The fact that this qualifier has to be added is a problemBeing one of the poorest politicians in America for 40 years during the prime of his life and then becoming a millionaire at age 76 after writing a best-selling book. Yea, that totally sounds like a master grifter
You are reading way WAY too much into this. My statement was a general thing about how much money politicians make, it had nothing to do with Bernie specifically.
I thought that way once as well, then I read this:
I don't think there's a reason to be a dick like that. That's the part I don't care for. You don't have to be beholden to someone to be polite and listen to what they have to say.
Well I can't speak for anyone except myself, but that's one of the reasons I'll likely be voting Democrat in most of the races this year. Being in SC it won't matter, but it is what it is.
Two problems with that
America is already socialist. Medicare and Social Security are both socialist programs. Bernie isn't even pushing for wild socialism, he literally just wants Americans to have health care like every other developed nation in the entire world. By European standards he's a centrist. By communist standards, he's pretty far to the right.
I forget, which European nations have outlawed private healthcare?
Socialism doesn't mean outlawing private healthcare. He wants medicare for all, which doesn't mean everyone has to have medicare, just that everyone has it. He has never proposed making private insurance illegal, just unnecessary. Supplemental insurance, as in Canada and several other nations, would be possible, even if all people had Medicare. Show me where Bernie proposes outlawing private health care, it doesn't exist
Oh I agree that the American Dream is a completely different hill to climb now than it was 50 or even 20 years ago. I'm on board with some "progressive" ideas including a higher minimum wage.
www.cnn.com
It doesn't ban supplemental coverage, just redundant coverage. His bill will never pass thoHere’s what Bernie Sanders’ Medicare for All proposal actually says
The Medicare for All plan would leave intact the current infrastructure of doctors, hospitals and health providers, but nationalize the health insurance industry. Here are the most important elements.
"This is the most controversial element of this bill. Sanders would make it illegal to sell private health insurance that covers the benefits offered by Medicare for All. "
So unlike in pretty much every other country, you can't buy private insurance to cover maternity care, joint replacements, or anything else that Medicare covers but that you'd like to get better coverage for.
But that is still a ban
I’m more interested in the govt minding it’s business. I have no use for cigarettes and would be possed if the govt tried to ban them
You're shifting the goal posts. Whether or not it will pass doesn't matter for the point I was making. Under Bernie's plan private coverage for 99% of healthcare will be illegal. Almost no other country does that, which was my original point. The vast, vast majority of countries with universal healthcare still allow private insurance for those that want it. Most of them even have separate private hospitals for people who want to pay more to be outside the national system.
Medicare already bans redundant coverage, as does the system in Canada. By giving Medicare to all citizens, he wouldn't even have to change the laws as currently written with relation to private coverage and Medicare.
Another major factor is that we could still have a second private system. Private hospitals that do not accept Medicare, and which private insurance could allow one to utilize, similar to arrangements in the NHS.
Our CRNAs make about that. I’m not going to work for that rate. Not in a high acuity, high stress environment. I’d just retire. Every practice would change to 4:1 or more immediately as well to try to keep some income, so more work and more stress. Hard pass. Good luck to the young. It would be the end of anesthesia as a medical specialty unless the rates adjusted.
Yes, that was exactly my point (hence why I worded that as I did, which you pointed out_. That 3rd category (the right-most column) is it looks like the most common as England, Australia, Sweden, Finland, Germany, New Zealand, Austria, Spain, Italy, and Portugal all have private systems you can buy into separate from the main universal coverage.
Yes, I'm well aware of what Medicare does and the fact that it behaves that way is a problem if we go to Medicare for all since currently if you receive Medicare you aren't allowed to purchase better insurance on top of that.
This is exactly what Bernie's proposal would not allow.
You just can't duplicate services. If private insurance specifically does not cover hospitals and clinics where medicare is accepted, there would be no duplication of services and it would be fine. There is nothing in Medicare that would prevent this, as it could be explicitly stated in the policy that it only covers services at non-Medicare providers. And you can currently have private insurance if you have Medicare, so long as the policy is through an employer per the exceptions in the Social Security Act, so it would be interesting to see if this exception remained to some degree or not.
Right, you can't duplicate services. So if Medicare covers, let's say a c-section, then private insurance can't cover that as well.
There's a lot of legal ways around this. You could sell what you bill as supplemental coverage that fills gaps in Medicare coverage, which at private hospitals which do not accept Medicare would be 100%, for instance.
Or you could just not have the govt be a huge pushy a—hole and interfere with people’s natural right to buy services they want independently
We shouldn’t steal to delay death, we have no right to our neighbors stuff and we definitely shouldn’t be banning our neighbors from buying stuff
Look, anyone who has a toddler's understanding of what theft is isn't worth talking with. You were plenty happy to fund your education with "stolen" money
Not happy at all, the existence of that is why it’s so expensive to begin with
Except Bernie's plan doesn't allow that.
How does it not allow it. There is nothing in the text that doesn't allow for the same sort of gap coverage provided by current medicare supplemental plans, just cranked up to 11
Because insurance plans are not allowed to offer any coverage that Medicare already does. Full stop.
That would be a legally arguable point that the conservative SCOTUS would likely find in favor of my opinion, that insurance which only covers facilities which do not accept medicare would be indicative of covering services medicare does not cover by definition
It’s a poor sales pitch for an idea to include “well just take that part to the supreme court and get rid of it”
It wouldn't be getting rid of anything. As it is written, my interpretation would fly based on established law
You clearly haven't read Bernie's bill.
