Trump has been impeached - Page 24 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15059978
BigSteve wrote:I don't understand.
That much is obvious.

Would you rather pay:
a) a bit more in taxes, and pay less, or <-- (UHC)
b) pay less taxes, pay high insurance premiums and end up paying more? <-- What USA has, now)

Paying Healthcare Premiums privately, is more expensive than paying it thru your taxes and having the government regulate the Healthcare system. It's just that simple.

Why can you not understand that it benefits you, financially, and actually ends up taking less money from your pocket? There is a reason that Americans pay twice as much(per capita) for medial service, but it still isn't even close to even being in the top 30.

Also, in countries with UHC, there are no bankruptcies based on inability to pay medical bills.

Reports from different entities are constantly published, such as the survey results of people with employer-sponsored insurance by the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) / LA Times Survey in 2019. The study found that 1 in 5 people surveyed have been contacted by collection agencies, while 9% of those surveyed stated they had declared personal bankruptcy due to medical expenses.
https://www.thebalance.com/medical-bank ... cs-4154729


BigSteve wrote:Your fellow lib has claimed that I would get a tax cut. Now you're saying I would pay more i taxes.
Maybe he just explained it unclearly, or you are merely looking for the flaw in any argument, so you can troll.

BigSteve wrote:And you wonder why people don't believe you...
:roll: Being belligerent when you don't understand the argument is your go-to thing, isn't it?
#15059979
Pants-of-dog wrote:Again, the answer is “yes”.

Yes, US taxpayers would probably pay less in taxes than they currently do.



The answer is 'no'. Your taxes are gonna go up, PoD doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The reason it makes economic sense for the middle class is that you end up saving money(a lot of money) because what you pay out of pocket for premiums, deductibles, copays etc is way more than what you would be paying in taxes. Your taxes will go up but you end up saving a shitload of money.

The problem the upper 20% has with Medicare 4 all is that their access to healthcare and their quality of care is gonna be seriously degraded because the resources would be distributed equally. The upper 20 is perfectly happy paying high premiums that they can easily afford because they're guaranteed the best care on earth. If Med4all goes through they're gonna have to get in line with the rest of us and that's gonna bring down their standard of living and they would rather not be so inconvenienced.
#15059985
@Sivad Bingo!!!

Unless you're a millionaire, Universal Healthcare is superior to privatized healthcare, and more affordable. If you're rich, what's a few thousand bucks?
#15059987
BigSteve wrote:I don't understand.

The United States, a prime example of idiocracy in action.


:lol:
By Sivad
#15059988
Godstud wrote:@Sivad Bingo!!!

Unless you're a millionaire, Universal Healthcare is superior to privatized healthcare, and more affordable. If you're rich, what's a few thousand bucks?


Not rich, not a millionaire, just upper middle class. Med4All is a bad deal for anyone making over $100,000 a year.
#15059992
BigSteve wrote:"Should" and "will" are two vastly different things.

When Obamacare went into affect, Americans were told they should save right around $2,500 per family a year. That didn't happen. In fact, there were horror stories about premiums skyrocketing. A young couple I know; successful, in their 30's with one child, had their premiums almost triple.

Yeah, they "should" have saved money.

They didn't...


Your anecdotes are meaningless as evidence.

If you could actually demonstrate how a tax cut would provide the additional funds required to pay fot it, maybe people would be more accepting of it...


Easy.

Just do what every other developed country has already done.

Hell, and you and I both know that if I dragged Bernie Sanders before you and he told you why it was ridiculous and unworkable, you'd dismiss him...


So no evidence.

Your claim that it is ridiculous and unworkable is dismissed as unsupported.

Not that I remember hearing.

But I asked you if Americans would see a tax cut under such a plan, and you said "yes".

I'd love for you to explain how a tax cut would raise the requisite revenue...


For the third or fourth time, the US already pays government money for healthcare.

This amount is higher than what other countries pay per capita.

If you switched, you would then pay what other countries are paying: i.e. less than what you pay now.

Corruption exists everywhere. It's going to happen whether we implement Bernie's plan or not...


Yes, and that will probably be the reason you do not get better medical care and pay less.

It is probably the reason why you do not have better care at a lower price right now.

Why should he be forced to sacrifice the standard of living he's worked so hard to achieve?

He could, but it would be at the expense of him and his family. Why should he do that?



Poor imaginary doctor!

He can only afford two or three luxury cars instead of six or seven. Boohoo.

