hope that the plan would work. It's just so some Democrats can point to their support of health care and Republicans' lack of support in the next election.
Fourth, no one knows how much Bernie's "Medicare for All" is going to cost - no one has a clue. But one thing is certain: Backers of Bernie's bill significantly under estimate the cost while opponents significantly over estimate the cost. And there in lies the main sticky point; two thirds of the people are not ready to buy a pig in a poke. They want to know what it's going to cost and who's paying. Bernie doesn't have an answer, or to put it more precisely, he has too many answers for who's paying, and the answer is everyone. And still, if every one of Bernie's funding methods were used he'd still be short by the same amount or more (16 trillion dollars over ten years).
Are you still blaming Bernie for Hillarie's loss?
Willie71 wrote:Clinton said single payer was impossible.
Willie71 wrote:It's gaining a lot of traction.
Sendraks wrote:To put it another way, Wil's desire to see single payer introduced is outweighed by his concerns about the implementation of the system. So it is pretty clear that this is something where either changes to proposals or evidence that Wil has misunderstood the proposals (there's no suggestion I can see that he has), might make him re-evaluate the position.
I'm not convinced that appeal to emotion arguments about family members getting cancer are terribly persuasive. Wil's concern that if the system is poorly set up and administrated, it will make fundamentally very little difference to the outcomes for family members under those circumstances. The financial argument alone isn't enough. An improved fiscal position means little if you're dead or your loved one is dead because the implemented single payer healthcare system turns out not to work.
I don't necessarily agree with Wil's position but, I understand where he is coming from and needling him on the principles behind single payer is pointless and does little to advance the argument.
The issue for the US is one where there isn't yet widespread deeply ingrained support for single payer across US society. So the approach of "you've got to start somewhere" and introduce a single payer system, which you then iterate until it works, isn't necessarily going to fly and there is a real risk that such progress could be reversed. Whatever gets introduced needs to have public confidence that it will work from the outset, financially, administratively and in terms of outcomes.
laklak wrote:That's what the Federal Government pays for Medicare, and a huge percentage of that money is spent on administration
laklak wrote:This is what you get when you trust our Federal Government to do anything - a complete clusterfuck. And people wonder why I am so dead set against giving those idiots any more power over my life.
laklak wrote:That's what the Federal Government pays for Medicare, and a huge percentage of that money is spent on administration. The rules for getting something as simple as a occupational therapy session are, to put is mildly, Byzantine. Mrs. Lak finally stopped practicing OT because she spent almost 75% of her time on government mandated paperwork. Now, someone is paying for the roughly 6 hours a day she spent following their rules, filling out paperwork, and the like, and those rules, regulations et. al. were promulgated and enforced by Federal bureaucrats.
It's fucking insane. Here's one little example - Medicare doesn't pay for residential care homes, but they'll pay for rehab, in 180 (or maybe it's 90 days, I can't remember) day increments. So, nursing homes keep patients for 90 days, then send them to the hospital, who run batteries of expensive tests and refer them to rehab. Then they go back to the nursing home for another stint till it's time to go back to the hospital again. It costs literally millions upon millions upon millions of dollars every year to do this, when what they fucking need to do is pay for a residential care home at literally 1/100 of the price.
This is what you get when you trust our Federal Government to do anything - a complete clusterfuck. And people wonder why I am so dead set against giving those idiots any more power over my life.
laklak wrote:It's fucking insane. Here's one little example - Medicare doesn't pay for residential care homes, but they'll pay for rehab, in 180 (or maybe it's 90 days, I can't remember) day increments. So, nursing homes keep patients for 90 days, then send them to the hospital, who run batteries of expensive tests and refer them to rehab. Then they go back to the nursing home for another stint till it's time to go back to the hospital again. It costs literally millions upon millions upon millions of dollars every year to do this, when what they fucking need to do is pay for a residential care home at literally 1/100 of the price.
laklak wrote:No fucking idea. Maybe they don't have a bloated, parasitic, self-perpetuating Federal Government run by venal, self-aggrandizing, power-hungry criminals, supported by a non-elected, ineffectual, hidebound bureaucracy that rewards incompetence, punishes independent thought, and exists only to promulgate rules and regulations designed specifically to insure their own continued survival?
Just a thought.
laklak wrote:That's what the Federal Government pays for Medicare, and a huge percentage of that money is spent on administration. The rules for getting something as simple as a occupational therapy session are, to put is mildly, Byzantine. Mrs. Lak finally stopped practicing OT because she spent almost 75% of her time on government mandated paperwork. Now, someone is paying for the roughly 6 hours a day she spent following their rules, filling out paperwork, and the like, and those rules, regulations et. al. were promulgated and enforced by Federal bureaucrats.
It's fucking insane. Here's one little example - Medicare doesn't pay for residential care homes, but they'll pay for rehab, in 180 (or maybe it's 90 days, I can't remember) day increments. So, nursing homes keep patients for 90 days, then send them to the hospital, who run batteries of expensive tests and refer them to rehab. Then they go back to the nursing home for another stint till it's time to go back to the hospital again. It costs literally millions upon millions upon millions of dollars every year to do this, when what they fucking need to do is pay for a residential care home at literally 1/100 of the price.
This is what you get when you trust our Federal Government to do anything - a complete clusterfuck. And people wonder why I am so dead set against giving those idiots any more power over my life.
laklak wrote:Sure, a lot of old people in care homes need to go to the hospital on occasion, but not every single one, every 90-180 days. And those that did not actually have a medical reason to go and were only discharged because of stupid, short sighted, useless Medicare regulations certainly do NOT need several tens of thousands of dollars worth of useless tests. Like OS said, Medicare is a money making machine.
The idea that the Feds are going to "reform" the system is laughable.
Return to News, Politics & Current Affairs
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest