2018 Democrats thread

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

And instead we get the inefficient, corrupt insurance industry, and a whole lot fewer people covered, and a whole lot higher prices than anyone else pays anywhere. 

This is "Sure I got shot in the head, but at least I didn't scratch my knee while falling".

And hospital billing rates for unneeded tests/exams, malpractice insurance and Big Pharma...and they have to cut somewhere, hospitals/doctors are the least likely of the 3.  (Of course, the GOP would prefer tort reforms to protect corporations to the disadvantage of individual customers.)

Without a check on corporate greed and sheer price gouging, then you’re not going to accomplish much.  We saw flash points with the Epipen (Manchin’s daughter) and the Martin Shkreli PR disaster for the drug industry...but no systemic changes.

How much profit is acceptable?  We put a limit on it for payday loans and check cashing, and call it usury for lenders.

[ptatc]

37 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

And you don't see that as a problem? You're literally okay with letting someone die needlessly so you don't have to be uncomfortable with who runs the healthcare system or having to pay a little more in taxes? That's a very cruel and inhumane viewpoint.

I know people wouldn't be happy with Medicare, but even that would be better than the current system. Hospitals would be cheaper for everyone if they didn't have to negotiate with the insurance companies, procedures were mostly set pricing, and the hospital knew they were getting a minimum of 80% of the bill. You want to talk about cutting administrative waste, that would be a HUGE cut to administrative waste.

If 700 million people (underestimating intentionally) in Europe can be covered by single payer systems, 400 million people (overestimating intentionally) in America being "too big to cover" under a single payer system is not a valid argument.

There is something wrong with a private company seeking profit when their method of ensuring that profit is to deny life saving or bettering treatment to a person because it would be too costly, despite the fact that that person paid their premiums timely for years, which is the modus operandi of the health insurance industry.

It wasn't until 8 years ago that health insurance companies were required to cover people with conditions they didn't like to cover and had to pay a minimum percentage of premiums to cover medical services or refund the difference. So you can say they make their profit from investments, but the mandated refund checks people got after the Affordable Care Act went into effect tell a different story.

Your opinion on the government's ability to handle it has been noted. I disagree with you and think the people in charge now are even more ill-equipped based on the results they've gotten, that being that we have the most expensive healthcare system in the world on a per capita basis, and our average health outcomes are nowhere near the top of the world. If this were baseball, our healthcare system would be present day Albert Pujols, overpaid for bad results.

I do see national healthcare in France as the problem when they would needlessly allow that situation. I don't see why you wouldn't see that as a problem. That's one reason I wouldn't like that type of national healthcare system.

 

I disagree that Medicaid for everyone would be better than the current system. The care would be awful and people would have heath insurance but most wouldn't improve to a point of a good standard of living. 

 

I don't know else to say but from inside the system it would be a nightmare to deal with. I dont do agree that the sgstem doesnt have the highest outcomes and would love to have just one insurance company to fill the paper work for. However, if we looked at only the medicare, if not the Medicaid system the results would be 10 times worse. The private system here improves the national outcomes not hinders it.

The proof that the governm3nt couldn't run it is the effectiveness or lack of effectiveness of the VA and medicare systems. It's not just my opinion. Look at the fraud and outcomes from those systems and think about them rrying to run a national system.

 

Edited August 10, 2018 by ptatc

[ptatc]

51 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

And hospital billing rates for unneeded tests/exams, malpractice insurance and Big Pharma...and they have to cut somewhere, hospitals/doctors are the least likely of the 3.  (Of course, the GOP would prefer tort reforms to protect corporations to the disadvantage of individual customers.)

Without a check on corporate greed and sheer price gouging, then you’re not going to accomplish much.  We saw flash points with the Epipen (Manchin’s daughter) and the Martin Shkreli PR disaster for the drug industry...but no systemic changes.

How much profit is acceptable?  We put a limit on it for payday loans and check cashing, and call it usury for lenders.

The physicians who currently order the unneeded tests and exams, as you believe, will be the same physicians in any new system. What makes you think it will change? They will either be reimbursed somehow or there will be no charge so why not order it. This takes a great deal of oversight and with the fraud in medicare, I don't see it being any better.

[Dam8610]

25 minutes ago, ptatc said:

The physicians who currently order the unneeded tests and exams, as you believe, will be the same physicians in any new system. What makes you think it will change? They will either be reimbursed somehow or there will be no charge so why not order it. This takes a great deal of oversight and with the fraud in medicare, I don't see it being any better.

You're right that robust oversight and transparency would be needed to make it work. I just prefer that option to the current system.

[ptatc]

10 minutes ago, Dam8610 said:

You're right that robust oversight and transparency would be needed to make it work. I just prefer that option to the current system.

I agree that the idea of a national healthcare system could be better. With the size and type of governing body it would take, I just don't think it would work efficiently to be enough of a benefit here.

I guess working within the current system for 30 years, has made me very pessimistic and jaded against that type of oversight being effective.