You could liken it to the argument about minimum wage. If minimum wage goes up, business owners aren't going to start making less, they're going to start charging more. In the case of health care, doctors aren't going to suddenly become these altruistic angels at the expense of the comfort of them and their families, they're going to find something which will allow them to continue their current standard of living...


The tiny few who leave can be replaced.

You've provided zero evidence that what works in one country would work here, so there's no reason to believe it would...


Yes, I am assuming that the USA follows the same laws of economics that other countries do.

Is there a reason I should not assume that is the case?

So pharmacists in Canada can prescribe medications?


Yes, many can.

But changing the system will change how he does business. Changing the system will not be beneficial to me, despite your naive assertion that it will be...


It will be beneficial to you because you will pay less taxes, you will have no out of pocket expenses or copays, you will live in a healthier community, you will not need to provide insurance for employees, and you will receive more comprehensive care.

———————————

Sivad wrote:The answer is 'no'. Your taxes are gonna go up, PoD doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. The reason it makes economic sense for the middle class is that you end up saving money(a lot of money) because what you pay out of pocket for premiums, deductibles, copays etc is way more than what you would be paying in taxes. Your taxes will go up but you end up saving a shitload of money.



No.

The US government spends more per capita on health care than the Canadian government does.

So we pay LESS in taxes, and we get BETTER coverage.

But it is consistent for you to once again support the mainstream conservative position.

The problem the upper 20% has with Medicare 4 all is that their access to healthcare and their quality of care is gonna be seriously degraded because the resources would be distributed equally. The upper 20 is perfectly happy paying high premiums that they can easily afford because they're guaranteed the best care on earth. If Med4all goes through they're gonna have to get in line with the rest of us and that's gonna bring down their standard of living and they would rather not be so inconvenienced.


The rest of us managed to force them to accept it. The US should be abke to do so as well.
#15059993
Drlee wrote:let me tell you about real health care.

Comparing US life expectancy by specific state globally

Iraq, Syria, and Libya are all matching clustered southern states with low life expectancy such as South Carolina, Alabama, and Kentucky.
#15060002
What does health care have to do with impeachment? Are they going to impeach Trump for not getting rid of ObamaCare? :?:
By Sivad
#15060008
I still don't get how Trump "abused the power"? I think all these crooks have an implicit understanding under the fake left-right paradigm arrangement that they will never investigate each other because, you know, that would be bad for business. But the Bidens are so ridiculously corrupt that they were jeopardizing the whole game. The corruption was so absurdly outrageous that how could it not be investigated? So maybe it was like a breach of the swamp creature code but how in the fuck is it a high crime to request an investigation into that kind of blatant in-your-face corruption?
By Rich
#15060012
I'm constantly amazed by the stupidity of my fellow human beings. How many people are so stupid, are so cretinous that they really seem to believe that Trump should be impeached. Some are no doubt just trolling, but many supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable commentators really do seem to think that Trump should be impeached.

Its too late. Personally I thought Bloomberg was too late, but its way too late for any one to challenge Trump for the Republican candidate. If for some insane reason two thirds of the Senate were to vote to impeach Trump, that would immediately be followed by a vote to ban him permanently from public office. That only requires a bare majority. This would mean that there would be no Republican candidate for President in November. The Democrat would be automatically elected. And you people try and tell me that you want to defend American democracy.

By delaying sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, Nancy Pelosi was trying to steal the election, because of Trump was to be impeached it would have had to be done at absolutely break neck speed to give the Republicans a chance to elect nominate another candidate. If anyone should be impeached here its not Joe Biden, its certainly not Donald Trump, its Nancy Pelosi. There is nothing absolutely nothing partisan in what I'm saying. If the situation were reversed I would call out the Republicans as trolls, cretins and retards just the same. In fact I had total and utter contempt for Ken Starr and his side kick Brett Kavanagh when they tried to remove Bill Clinton.

I would love, I would absolutely love to see the Republican establishment join up with the Liberal establishment to remove Trump and steal the November election for the Liberals. Because I tell you what, then the Liberal establishment would find out what the word backlash means. Because then the Liberal establishment would find out what anti Marxists mean by 2nd Amendment rights.
#15060020
Rich wrote:I'm constantly amazed by the stupidity of my fellow human beings. How many people are so stupid, are so cretinous that they really seem to believe that Trump should be impeached. Some are no doubt just trolling, but many supposedly intelligent and knowledgeable commentators really do seem to think that Trump should be impeached.

