Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Bernie Sanders Tells Union Worker: “I’d ‘Absolutely’ Take Away Your Health Care Plan”
Comments
-
Said the lying Kunt who claimed there was no evidence that Medicare for all would involve the elimination of private insurance despite the fact that fucking Bernie Sanders proposal calls for doing exactly that.2001400ex said:
SMH idiot. Seriously.... Bob you don't even understand what single payer means.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
Liz Warren has also called for the elimination of private health insurance and Booker and Harris and Gillibrand have all signed onto Bernie's Medicare for All bill.
Always love it when a complete fucking moron tries to tell me I don't understand something. -
There's zero chance eliminating the insurance companies happens. They are the ones who gave us Obamacare. I'm sorry if you don't understand reality.SFGbob said:
Said the lying Kunt who claimed there was no evidence that Medicare for all would involve the elimination of private insurance despite the fact that fucking Bernie Sanders proposal calls for doing exactly that.2001400ex said:
SMH idiot. Seriously.... Bob you don't even understand what single payer means.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
Liz Warren has also called for the elimination of private health insurance and Booker and Harris and Gillibrand have all signed onto Bernie's Medicare for All bill.
Always love it when a complete fucking moron tries to tell me I don't understand something.
That being said, the reality is that there's zero chance we go to single payer in the next 20 years anyway. Not even if the Democrats get 60 votes in the Senate again. -
Go fuck yourself Hondo.2001400ex said:
There's zero chance eliminating the insurance companies happens. They are the ones who gave us Obamacare. I'm sorry if you don't understand reality.SFGbob said:
Said the lying Kunt who claimed there was no evidence that Medicare for all would involve the elimination of private insurance despite the fact that fucking Bernie Sanders proposal calls for doing exactly that.2001400ex said:
SMH idiot. Seriously.... Bob you don't even understand what single payer means.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
Liz Warren has also called for the elimination of private health insurance and Booker and Harris and Gillibrand have all signed onto Bernie's Medicare for All bill.
Always love it when a complete fucking moron tries to tell me I don't understand something.
That being said, the reality is that there's zero chance we go to single payer in the next 20 years anyway. Not even if the Democrats get 60 votes in the Senate again.
You talked out your fucking ass. There is all kinds of evidence that Medicare for all plan would involve the elimination of private insurance. It's exactly what Sanders and Warren are calling for. Whether it will or wont happen wasn't the issue.
Whether they can get it through the Congress is completely separate issue, and if either Warren or Sanders wins the nomination you'll fucking vote for them. -
They aren't winning the nomination. And even if they win the presidency, there's zero chance single payer happens. Just like the wall isn't built yet.SFGbob said:
Go fuck yourself Hondo.2001400ex said:
There's zero chance eliminating the insurance companies happens. They are the ones who gave us Obamacare. I'm sorry if you don't understand reality.SFGbob said:
Said the lying Kunt who claimed there was no evidence that Medicare for all would involve the elimination of private insurance despite the fact that fucking Bernie Sanders proposal calls for doing exactly that.2001400ex said:
SMH idiot. Seriously.... Bob you don't even understand what single payer means.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
Liz Warren has also called for the elimination of private health insurance and Booker and Harris and Gillibrand have all signed onto Bernie's Medicare for All bill.
Always love it when a complete fucking moron tries to tell me I don't understand something.
That being said, the reality is that there's zero chance we go to single payer in the next 20 years anyway. Not even if the Democrats get 60 votes in the Senate again.
You talked out your fucking ass. There is all kinds of evidence that Medicare for all plan would involve the elimination of private insurance. It's exactly what Sanders and Warren are calling for. Whether it will or wont happen wasn't the issue.
