So is this why Trump buried Ivana at his golf course?

[gounion]

He who controls the cash controls the business. If you knew anything about business you would know this. So yeah, giving the government a monopoly on the payment system gives them to ability to control the underlying business. After all all those providers don’t work for free.

Still doesn't control the business. I mean, if you hate monopoly so much, why aren't you upset that the government "controls" the defense industry? The fact that private, corporate and non-profit as well as governmental organizations work in the medical field ensures competition.

Again, the corporations have destroyed our medical system, so it's time for a change. But you've got your grubby hands on the gravy train, so your wanting it to continue running.

It works in many different countries, all better than in ours. Why are you so concerned about us continuing to pay twice or more what any other country pays for care, and we don't even cover everyone? Why do you want the status quo so bad?

[JoeMemphis]

Still doesn't control the business. I mean, if you hate monopoly so much, why aren't you upset that the government "controls" the defense industry? The fact that private, corporate and non-profit as well as governmental organizations work in the medical field ensures competition.

Again, the corporations have destroyed our medical system, so it's time for a change. But you've got your grubby hands on the gravy train, so your wanting it to continue running.

It works in many different countries, all better than in ours. Why are you so concerned about us continuing to pay twice or more what any other country pays for care, and we don't even cover everyone? Why do you want the status quo so bad?

National defense is one of the areas mentioned in the constitution as a responsibility of the Federal government. Running a health insurance company isn’t mentioned anywhere in the constitution. I don’t have an issue with the current entitlement programs. I do take issue with a government grab for control of an existing private industry.

The government has regulatory authority in the health care industry. Supposedly this is to address abuses and provide for the general welfare. ACA was a modification of that regulatory environment put forward by your party as the solution. A solution that has delivered a health care environment you call a disaster. So now you seek to give government complete control over that industry that they can’t seem to properly regulate. I’m unconvinced.

Implement it in this country in a state where people in your party control the government. Demonstrate the concept in this country, under our laws rather than cram a decision down the throats of people living in states that want no part of another one of your government solutions. There’s nothing holding you back except your ability to get your own folks to buy in. Therein lies the problem.

[gounion]

National defense is one of the areas mentioned in the constitution as a responsibility of the Federal government. Running a health insurance company isn’t mentioned anywhere in the constitution. I don’t have an issue with the current entitlement programs. I do take issue with a government grab for control of an existing private industry.

The government has regulatory authority in the health care industry. Supposedly this is to address abuses and provide for the general welfare. ACA was a modification of that regulatory environment put forward by your party as the solution. A solution that has delivered a health care environment you call a disaster. So now you seek to give government complete control over that industry that they can’t seem to properly regulate. I’m unconvinced.

Implement it in this country in a state where people in your party control the government. Demonstrate the concept in this country, under our laws rather than cram a decision down the throats of people living in states that want no part of another one of your government solutions. There’s nothing holding you back except your ability to get your own folks to buy in. Therein lies the problem.

Bullshit. Tell you what, Joe. You argue for the status quo. You want to keep families begging on GoFundMe to keep their children alive. You love all the medical debt. Why? Because you are personally getting income from those investments.

You say all this shit - why don't we talk about the problems with our system. Explain how you would fix this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sWLSDaObkk

Do you think the richest country on earth should have to have their citizens beg for money so that you can make the big bucks? Yes or no?

[JoeMemphis]

Bullshit. Tell you what, Joe. You argue for the status quo. You want to keep families begging on GoFundMe to keep their children alive. You love all the medical debt. Why? Because you are personally getting income from those investments.

You say all this shit - why don't we talk about the problems with our system. Explain how you would fix this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sWLSDaObkk

Do you think the richest country on earth should have to have their citizens beg for money so that you can make the big bucks? Yes or no?

I’m arguing to continue to operate under ACA which is a body of laws passed as the “solution” to affordability issues by the party and politician you support.

[gounion]

I’m arguing to continue to operate under ACA which is a body of laws passed as the “solution” to affordability issues by the party and politician you support.

So you have no solutions and want the gravy train to continue.

And you have no heart.

[JoeMemphis]

So you have no solutions and want the gravy train to continue.

And you have no heart.

My solution at the moment is to live with the solution you and your party passed so enthusiastically 10+ years ago as the the answer to affordability and coverage issues in health insurance and healthcare. If you believe that solution to be inadequate, then perhaps you should question your own logic and your own judgement. That being said, the fact that you consider your last solution to have done little to nothing to prevent this “disaster” in health care isn’t a ringing endorsement for a new solution which doubles down on your last solution. At a minimum, you should sell and implement your plan in one of the richest blue states in the US and demonstrate that your solution is more than blue sky but actually works in the field in this country.