Its too late. Personally I thought Bloomberg was too late, but its way too late for any one to challenge Trump for the Republican candidate. If for some insane reason two thirds of the Senate were to vote to impeach Trump, that would immediately be followed by a vote to ban him permanently from public office. That only requires a bare majority. This would mean that there would be no Republican candidate for President in November. The Democrat would be automatically elected. And you people try and tell me that you want to defend American democracy.

By delaying sending the impeachment articles to the Senate, Nancy Pelosi was trying to steal the election, because of Trump was to be impeached it would have had to be done at absolutely break neck speed to give the Republicans a chance to elect nominate another candidate. If anyone should be impeached here its not Joe Biden, its certainly not Donald Trump, its Nancy Pelosi. There is nothing absolutely nothing partisan in what I'm saying. If the situation were reversed I would call out the Republicans as trolls, cretins and retards just the same. In fact I had total and utter contempt for Ken Starr and his side kick Brett Kavanagh when they tried to remove Bill Clinton.

I would love, I would absolutely love to see the Republican establishment join up with the Liberal establishment to remove Trump and steal the November election for the Liberals. Because I tell you what, then the Liberal establishment would find out what the word backlash means. Because then the Liberal establishment would find out what anti Marxists mean by 2nd Amendment rights.
What about Pence? Is Pence so ineligible or irrelevant that he got completely ommitted?
#15060024
Pants-of-dog wrote:Your anecdotes are meaningless as evidence.


That scenario replayed itself thousands of times.

I look at what happened to people I know and that's enough for me...

Easy.

Just do what every other developed country has already done.


There's not a single reason to believe it would work here. Until that's done, there's no reason to believe it would...

So no evidence.

Your claim that it is ridiculous and unworkable is dismissed as unsupported.


As is your assertion that it is workable. Just because something works in Canada doesn't mean it can be implemented in a country with a population almost ten times what you have...

If you switched, you would then pay what other countries are paying: i.e. less than what you pay now.


You have no idea what I pay for the level of care I receive, and I have no reason to believe that standard of care would remain if I paid less...

Yes, and that will probably be the reason you do not get better medical care and pay less.


I get the best possible care available. Until you can show me how I'll receive the same level of care under a government run system, I'm not believing it.

If I fall ill in the middle of the night, I can call my doctor's cell phone and he'll come to my house. THAT'S the level of care I receive...

It is probably the reason why you do not have better care at a lower price right now.


No one, especially you, has been able to show how better care exists for a lower cost...

Poor imaginary doctor!

He can only afford two or three luxury cars instead of six or seven. Boohoo.


And that's the crux of your argument. You don't like the fact that doctors can afford fancy cars and big houses. What he can afford is not pertinent to the discussion, other than how government run health care will adversely affect him.

You're jealousy is palpable...

The tiny few who leave can be replaced.


And those doctors won't provide the same level of care...

Yes, I am assuming that the USA follows the same laws of economics that other countries do.

Is there a reason I should not assume that is the case?


It's easier to make hot chocolate for ten people than it is for 1,000. It's a matter of scale.

We have cities with larger populations than your whole fucking country...

Yes, many can.


So they can. That's not the case in the States...

It will be beneficial to you because you will pay less taxes, you will have no out of pocket expenses or copays, you will live in a healthier community, you will not need to provide insurance for employees, and you will receive more comprehensive care.


You simply can't say that, because you don't know anything about the care I receive.

And other libs are saying there will be a tax hike to pay for it, so that's another reason to believe it won't work, simply because libs don't know what they're talking about...

———————————

So we pay LESS in taxes, and we get BETTER coverage.


Your liberal brethren has already said there would be a tax hike.

Which is it?

The rest of us managed to force them to accept it. The US should be abke to do so as well.


No one should be "forced" to do anything. THAT'S the problem...
#15060025
Patrickov wrote:What about Pence? Is Pence so ineligible or irrelevant that he got completely ommitted?


Why on earth would Pence be impeached?
#15060026
Patrickov wrote:What about Pence? Is Pence so ineligible or irrelevant that he got completely ommitted?

Oh please come on. Even if the nomination could some how be hacked back together, even if Pence was able to stand at the top of ticket, what chance do you think he would have of being elected in November if he was seen to have in the slightest way colluded with the removal of Trump. In fact the only path I could see for Pence in such a scenario would be to immediately resign, put Pelosi into the White House and then seek to ride the Tsunami of rage, back into the Whitehouse in November.