Whether they can get it through the Congress is completely separate issue, and if either Warren or Sanders wins the nomination you'll fucking vote for them. -
Maybe my ass. If it won't kill you you'll wait extended lengths of time.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
Get a job hippie! -
Hondo again defends to the death something he disagrees with and claims will never happen
-
"Limiting supply mostly for elective procedures." Prioritizing procedures that save lives is called rationing care smartly.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
I'm sorry you'll have to wait a couple months for your next penis enlargement. -
Canadians are also healthier than Americans. Less fat and less genetic predisposition to diabetes and high blood pressure. Look at the top food stamp purchases.Pop, chips, sugar treats.
-
You are clueless.dhdawg said:
"Limiting supply mostly for elective procedures." Prioritizing procedures that save lives is called rationing care smartly.SFGbob said:
Nice work dumbfuck. You just supported my case.2001400ex said:
The wait times that Canada might experience are not caused by its being a single-payer system.
Wait times aren’t like cancer. We know what causes wait times; we know how to fix them. Spend more money.
Our single-payer system, which is called Medicare (see above), manages not to have the “wait times” issue that Canada’s does. There must, therefore, be some other reason for the wait times. There is, of course.
In 1966, Canada implemented a single-payer health care system, which is also known as Medicare. Since then, as a country, Canadians have made a conscious decision to hold down costs. One of the ways they do that is by limiting supply, mostly for elective things, which can create wait times. Their outcomes are otherwise comparable to ours.
Please understand, the wait times could be overcome. Canadians could spend more. They don’t want to. We can choose to dislike wait times in principle, but they are a byproduct of Canada’s choice to be fiscally conservative.
Yes, they chose this. In a rational world, those who are concerned about health care costs and what they mean to the economy might respect that course of action. But instead, they attack the system.
So they do have longer wait times but it's not caused by the single payer system, it's caused by the decision to hold down cost of the single payer system by limiting the supply.
Yeah, that totally destroys the claim to the contrary.
Once again Hondo the dumbfuck doesn't read what he links.
I'm sorry you'll have to wait a couple months for your next penis enlargement.
I have Canadian friends. They have had to have procedures done in America because the wait is many months. Were they life threatening? Eventually. But they were painful conditions that made life shitty and limited activity and work greatly. People in GB will tell you the same.
Maybe if you had friends worth a shit things would be different.
Losers like yourself whining and wanting free shit because you think it's owed to you is hilariously funny yet depressing. -
Far more Americans leave to get healthcare than Canadians.
Bernie just led a convoy of Americans going to Canada because you can actually afford insulin there. -
Now that's funny!dhdawg said:Far more Americans leave to get healthcare than Canadians.
Bernie just led a convoy of Americans going to Canada because you can actually afford insulin there. -
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients -
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
That's my point. Hondo doesn't know what "medicare for all" is.SFGbob said:
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
Oh I know, and while Hondo is complete fucking ignorant of what Sanders bill actually calls for, he'll claim that you're and idiot because you don't know what Medicare for all really means.greenblood said:
That's my point. Hondo doesn't know what "medicare for all" is.SFGbob said:
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
I know what they are proposing. I also know that they'll never get rid of insurance companies completely. A large percentage of Canadians have private insurance still.greenblood said:
That's my point. Hondo doesn't know what "medicare for all" is.SFGbob said:
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
Yeah, and you "knew" Social Security didn't exist in the 1950s. Your claim was that there was no evidence that Medicare for All would eliminate private insurance you fucking lying piece of shit.2001400ex said:
I know what they are proposing. I also know that they'll never get rid of insurance companies completely. A large percentage of Canadians have private insurance still.greenblood said:
That's my point. Hondo doesn't know what "medicare for all" is.SFGbob said:
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
Rural Hospitals From Texas To Maine Say ‘Medicare For All’ Would End Up ‘Closing Our Doors’
That would just be the start of the problems.
https://www.weaselzippers.us/430143-rural-hospitals-from-texas-to-maine-say-medicare-for-all-would-end-up-closing-our-doors/ -
awww Blob the strawman fucker missed me! You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....SFGbob said:
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
It turns out that in our medical system which rations care based on ability to pay and the profit motive has longer wait times for more critical appointments then grandma gertrudes new knee....
The Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that focuses on health care, compared wait times in the United States to those in 10 other countries last year. “We were smug and we had the impression that the United States had no wait times — but it turns out that’s not true,” said Robin Osborn, a researcher for the foundation. “It’s the primary care where we’re really behind, with many people waiting six days or more” to get an appointment when they were “sick or needed care.”
The study found that 26 percent of 2,002 American adults surveyed said they waited six days or more for appointments, better only than Canada (33 percent) and Norway (28 percent), and much worse than in other countries with national health systems like the Netherlands (14 percent) or Britain (16 percent). When it came to appointments with specialists, patients in Britain and Switzerland reported shorter waits than those in the United States, but the United States did rank better than the other eight countries.
So it turns out that America has its own waiting problem. But we tend to wait for different types of medical interventions. And that is mainly a result of payment incentives, experts say.
Americans are more likely to wait for office-based medical appointments that are not good sources of revenue for hospitals and doctors. In other countries, people tend to wait longest for expensive elective care — four to six months for a knee replacement and over a month for follow-up radiation therapy after cancer surgery in Canada, for example.
In our market-based system, patients can get lucrative procedures rapidly, even when there is no urgent medical need: Need a new knee, or an M.R.I., or a Botox injection? You’ll probably be on the schedule within days. But what if you’re an asthmatic whose breathing is deteriorating, or a diabetic whose medicines need adjustment, or an elderly patient who has unusual chest pain and needs a cardiology consultation? In much of the country, you can wait a week or weeks for such office appointments -
You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....
So now you're just going to lie? There were numbers in the piece about cancer patient waiting for treatment you lying sack of crap and the article directly refuted dh's claim:
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
That was the point of contention you lying piece of shit. Now how was the article I linked to a "strawman" in response to Dh's pile of steaming bullshit?
Run and hide Kunt.
-
Talk about a fucking strawman. None of the bullshit you cut and pasted even addresses the point of contention Scotty. Fucking pull your head out of your ass before you post Mr. Republican.GDS said:
awww Blob the strawman fucker missed me! You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....SFGbob said:
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
It turns out that in our medical system which rations care based on ability to pay and the profit motive has longer wait times for more critical appointments then grandma gertrudes new knee....
The Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that focuses on health care, compared wait times in the United States to those in 10 other countries last year. “We were smug and we had the impression that the United States had no wait times — but it turns out that’s not true,” said Robin Osborn, a researcher for the foundation. “It’s the primary care where we’re really behind, with many people waiting six days or more” to get an appointment when they were “sick or needed care.”
The study found that 26 percent of 2,002 American adults surveyed said they waited six days or more for appointments, better only than Canada (33 percent) and Norway (28 percent), and much worse than in other countries with national health systems like the Netherlands (14 percent) or Britain (16 percent). When it came to appointments with specialists, patients in Britain and Switzerland reported shorter waits than those in the United States, but the United States did rank better than the other eight countries.
So it turns out that America has its own waiting problem. But we tend to wait for different types of medical interventions. And that is mainly a result of payment incentives, experts say.
Americans are more likely to wait for office-based medical appointments that are not good sources of revenue for hospitals and doctors. In other countries, people tend to wait longest for expensive elective care — four to six months for a knee replacement and over a month for follow-up radiation therapy after cancer surgery in Canada, for example.
In our market-based system, patients can get lucrative procedures rapidly, even when there is no urgent medical need: Need a new knee, or an M.R.I., or a Botox injection? You’ll probably be on the schedule within days. But what if you’re an asthmatic whose breathing is deteriorating, or a diabetic whose medicines need adjustment, or an elderly patient who has unusual chest pain and needs a cardiology consultation? In much of the country, you can wait a week or weeks for such office appointments -
I'm not lying about anything dipshit. The point of that article is that only 88% of grandma gertrudes are getting their new knees within 18 weeks instead of the targeted 92%. There's a throwaway quote from a university admin about cancer targets not being met with no numbers, data or context to the throwaway quote. Again - you post an article about 4% of British grandma's not getting their new knee in time as some sort of gotcha for waiting time for mandatory medical procedures you strawman fucking dipshit.SFGbob said:You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....