[Libertas]

https://twitter.com/tomiahonen/status/1 ... kzVwxoTyog

My Dearest Vladimir

How's your war going in Ukraine? Did I misunderstand? Wasn't it supposed to last 3 days. It's been over 6 months

I'm miserable. Karl Rove says I'm guilty of espionage. Ingraham abandons me. Chris Christie says I was wrong. Ronna has stopped paying my lawyers

[carmenjonze]

At a minimum, you should sell and implement your plan in one of the richest blue states in the US and demonstrate that your solution is more than blue sky but actually works in the field in this country.

Give it a rest. Leave my state out of your stupid fantasy life and quit repeating this garbage. What is wrong with you.

[Libertas]

Give it a rest. Leave my state out of your stupid fantasy life and quit repeating this garbage. What is wrong with you.

Con has a fantasy that UHC is tried somewhere in USA and it fails and people die.

[ProfX]

It's almost as if there aren't dozens of countries already using some form of UHC system (not necessarily single payer, as I've noted). And none of them have collapsed.

Oh, but I know, they aren't uniquely, exceptional Americans, so what works in their countries couldn't possibly here.

[Libertas]

It's almost as if there aren't dozens of countries already using some form of UHC system (not necessarily single payer, as I've noted). And none of them have collapsed.

Oh, but I know, they aren't uniquely, exceptional Americans, so what works in their countries couldn't possibly here.

If con has to wait 3 weeks for a non emergency surgery instead of two, it does not matter how many Americans have to die to avoid that.

I know this because of my past.

[JoeMemphis]

It's almost as if there aren't dozens of countries already using some form of UHC system (not necessarily single payer, as I've noted). And none of them have collapsed.

Oh, but I know, they aren't uniquely, exceptional Americans, so what works in their countries couldn't possibly here.

So do it here. In a blue state. Let’s see how well it works.

[ProfX]

Whatever "it" means.

Universal Health Care doesn't have to be single payer, OR M4A, and not even necessarily a public option, though for a U.S. context, that latter method would fit best into our current ACA-based structure.

Worldwide, different countries do it in at least 6 different ways. Including a wholly private insurance model.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

There are a lot of different things that have been tried worldwide, and could be tried here.

[gounion]

So do it here. In a blue state. Let’s see how well it works.

We already know how well it works, nationwide. Medicare. We just need to expand it. Simple.

[carmenjonze]

So do it here. In a blue state. Let’s see how well it works.

Assume a can opener.

JFC you are an ignorant a-hole.

[Libertas]

Assume a can opener.

JFC you are an ignorant a-hole.

The entire healthcare system is BASED in a for profit insurance platform.

Things like for profit hospitals have to go if UHC is going to work, as I am sure is the case everywhere else in the world.

[carmenjonze]

The entire healthcare system is BASED in a for profit insurance platform.

Things like for profit hospitals have to go if UHC is going to work, as I am sure is the case everywhere else in the world.

Making munny off of other people’s suffering. Can it get more conservative?

[Libertas]

Making munny off of other people’s suffering. Can it get more conservative?

They really do want to get that surgery one week earlier even though it will mean 40 million people wont have healthcare.

It is why we can't be in the same country the same society the same economic system, you and I and Democrats and liberals and progressives do not want people to suffer and we're willing to make tiny sacrifices to that end. It only has to be tiny.

Right wingers don't give a shit about anybody but themselves at all.

Big difference

[carmenjonze]

They really do want to get that surgery one week earlier even though it will mean 40 million people wont have healthcare.

It is why we can't be in the same country the same society the same economic system, you and I and Democrats and liberals and progressives do not want people to suffer and we're willing to make tiny sacrifices to that end. It only has to be tiny.

Right wingers don't give a shit about anybody but themselves at all.

Big difference

Reminds me of all those grifting suburbanites in LA who clamored onto the hood and barrio for the first time in their helicopter parent lives, to bogart the vaccines when they first came out.

Because generations of proper healthcare still isn’t good enough for them.

[JoeMemphis]

Whatever "it" means.

Universal Health Care doesn't have to be single payer, OR M4A, and not even necessarily a public option, though for a U.S. context, that latter method would fit best into our current ACA-based structure.

Worldwide, different countries do it in at least 6 different ways. Including a wholly private insurance model.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

There are a lot of different things that have been tried worldwide, and could be tried here.

So decide what it means and go do “it” in a state you control politically and whose views align with your own. Why insist that it be done nationwide and in states that are not interested in another solution. Go sell whatever “it” means to you in a state and demonstrate that it pays for itself, will be widely accepted. Let’s see how much additional tax dollars will be required to fund “it”.