That's assuming that American democracy survived till November. Do you think if Trump were removed he would just go quietly into the night. I myself might well be happy to take part in, how shall I put it? Lets just say robust demonstrations, here in England. The destabilisation caused by the removal of Trump might not just be confined to the United States. Look, many left radicals might find such a scenario enticing. I of all people can hardly blame people for radicalism, for political risk taking. But do not try and pretend that by removing Trump you are trying to defend the Constitutional Status Quo.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15060031
I get the best possible care available. Until you can show me how I'll receive the same level of care under a government run system, I'm not believing it.

If I fall ill in the middle of the night, I can call my doctor's cell phone and he'll come to my house. THAT'S the level of care I receive...


:roll:

Oh I see. And he is going to bring an x-ray or MRI with him? Of you fall badly enough to need a doctor's evaluation you should call the paramedics. They will take you to a competent doctor.

But BS is forwarding a bullshit argument yet again. I have care every bit as good as his, and probably better because I do not get any bill, from my government coverage.

There is nothing about universal health care that:

Stops us from having far better care than we have now for all people.

Allowing people to buy more coverage if they want.

Hire a concierge doctor if they want him to come by and fix their boo boos without making an appointment.

But then there is something missing entirely from BS' arguments. He has yet to voice even the slightest concern for others who are literally dying because they do not have competent health care. For him and people like him they don't matter. It is a recurring theme in his posts.

There is no need at all under universal health care for a single person to experience loss of services. In fact, the scaling up of capacity will provide better service for everyone; particularly rural Americans.

Look at Ingliz' excellent chart. The monumentally stupid republican supporters who have been deluded into believing that they will get something better if the PPACA is repealed, are dying from their stupidity.

As for the notion that people who earn over $100K would lose anything under universal health care, this is simply not true. I earn over that, could easily afford a Cadillac health care policy. The thing is that my all-government policy, which pays for everything except some small drug copays, is far better than anything available for sale,,,,full stop.
#15060058
BigSteve wrote:That scenario replayed itself thousands of times.

I look at what happened to people I know and that's enough for me...


If it happened so often, it should be easy to find evidence.

There's not a single reason to believe it would work here. Until that's done, there's no reason to believe it would...


Yes, no reason.

.....except the fact that it has worked everywhere else we have tried.

As is your assertion that it is workable. Just because something works in Canada doesn't mean it can be implemented in a country with a population almost ten times what you have...


China does it.

Are you saying that the Chinese and the Cubans and Canadians are just better at running a country than you folks?

You have no idea what I pay for the level of care I receive, and I have no reason to believe that standard of care would remain if I paid less...

I get the best possible care available. Until you can show me how I'll receive the same level of care under a government run system, I'm not believing it.

If I fall ill in the middle of the night, I can call my doctor's cell phone and he'll come to my house. THAT'S the level of care I receive...

You simply can't say that, because you don't know anything about the care I receive.


No one is discussing you as an individual.

As a country, you folks pay more and receive crappier care.

No one, especially you, has been able to show how better care exists for a lower cost...


I do not need to show it to you.

All of us who live outside the USA are already experiencing it.

And that's the crux of your argument. You don't like the fact that doctors can afford fancy cars and big houses. What he can afford is not pertinent to the discussion, other than how government run health care will adversely affect him.

You're jealousy is palpable...

And other libs are saying there will be a tax hike to pay for it, so that's another reason to believe it won't work, simply because libs don't know what they're talking about...


Ad hominem. Ignored.

And those doctors won't provide the same level of care...


Why not?

Are you under the weird impression that old doctors are magically better than young ones?

It's easier to make hot chocolate for ten people than it is for 1,000. It's a matter of scale.

We have cities with larger populations than your whole fucking country...


I see you are getting angry again.

But thank you for bringing up economies of scale.

Because the government is the single payer in Medicare for all, the government can access economies of scale, thereby reducing unit costs substantially. In your private system, these savings go to line the pockets of insurance company owners.

In a public system, you would benefit from these savings.

And again, more populous countries do it, so the mere size of the US population is not a valid criticism.

So they can. That's not the case in the States...


And?

This does not change the fact that you were incorrect about it taking weeks to receive medical care in Canada.

Your liberal brethren has already said there would be a tax hike.

Which is it?


For the third or fourth time, you SHOULD pay less, but because of US corruption, you may pay more in taxes but less overall.

No one should be "forced" to do anything. THAT'S the problem...


Cheap moralising.

Unless you are a radical anarchist, you already support forcing people to do things.
#15060080
Drlee wrote:Oh I see. And he is going to bring an x-ray or MRI with him? Of you fall badly enough to need a doctor's evaluation you should call the paramedics. They will take you to a competent doctor.


