Forum Thread

Money can't be destroyed .

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 38 1 2 3 Next
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    If single payer was instituted does it cost the top 1% anything??? No and not just no absolutely no!!! They own almost everything and all the money that is spent goes back to what they own. Entitlements and give aways cost nothing in the end because all the money goes back to the origin. Poverty and sufferings are a choice made by limiting the velocity of money.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: If single payer was instituted does it cost the top 1% anything??? No and not just no absolutely no!!! They own almost everything and all the money that is spent goes back to what they own. Entitlements and give aways cost nothing in the end because all the money goes back to the origin. Poverty and sufferings are a choice made by limiting the velocity of money.

    This is sheer nonsense. What data do you have to back up all of these claims other than your own opinion?

    Single-payer has been a goal of mine since I wrote my college thesis on this very topic in 2006, but you are living in a fantasy world if you have convinced yourself that single-payer won't cost the top 1% anything. You're also living in a fantasy world if you have convinced yourself that it won't cost the remaining 99% anything.

    Have you studied the various single-payer systems throughout the industrialized world or have you simply convinced yourself that "[e]ntitlements and give aways [sic] cost nothing in the end because all the money goes back to the origin" without doing any research whatsoever?

    Single-payer has its pros and cons and those pros and cons are different in every country that has single-payer healthcare. A pro in most countries that have it is that you can receive medical care no matter your economic status. A con in most countries is that you may die waiting for service no matter your economic status. Trust me, I am keenly aware of this fact considering my wife's very wealthy uncle couldn't find a single private doctor to provide him care after a receiving a very troubling diagnoses.

    Providing health and wellness for a country of 325 million people isn't as simple as saying it won't "cost the top 1% anything."

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Try a little resolutionist analytical thinking and try and free yourself from the right-wing propaganda. If single payer costs 3 Trillion dollars a year once disbursed where do you think that 3 Trillion dollar goes????
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote: Try a little resolutionist analytical thinking and try and free yourself from the right-wing propaganda. If single payer costs 3 Trillion dollars a year once disbursed where do you think that 3 Trillion dollar goes????

    My whole family looks at me as a far leftie, so I'm sure they will get a good chuckle if I ever tell them what you just said. (Don't worry, I won't.)

    Try to free yourself from fanciful thinking and far left-wing propaganda, Chet.

    Have you ever thought much about the law of supply and demand, especially when it pertains to healthcare? There's 325 million people living in the United States and 953,695 "actively licensed allopathic and osteopathic physicians." To put it in layman's terms - there's "295 physicians per 100,000" people in the US.

    Will those 295 doctors be able to give 100,000 people high quality healthcare...for free? I think we all know the answer.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    And I repeat: What data do you have to back up all of these claims other than your own opinion?
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Dallas, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Jared,

    the real costs are the labor and resources consumed. That’s limited and there is a real constraint.

    Financially there is no cost for the United States govt as they just mark up accounts in the banking system to do govt spending. Same for all currency issuing govts.

    Based on theory, logic, and simple modeling, single payer would be a massive deflationary event necessitating a large tax cut or govt spending increase.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Dallas, TX
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    And the view I just espoused is the majority view behind closed doors among rank and file Democrats and leadership (although they are afraid to talk about it.)
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    It would be on of the greatest jobs programs ever. If the country has sense enough to repeal CFMA et al it would be a move toward world peace.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote:

    Jared,

    the real costs are the labor and resources consumed. That’s limited and there is a real constraint.

    Financially there is no cost for the United States govt as they just mark up accounts in the banking system to do govt spending. Same for all currency issuing govts.

    Based on theory, logic, and simple modeling, single payer would be a massive deflationary event necessitating a large tax cut or govt spending increase.

    There's just one problem with your solution - the Congress, not the Executive, passes bills. The Executive either signs or vetoes them.

    Convince 218 Congresspeople and 60 (or 51 depending on the language) Senators to pass a bill and a President to sign it then we're all good.

    Well, we would be all good if there weren't a far right-wing Supreme Court that would very likely strike down the law the Congress passed and the Executive signed.

    Elections have consequences. We'll be living with those consequences for the next half century or more.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Carlitos Wrote: And the view I just espoused is the majority view behind closed doors among rank and file Democrats and leadership (although they are afraid to talk about it.)

    Rank and file Democrats elected to local, state, and national office or rank and file Democrats who meet up with their friends and bitch about how terrible everything is, but decide to sit on their ass every two and four years?

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jaredsxtn Wrote: And I repeat: What data do you have to back up all of these claims other than your own opinion?
    jaredsxtn, it is blatantantly intuitively obvious. As well as the response to develop streamlining to get people treated. Maybe you don't know or understand but the long journey to becoming a doctor was instituted to limit the number of doctors due to the huge amounts of doctors upon entering the 20 th century.
  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:
    jaredsxtn Wrote: And I repeat: What data do you have to back up all of these claims other than your own opinion?
    jaredsxtn, it is blatantantly intuitively obvious. As well as the response to develop streamlining to get people treated. Maybe you don't know or understand but the long journey to becoming a doctor was instituted to limit the number of doctors due to the huge amounts of doctors upon entering the 20 th century.

    Once Again: What data do you have to back up all of these claims other than your own opinion?

    I'm going to continue to say this until you, for once, actually back up your statements with fact. So I encourage you to do so or you'll just keep getting the same exact response from me.

    Good luck.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Study Says Single-Payer Healthcare System Would Stimulate Economy - Our ...

    Our Bodies Ourselves › 2009/01 › study-...


    Jan 15, 2009 · Study Says Single-Payer Healthcare System Would ... to cover all Americans, the economic stimulus alone would

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Chet Ruminski Wrote:

    Study Says Single-Payer Healthcare System Would Stimulate Economy - Our ...

    Our Bodies Ourselves › 2009/01 › study-...


    Jan 15, 2009 · Study Says Single-Payer Healthcare System Would ... to cover all Americans, the economic stimulus alone would

    Yea...that’s not a study. It’s a blog written by Californian nurses in 2009.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Pensacola, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    "Study Says Single-Payer Healthcare"

    If you don't believe spending creates jobs Then you subscribe to a totally different ideology. Stimuli creates jobs but it doesn't last any longer than any particular funding lasts. If you believe in austerity then it is not possible for you to understand that spending is an economy.