Study: 'Medicare for all' projected to cost $32.6 trillion

[about_average]

The pure as the driven snow altruistic individuals that comprise the DNC of course!!!

You're getting really good at ascription.

I've voted libertarian in every election for the last 30 years.

That's fucking pathetic.....I know lawn boys banging out better than that.

Who the fuck goes through that much shit and takes on that much debt to make 60 a year?

Idiots would be better off getting a CDL.

Believe it or not there are actually doctors who practice medicine because they love the work and want to help people because for some it's a worthy thing to do.
Not all doctors go in to medicine to make a shit load of money.

One concrete example, the starting salary for doctors who work for Doctors Without Borders is less than $12,000/yr.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I've voted libertarian in every election for the last 30 years.

Yet you spend so much time on here defending "progressive" (D)icks and their socialistic bullshit.

Why??

Not all doctors go in to medicine to make a shit load of money.

There are idiots everywhere.

 

[Rightguide]

I'm all for Plan B.

Someone in this thread was bitching about the horrendous costs of an MRI. guess what sports fans, $510 if you pay cash. As a matter of fact anyone can go to a doctor, hospital, whatever and cut a cash deal and you'd be amazed at the savings. Often more than 50%.

I'd say return it to the private sector, there's no constitutional authority to nationalize the health care industry.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'd say return it to the private sector, there's no constitutional authority to nationalize the health care industry.

But comrade the "General Welfare" clause clearly gives the federal government total authority to nationalize ALL the things!!

 

[Rightguide]

But comrade the "General Welfare" clause clearly gives the federal government total authority to nationalize ALL the things!!

Haha, the left thinks so but the general welfare clause according to the founders is actually a limit on the authority of the Congress, confining it's law making only to the those needed to carry out it's article I authority. It limits the purpose for which Congress can lay and collect taxes.

As Madison explained the Congress derives no power from the General Welfare clause. In addition (in case the left brings it up) the “Necessary and Proper” clause only allows Congress to make law that facilitates those "enumerated" Article I powers and "national healthcare' isn't one of them. Oh, and in case a "Below Average" suggestion saying the Commerce Clause permits National health care, there's a legal difference in "regulating" commerce and actually engaging in it.

 

[about_average]

Yet you spend so much time on here defending "progressive" (D)icks and their socialistic bullshit.

I guess you can provide some quotes then.

 

[about_average]

But comrade the "General Welfare" clause clearly gives the federal government total authority to nationalize ALL the things!!

Exaggerate much?

 

[BotanyBoy]

I guess you can provide some quotes then.

There are two "promote the general welfare" clauses in the Constitution.
You agreed it would be better for the country if everyone had healthcare.
Welfare is defined as " the good fortune, health, happiness, prosperity, etc., of a person, group, or organization; well-being

Argued exactly like the democratic socialist have been for years.

And then here you are absolving Obama/D's responsiblity for aca...as if Republicans had any sort of control over it.

It was the republicans who insisted that the insurance companies get the windfall of the ACA dollars

Exaggerate much?

No.

If you think it gives authority to nationalize one part of the economy why not any or all of the others?

 

[RobDownSouth]

Moochie and NotIshmael have combined for a quarter of the 100+ replies in this thread. Not unusual.

I wonder how many minds they have changed? How many folks now embrace their "teh Poor have an obligation to die in a cost-driven economy" mantra?

Very few, I suspect.

 

[beew]

Moochie and NotIshmael have combined for a quarter of the 100+ replies in this thread. Not unusual.

I wonder how many minds they have changed? How many folks now embrace their "teh Poor have an obligation to die in a cost-driven economy" mantra?

Very few, I suspect.

And even if so, so what?

Those are just opinions on a Porn Board, neither of them have the power nor the inclination to actually act on their words in the real world.

Your reaction - to destroy political threads by spamming them with trolling posts and attack alts - is inappropriate.

 

[dan_c00000]

The fantasy is strong with you dan

Damn you trigger so easy! What a snowflake. I notice you didn't even bother to rebut my points with your usual racist bullshit. Fuck you're so easy to own.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Damn you trigger so easy! What a snowflake. I notice you didn't even bother to rebut my points with your usual racist bullshit. Fuck you're so easy to own.

You don't own anything....that's why you're so desperate for the government to go rob someone else for you.

 

[bellisarius]

But comrade the "General Welfare" clause clearly gives the federal government total authority to nationalize ALL the things!!

These people that hang on to the "General Welfare" clause are twisting the Constitution. BOTH parties have perverted the clause when it's suited their politics. But there is a great deal of writings about that clause in the words of the men that put it in the Constitution to begin with and it doesn't mean what any of the Constitutional perverts of either party think and say it does.

 

[Luk]

No Republicans want to address the Koch brothers findings. This pleases liberals everywhere.

 

[about_average]

Argued exactly like the democratic socialist have been for years.

The dictionary is a "progressive dick"?

And then here you are absolving Obama/D's responsiblity for aca...as if Republicans had any sort of control over it.

Compare the original plan to what it was after Obama wimped out and caved to the Republicans in congress.

I'm absolving Obama of the ACA fuckup?

You define words in an extremely bizarre way.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I'm absolving Obama of the ACA fuckup?

You tried to blame republicans for it's failue, so yes.

You define words in an extremely bizarre way.

Not a bid different from the Dictionary.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

Saving $2 Trillion dollars and insuring 30 million more people seems very unpopular among the very people that suck at the government tit the most. Weird.


If only Tricky Trumpy were to decide to do something like saving the very richest a $100 Billion dollars more in taxes by administratively reinterpreting the law on calculating the investment basis of capital gains. I wonder how they would react to that?