So now you're just going to lie? There were numbers in the piece about cancer patient waiting for treatment you lying sack of crap and the article directly refuted dh's claim:
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
That was the point of contention you lying piece of shit. Now how was the article I linked to a "strawman" in response to Dh's pile of steaming bullshit?
Run and hide Kunt. -
From the article and what I actually quoted:
“Cancer targets have been missed for the last two months, waiting lists have hit a 10-year high and the number of people waiting more than 18 weeks for planned care has gone up by more than 100,000 compared to this time last year,” said Janet Davies, the Royal College of Nursing’s general secretary.
But you keep lying and claiming it was only about elective knee replacements you fucking lying piece of shit. -
That's a good Kunt, just keep your head down and plow right through with your bullshit. Who cares if doesn't address the point of contention. And you're lying, the article didn't just deal with knee replacements.
So are you agreeing with DH's dumbfuck? No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, -
They have to to get any medical treatment!2001400ex said:
I know what they are proposing. I also know that they'll never get rid of insurance companies completely. A large percentage of Canadians have private insurance still.greenblood said:
That's my point. Hondo doesn't know what "medicare for all" is.SFGbob said:
Hondo's position is that because none of the "bad" stuff will possibly be enacted this polls doesn't really count. Medicare for All is what Hondo feels it is going to be, not what Sanders and Warren have said it will be.greenblood said:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/medicare-for-all-polls-public-option-kaiser-popular-misunderstood.html2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
Funny how popular "medicare for all" is when people realize what "medicare for all" actually is. Just like the 2016 campaign, liberals like Hondo still haven't figured out how polls work, and how they can be manipulated. -
And scotti gives us a wonderful paid and biased research project by that most liberal of organizations The Commonwealth Fund. TCF is a group I am familiar with and it is a huge backer of Universal Healthcare, single payer. In other words it is perfectly aligned with socialistic medicine. You won't find any perspective coming out of TCF other than one that supports their utopia of "free" healthcare for all.GDS said:
awww Blob the strawman fucker missed me! You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....SFGbob said:
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
It turns out that in our medical system which rations care based on ability to pay and the profit motive has longer wait times for more critical appointments then grandma gertrudes new knee....
The Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that focuses on health care, compared wait times in the United States to those in 10 other countries last year. “We were smug and we had the impression that the United States had no wait times — but it turns out that’s not true,” said Robin Osborn, a researcher for the foundation. “It’s the primary care where we’re really behind, with many people waiting six days or more” to get an appointment when they were “sick or needed care.”
The study found that 26 percent of 2,002 American adults surveyed said they waited six days or more for appointments, better only than Canada (33 percent) and Norway (28 percent), and much worse than in other countries with national health systems like the Netherlands (14 percent) or Britain (16 percent). When it came to appointments with specialists, patients in Britain and Switzerland reported shorter waits than those in the United States, but the United States did rank better than the other eight countries.
So it turns out that America has its own waiting problem. But we tend to wait for different types of medical interventions. And that is mainly a result of payment incentives, experts say.
Americans are more likely to wait for office-based medical appointments that are not good sources of revenue for hospitals and doctors. In other countries, people tend to wait longest for expensive elective care — four to six months for a knee replacement and over a month for follow-up radiation therapy after cancer surgery in Canada, for example.