If “it” was that great, I’m sure someone would be suggesting “it” in a state. Trouble is state legislators love their jobs as much as federal legislators and they can’t hide and bury the true costs to individuals and business like federal legislators.

As for me, I recall how the last “it” was sold to the public. I predicted at the time that your party would be back in a few years making excuses and wanting M4A. I believe a gentleman named Gruber said it was part of the strategy. Folks on this board bent over backwards denying that and yet here we are.

So do us all a favor. Before we dismantle and destroy what we have, go sell your version of “it” in a state full of supporters of “it” and demonstrate the concept. In this country, under our laws.

[gounion]

So decide what it means and go do “it” in a state you control politically and whose views align with your own. Why insist that it be done nationwide and in states that are not interested in another solution. Go sell whatever “it” means to you in a state and demonstrate that it pays for itself, will be widely accepted. Let’s see how much additional tax dollars will be required to fund “it”.

If “it” was that great, I’m sure someone would be suggesting “it” in a state. Trouble is state legislators love their jobs as much as federal legislators and they can’t hide and bury the true costs to individuals and business like federal legislators.

As for me, I recall how the last “it” was sold to the public. I predicted at the time that your party would be back in a few years making excuses and wanting M4A. I believe a gentleman named Gruber said it was part of the strategy. Folks on this board bent over backwards denying that and yet here we are.

So do us all a favor. Before we dismantle and destroy what we have, go sell your version of “it” in a state full of supporters of “it” and demonstrate the concept. In this country, under our laws.

Deflection. You want the money.

[JoeMemphis]

Deflection. You want the money.

It’s not a deflection. It’s common sense and perhaps that’s why you don’t understand. You can’t explain why it isn’t done at the state level. You can’t explain why it hasn’t been tried at the state level. You claim it’s the solution and yet you either can’t or won’t sell it and implement it in a state that your party controls. In most any deal, that’s a red flag.

Why states that aren’t looking for another democrat solution to health care buy into a solution democrats can’t sell to their fellow democrats? You make all these claims and yet you can’t explain why it isn’t being done in a state that’s controlled by Democrats and has an economy bigger than many countries that already have UHC.

I suspect it’s because it doesn’t live up to the hype in either outcomes or costs and those state guys like their jobs too much to throw themselves on the sword for another of your solutions. I don’t blame them.

[gounion]

It’s not a deflection. It’s common sense and perhaps that’s why you don’t understand. You can’t explain why it isn’t done at the state level. You can’t explain why it hasn’t been tried at the state level. You claim it’s the solution and yet you either can’t or won’t sell it and implement it in a state that your party controls. In most any deal, that’s a red flag.

Why states that aren’t looking for another democrat solution to health care buy into a solution democrats can’t sell to their fellow democrats? You make all these claims and yet you can’t explain why it isn’t being done in a state that’s controlled by Democrats and has an economy bigger than many countries that already have UHC.

I suspect it’s because it doesn’t live up to the hype in either outcomes or costs and those state guys like their jobs too much to throw themselves on the sword for another of your solutions. I don’t blame them.

Yes it’s deflection because it’s already being done at the federal level, far more successfully than the corporations are doing. But then you wouldn’t get a cut would you? You don’t care if it costs our nation twice what it costs all other nations, because you’re making money. You don’t care that people have to have go-fund-mes to get care for their kids, because you’re making money.

And that’s your self-centered bottom line.

[ProfX]

So decide what it means and go do “it” in a state you control politically and whose views align with your own.

I have argued this with you too many times already Joe, and am not going to do it any further.

THe only thing I find puzzling is people who say they want more bipartisan cooperation in Washington DC, but really mean only on the conservative policy agenda they prefer.

That's it. You can go back to arguing with GoU over the details of this for another ten pages. I get tired, personally, of arguing with walls, especially walls who say the problem in Washington DC is lack of cooperation.

Universal Health Care is a goal I have, Joe. Most countries share it. For reasons I've posted about many times. The method doesn't matter to me as much as the goal. M4A, a new public option, something like Canada's single payer, those are the three things most people talk about, I only note there are even ways beyond those three. All I know for sure is you'll reject them.

I guess you don't want bipartisan cooperation on THAT because it's not one of your goals. I get that. I'm tired of arguing about it with you.

[JoeMemphis]

Yes it’s deflection because it’s already being done at the federal level, far more successfully than the corporations are doing. But then you wouldn’t get a cut would you? You don’t care if it costs our nation twice what it costs all other nations, because you’re making money. You don’t care that people have to have go-fund-mes to get care for their kids, because you’re making money.

And that’s your self-centered bottom line.

Then go save and save the good folks in CA a ton of money. Of don’t you care about them? You would have them wait years for something they could have much quicker. Why is that?

Just another “we can’t” excuse.