Why should I be taken to a competent doctor when a competent doctor will come to me?

But BS is forwarding a bullshit argument yet again. I have care every bit as good as his, and probably better because I do not get any bill, from my government coverage.


You don't have a clue as to the level of care I get, and it's doubtful that yours is better. It's great that you don't get a bill. I'm happy for you. What you libs can't seem to process is that I don't mind paying for my care, and I prefer that over allowing the government to dictate my health care options...

But then there is something missing entirely from BS' arguments. He has yet to voice even the slightest concern for others who are literally dying because they do not have competent health care. For him and people like him they don't matter. It is a recurring theme in his posts.


You know, if we'd stop pissing money away on other unnecessary things I would probably be more concerned. But as long as the government hemorrhages money on needless bullshit, yeah, I'm not going to be a fan of having my taxes increased so they can give away more...

The thing is that my all-government policy, which pays for everything except some small drug copays, is far better than anything available for sale,,,,full stop.


As I mentioned earlier, my doctor will come to my house in the middle of the night if I ask him to. No doctor in a government program is going to do that...
#15060081
BigSteve wrote:Why should I be taken to a competent doctor when a competent doctor will come to me?


Are you arguing that the US should continue to have high rates of mortality because of lack of medical access, just so you can not go out?

You don't have a clue as to the level of care I get, and it's doubtful that yours is better. It's great that you don't get a bill. I'm happy for you. What you libs can't seem to process is that I don't mind paying for my care, and I prefer that over allowing the government to dictate my health care options...


This myth that you have less options in a government system is incorrect.

Because of the federal health care system, I can see any doctor or clinic or hospital that I want in Alberta. I am not, for example, restricted to thise companies that have a contract with an insurance company.

You know, if we'd stop pissing money away on other unnecessary things I would probably be more concerned. But as long as the government hemorrhages money on needless bullshit, yeah, I'm not going to be a fan of having my taxes increased so they can give away more...


You could significantly reduce your defense budget.

As I mentioned earlier, my doctor will come to my house in the middle of the night if I ask him to. No doctor in a government program is going to do that...


Provide evidence for this claim that no doctors do house calls in the rest if the developed world.
#15060082
Godstud wrote:That much is obvious.


Dishonestly taken out of context, but I understand that's the only way you believe you can make a point...

Would you rather pay:
a) a bit more in taxes, and pay less, or <-- (UHC)
b) pay less taxes, pay high insurance premiums and end up paying more? <-- What USA has, now)


I'll take b), thanks.

You seem to think that I should look at everything in terms of cost; how much money am I spending. But I don't mind spending money. At Mecum last weekend I bought a Zagato Perana; cost me $118K. It won't go anywhere my Chevy Malibu won't. But I wanted it, I have the means, so I bought it.

I don't mind paying for the health care I get, from the doctor who provides it.

If it's worth it to me, then whether or not it's worth it to someone else is completely meaningless...

Paying Healthcare Premiums privately, is more expensive than paying it thru your taxes and having the government regulate the Healthcare system. It's just that simple.


I don't want the government to regulate health care. It's just that simple...

Why can you not understand that it benefits you, financially, and actually ends up taking less money from your pocket? There is a reason that Americans pay twice as much(per capita) for medial service, but it still isn't even close to even being in the top 30.


I see no guarantees that the level of care will stay the same and not be diminished. Why should I pay $1,000* for shitty health care under a government system instead of $1,300* for the high quality care I currently receive?

Also, in countries with UHC, there are no bankruptcies based on inability to pay medical bills.


Not my concern...

Being belligerent when you don't understand the argument is your go-to thing, isn't it?


And characterizing anything you disagree with as "belligerent" or "irrelevant" is yours.

It would be better if you could just present an intelligent argument. Sadly, that repeatedly escapes you...
#15060083
Pants-of-dog wrote:Are you arguing that the US should continue to have high rates of mortality because of lack of medical access, just so you can not go out?


My comment was solely with regards to the level of care my doctor provides...

You could significantly reduce your defense budget.


We could stop pissing money away on foreign aid to shithole countries and shoveling money into wasteful programs for illegal aliens, too...

Provide evidence for this claim that no doctors do house calls in the rest if the developed world.


I never made that claim.

If you're going to revert to blatant, overt dishonesty, this conversation is over...
  • 1
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 40

The Young Turks (TYT) had this story on food ba[…]

Election 2020

https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/C[…]

What is wrong with white people in America? :eh[…]

Of course he will. He'll be remembered just like t[…]