In our market-based system, patients can get lucrative procedures rapidly, even when there is no urgent medical need: Need a new knee, or an M.R.I., or a Botox injection? You’ll probably be on the schedule within days. But what if you’re an asthmatic whose breathing is deteriorating, or a diabetic whose medicines need adjustment, or an elderly patient who has unusual chest pain and needs a cardiology consultation? In much of the country, you can wait a week or weeks for such office appointments
Way to spread misinformation scotti. I am curious, do you ever search sites that aren't one sided and liberal? -
Care to refute the facts in his post?Bendintheriver said:
And scotti gives us a wonderful paid and biased research project by that most liberal of organizations The Commonwealth Fund. TCF is a group I am familiar with and it is a huge backer of Universal Healthcare, single payer. In other words it is perfectly aligned with socialistic medicine. You won't find any perspective coming out of TCF other than one that supports their utopia of "free" healthcare for all.GDS said:
awww Blob the strawman fucker missed me! You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....SFGbob said:
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
It turns out that in our medical system which rations care based on ability to pay and the profit motive has longer wait times for more critical appointments then grandma gertrudes new knee....
The Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that focuses on health care, compared wait times in the United States to those in 10 other countries last year. “We were smug and we had the impression that the United States had no wait times — but it turns out that’s not true,” said Robin Osborn, a researcher for the foundation. “It’s the primary care where we’re really behind, with many people waiting six days or more” to get an appointment when they were “sick or needed care.”
The study found that 26 percent of 2,002 American adults surveyed said they waited six days or more for appointments, better only than Canada (33 percent) and Norway (28 percent), and much worse than in other countries with national health systems like the Netherlands (14 percent) or Britain (16 percent). When it came to appointments with specialists, patients in Britain and Switzerland reported shorter waits than those in the United States, but the United States did rank better than the other eight countries.
So it turns out that America has its own waiting problem. But we tend to wait for different types of medical interventions. And that is mainly a result of payment incentives, experts say.
Americans are more likely to wait for office-based medical appointments that are not good sources of revenue for hospitals and doctors. In other countries, people tend to wait longest for expensive elective care — four to six months for a knee replacement and over a month for follow-up radiation therapy after cancer surgery in Canada, for example.
In our market-based system, patients can get lucrative procedures rapidly, even when there is no urgent medical need: Need a new knee, or an M.R.I., or a Botox injection? You’ll probably be on the schedule within days. But what if you’re an asthmatic whose breathing is deteriorating, or a diabetic whose medicines need adjustment, or an elderly patient who has unusual chest pain and needs a cardiology consultation? In much of the country, you can wait a week or weeks for such office appointments
Way to spread misinformation scotti. I am curious, do you ever search sites that aren't one sided and liberal? -
Care to admit you were talking out your ass when you claimed there was no evidence that Medicare for All would get rid of private insurance?2001400ex said:
Care to refute the facts in his post?Bendintheriver said:
And scotti gives us a wonderful paid and biased research project by that most liberal of organizations The Commonwealth Fund. TCF is a group I am familiar with and it is a huge backer of Universal Healthcare, single payer. In other words it is perfectly aligned with socialistic medicine. You won't find any perspective coming out of TCF other than one that supports their utopia of "free" healthcare for all.GDS said:
awww Blob the strawman fucker missed me! You threw out an article talking about how 12% of grandma gertrudes are waiting longer in the UK then target for knee replacement as an example of people waiting a long time for mandatory medical service....SFGbob said:
And of course Scotty the mouthy Kunt ran away.GDS said:
Blob the prolific strawman fucker strikes again!SFGbob said:
That is pure crap.dhdawg said:
"Delays in getting care"SFGbob said:
Hell Hondo, you even previously posted that exact same fucking stupid Fox Online poll. Like I said, there's no point trying to educate your ignorant ass. This is just one of the many times this information has been posted here.2001400ex said:
Lol lyin Bob again. You just can't help yourself.SFGbob said:
There's no point in trying to educate your ignorant ass Hondo. If you're so fucking uninformed that you're not aware that support for "Medicare for All" drops like a stone when you tell people that it will cause them to lose their private insurance and pay higher taxes, something that has been discussed here a number a times, then there's no point in discussing the issue with such an ignorant dumbfuck. I will administer a swift steel toed boot to your snatch if you like because I believe that may be the one thing that might help you.2001400ex said:
Lil lyin Bob can't back up his mouth again. Pussy.SFGbob said:
Gofuckyourself.com2001400ex said:
Link?SFGbob said:
Gosh Hondo, why are you showing me a poll from last year? As soon as people found out that the "costs" were going to include an increase in taxes and the loss of their private insurance support for it fucking cratered.2001400ex said:SFGbob said:
Of the people that support Medicare for all that's their biggest motivation. "Free" shit. And as you saw with the poll numbers even the parasites who what more "free" shit from the government once they found out it wasn't going to be "free" their support disappeared and that's why Harris is no longer talking about Medicare for AllBendintheriver said:
The democrat voter just knows that someone else is going to be paying for their free healthcare.Sledog said:
I enjoy how people for it think it's free and have no clue how to pay for it.TheKobeStopper said:I enjoy that the people most against Medicare For All have literally no clue what it even means.
