Grotewold wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles.

They merit re-evaluation, then, as Werthless describes

Werthless wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:No matter how much it is authentic and how much people like free stuff, M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles. All of Bernie's core positions are about spending your money on his dreams, and grade school math proves it's impossible.

Care to elaborate? I haven't seen this math.

All I've read on this is studies that indicate that Medicare For All both reduces US healthcare spending and improves outcomes. I haven't seen that it would raise costs, but perhaps I'm not understanding your comment.

TomatoPie wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles.

They merit re-evaluation, then, as Werthless describes

How best to get good health care to all Americans?

I think Bernie Bros and Liz Progressives and Biden fence sitters and decent conservatives (yeah, short supply) all want the same outcome. The argument is the path there.

I agree that single payer, M4A, or some version of that is superior to the mess we now have.

But even better than single payer would be a free market system whereby self-sufficient citizens secure their own health care insurance ( as they do with every other necessity of life) and the government provides a base level for those who cannot.

Single payer discounts how much profit motives influence the quality of care and the development of new drugs and new procedures.

Nobody flies to Sweden or Cuba for a life-saving operation; people all over the world come to the USA because this is where leading edge medical care happens. And the entire world benefits from that. Cheap drugs in Canada are effectively subsidized by research in the USA. We'd be very foolish to break down the engine of medical advancement.

Government is not the solution to the cost of health care - it's the problem. It's so screamingly obvious, the pattern for college costs and health care. Cries of "too expensive" followed by more government money that sparks a new upward price spiral followed by cries of "too expensive"

Bill McNeal wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles.

They merit re-evaluation, then, as Werthless describes

How best to get good health care to all Americans?

I think Bernie Bros and Liz Progressives and Biden fence sitters and decent conservatives (yeah, short supply) all want the same outcome. The argument is the path there.

I agree that single payer, M4A, or some version of that is superior to the mess we now have.

But even better than single payer would be a free market system whereby self-sufficient citizens secure their own health care insurance ( as they do with every other necessity of life) and the government provides a base level for those who cannot.

Single payer discounts how much profit motives influence the quality of care and the development of new drugs and new procedures.

Nobody flies to Sweden or Cuba for a life-saving operation; people all over the world come to the USA because this is where leading edge medical care happens. And the entire world benefits from that. Cheap drugs in Canada are effectively subsidized by research in the USA. We'd be very foolish to break down the engine of medical advancement.

Government is not the solution to the cost of health care - it's the problem. It's so screamingly obvious, the pattern for college costs and health care. Cries of "too expensive" followed by more government money that sparks a new upward price spiral followed by cries of "too expensive"

150,000-320,000 Americans do go to other countries for surgeries or other procedures because it is too expensive here.

https://www.insider.com/medical-tourism ... are-2018-6

or 1.4 million

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/08/1 ... Should-You

depending on the source, but it is a very real thing and is being done at an increasing rate.

philliesphhan wrote:If Warren supporters like slugs insist on using the term Bernie Bros, I'm going to start saying Warren's Whites since that's the only support she got and the reason she was never much better than 3rd or 4th place

JUburton wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:If Warren supporters like slugs insist on using the term Bernie Bros, I'm going to start saying Warren's Whites since that's the only support she got and the reason she was never much better than 3rd or 4th place

Is it hard to figure out that when someone says Bernie Bro they are not referring to literally every Bernie supporter? And in fact, they're only referring to a small portion of them?

If you were joking or something then oops

pacino wrote:Welp

I'm speechless

slugsrbad wrote:

JUburton wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:If Warren supporters like slugs insist on using the term Bernie Bros, I'm going to start saying Warren's Whites since that's the only support she got and the reason she was never much better than 3rd or 4th place

Is it hard to figure out that when someone says Bernie Bro they are not referring to literally every Bernie supporter? And in fact, they're only referring to a small portion of them?

If you were joking or something then oops

Exactly. The Bernie Bro’s are the extremely online trolls who are in every reply chain attacking anyone other than Senator Sanders.

The last thing the progressive left needs to do is to eat itself alive. We can not control what Elizabeth Warren or her supporters will do, but the online group blaming her for Super Tuesday do little to endear themselves to Warren supporters.

I really hope she comes out for Bernie strongly. I think some fights are worth fighting for, even if you lose. Her campaign was a testament to that, Bernie in 2016 was a testament to that too.

Bill McNeal wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles.

They merit re-evaluation, then, as Werthless describes

How best to get good health care to all Americans?

I think Bernie Bros and Liz Progressives and Biden fence sitters and decent conservatives (yeah, short supply) all want the same outcome. The argument is the path there.

I agree that single payer, M4A, or some version of that is superior to the mess we now have.

But even better than single payer would be a free market system whereby self-sufficient citizens secure their own health care insurance ( as they do with every other necessity of life) and the government provides a base level for those who cannot.

Single payer discounts how much profit motives influence the quality of care and the development of new drugs and new procedures.

Nobody flies to Sweden or Cuba for a life-saving operation; people all over the world come to the USA because this is where leading edge medical care happens. And the entire world benefits from that. Cheap drugs in Canada are effectively subsidized by research in the USA. We'd be very foolish to break down the engine of medical advancement.

Government is not the solution to the cost of health care - it's the problem. It's so screamingly obvious, the pattern for college costs and health care. Cries of "too expensive" followed by more government money that sparks a new upward price spiral followed by cries of "too expensive"

150,000-320,000 Americans do go to other countries for surgeries or other procedures because it is too expensive here.

https://www.insider.com/medical-tourism ... are-2018-6

or 1.4 million

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/08/1 ... Should-You

depending on the source, but it is a very real thing and is being done at an increasing rate.

Monkeyboy wrote:
As for drugs, most of the worlds drugs are researched and manufactured in Europe, the land of social democrats.

CalvinBall wrote:Biden May Be Saving the Democrats

I will give you my HOF spot if you can guess who wrote this article without clicking the link.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-may-be-saving-the-democrats-11583343952?mod=e2tw

Houshphandzadeh wrote:so many people who were so wrong in 2016 insist that they have the pulse on the American electorate

Karl Rove got everything they wanted policy-wise over the last 20 years and then were surprised to find that out that their party was fueled by racism, sexism, and xenophobia and their country defined by inequality, but now we take their advice as the way forward

TomatoPie wrote:

Werthless wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:No matter how much it is authentic and how much people like free stuff, M4A is antithetical to fundamental conservative principles. All of Bernie's core positions are about spending your money on his dreams, and grade school math proves it's impossible.

Care to elaborate? I haven't seen this math.

All I've read on this is studies that indicate that Medicare For All both reduces US healthcare spending and improves outcomes. I haven't seen that it would raise costs, but perhaps I'm not understanding your comment.

I think I answered it in my reply to Grote.

Bottom line - why create a government solution that wraps everybody in the bureaucracy when only a handful of citizens need help? That was the fundamental flaw of Obamacare, which has only accelerated the upward price spiral. Why not ObamaFood and ObamaHouse and ObamaNetflix? Because I can do it myself, dagnabbit! Better faster cheaper.

Medical care IS different, the need is not elastic. But a program that encompasses all Americans is just as dumb as Yang's free money for everybody, and certainly not in line with any conservative values.

The invisible hand of the free market is a core value. You can't be a conservative without honoring the power of free markets.