The poll found that Americans initially support “Medicare-for-all,” 56 percent to 42 percent.
However, those numbers shifted dramatically when people were asked about the potential impact, pro and con.
Support increased when people were told “Medicare-for-all” would guarantee health insurance as a right (71 percent) and eliminate premiums and reduce out-of-pocket costs (67 percent).
But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.
“The issue that will really be fundamental would be the tax issue,” said Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health who reviewed the poll. He pointed out that state single-payer efforts in Vermont and Colorado failed because of concerns about the tax increases needed to put them in place.
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
Sounds like a much better way to ration care than how we do it, which is based on how much money you have.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jul/13/nhs-operation-waiting-lists-reach-10-year-high-at-43m-patients
It turns out that in our medical system which rations care based on ability to pay and the profit motive has longer wait times for more critical appointments then grandma gertrudes new knee....
The Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that focuses on health care, compared wait times in the United States to those in 10 other countries last year. “We were smug and we had the impression that the United States had no wait times — but it turns out that’s not true,” said Robin Osborn, a researcher for the foundation. “It’s the primary care where we’re really behind, with many people waiting six days or more” to get an appointment when they were “sick or needed care.”
The study found that 26 percent of 2,002 American adults surveyed said they waited six days or more for appointments, better only than Canada (33 percent) and Norway (28 percent), and much worse than in other countries with national health systems like the Netherlands (14 percent) or Britain (16 percent). When it came to appointments with specialists, patients in Britain and Switzerland reported shorter waits than those in the United States, but the United States did rank better than the other eight countries.
So it turns out that America has its own waiting problem. But we tend to wait for different types of medical interventions. And that is mainly a result of payment incentives, experts say.
Americans are more likely to wait for office-based medical appointments that are not good sources of revenue for hospitals and doctors. In other countries, people tend to wait longest for expensive elective care — four to six months for a knee replacement and over a month for follow-up radiation therapy after cancer surgery in Canada, for example.
In our market-based system, patients can get lucrative procedures rapidly, even when there is no urgent medical need: Need a new knee, or an M.R.I., or a Botox injection? You’ll probably be on the schedule within days. But what if you’re an asthmatic whose breathing is deteriorating, or a diabetic whose medicines need adjustment, or an elderly patient who has unusual chest pain and needs a cardiology consultation? In much of the country, you can wait a week or weeks for such office appointments
Way to spread misinformation scotti. I am curious, do you ever search sites that aren't one sided and liberal?
-
No country with universal healthcare has wait times for mandatory procedures, elective procedures maybe.
This claim was pure bullshit. Scotty who claimed that I was attacking a strawman when I called it bullshit has so far lied about the content of the article I posted to refute it while refusing to address Dh's bullshit claim.
Telling me that wait times here in the US are similar doesn't address the claim Scotty. His claim is that there are no wait times for mandatory procedures in countries with universal healthcare. The only one fucking strawman ass was you Scotty with you off-topic response.