Edited August 10, 2018 by ptatc

[Reddy]

Which Dem(s) can beat Avenatti? Honest question.

[Dam8610]

23 hours ago, Reddy said:

Which Dem(s) can beat Avenatti? Honest question.

Bernie if he declares as a Democrat for a 2020 run. Maybe Kamala Harris if she moves left enough on economic policy.

[caulfield12]

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/11/opinions/avenatti-dems-fire-with-fire-opinion-zelizer/index.html

Avenatti is right, Dems have to fight fire with fire

[caulfield12]

On 8/11/2018 at 2:22 PM, Reddy said:

Which Dem(s) can beat Avenatti? Honest question.

Pretty obviously someone who can stand toe to toe with Trump and not be cowed by him...and I theoretically someone who is a master at publicizing themself for free while simultaneously sustaining the public’s interest in them.

[Reddy]

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Some pretty serious domestic abuse allegations against Ellison coming out

[caulfield12]

Dems have more positive view of socialism that capitalism for first time since financial crisis 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/13/politics/democrats-nervous-gallup-poll-analysis/index.html

[Dick Allen]

Anyone read about the GOP state senate candidate in FL who was busted with a fake diploma? First she said she didn't want to comment on "fake news". Miami of OH did say they had no record of her graduating and the diploma she was showing off didn't appear legit. So she finally came clean, and said it wasn't her intent to mislead anyone. 

[Quin]

On 8/12/2018 at 9:23 AM, Reddy said:

 

 

As an aside, NY is extremely easy to vote in 

[Brian]

1 hour ago, Dick Allen said:

Anyone read about the GOP state senate candidate in FL who was busted with a fake diploma? First she said she didn't want to comment on "fake news". Miami of OH did say they had no record of her graduating and the diploma she was showing off didn't appear legit. So she finally came clean, and said it wasn't her intent to mislead anyone. 

It’s almost like she doesn’t realize the internet busts everyone.

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/melissa-howard-fake-diploma_us_5b720142e4b0bdd0620c1808?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016&section=politics

[Kyyle23]

she will probably just keep running and win.  Just like the guy that punched the reporter and was like "im sorry shouldnt have done that"

[LittleHurt05]

I hope fakediplomanow.com gave her a refund, that's some piss poor work on their end between the dean's sig and the non-existent major.

[StrangeSox]

3 hours ago, Quinarvy said:

As an aside, NY is extremely easy to vote in 

Their registration process is ridiculous, months and months before the primary iirc.

[Quin]

25 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Their registration process is ridiculous, months and months before the primary iirc.

Yeah, but registering and voting are both simple. The only thing is doing it in advance and for primaries.

Registered at the DMV when I moved. Friend did it online. 

Walked into the polls at 8 PM for my primary, cast a ballot and was out. Compared to Missouri it was a godsend.

[StrangeSox]

Same day registration and automatic registration in all fifty states imo

[The Beast]

47 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

Same day registration and automatic registration in all fifty states imo

What’s the problem with registering on the same day and bringing current bills to show where you live? Why not register people automatically once they get their driver’s license at 18?

[Reddy]

6 hours ago, Quinarvy said:

As an aside, NY is extremely easy to vote in 

Uh... nope. Lived there for 7 years.

Beyond the crazy amount of time you have to register before the election and the fact that tons of names got purged off the rolls in '16, NYS is hardly a paragon of hassle-free voting.

Edited August 14, 2018 by Reddy

[Quin]

2 hours ago, StrangeSox said:

Same day registration and automatic registration in all fifty states imo

I agree with this, though those seem a bit redundant.

Edit: Unless that means you're automatically registered at age 18 and could vote on that day if it were your birthday.

[StrangeSox]

21 minutes ago, Quinarvy said:

I agree with this, though those seem a bit redundant.

Edit: Unless that means you're automatically registered at age 18 and could vote on that day if it were your birthday.

There's still a chance that you may not be registered even in an AVR state on election day for various reasons, or if its a closed primary state maybe you want to pull a certain party's ballot but didn't make that decision at least 25 days ahead of time.

Here's a good article back from 2016 on all the hurdles NY throws up to voting:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/the-problem-with-voting-rights-in-new-york

Quote

 

For example, the Justice Department and liberal public-interest groups have charged that the decision by Republican-led states to cut back on early voting represents a form of discrimination against minority voters. So has early voting been cut back in New York? No—because the state does not allow any early voting. New York is one of only thirteen states that has no provision for early voting, and instead employs the archaic practice of giving voters only two choices: show up at the polls on Election Day or vote by absentee ballot.

But the disgrace of New York’s voting laws only begins there. New York not only lacks same-day voter registration—a valuable reform—but it requires voters to register at least twenty-five days before Election Day, which presents a meaningful barrier to many voters who want to participate. (Fourteen states and the District of Columbia allow same-day voter registration.) In addition, absentee voting is a cumbersome process in New York, which requires snail-mail exchanges between the voter and the local Board of Elections. (No e-mail requests are allowed for absentee voting.) It’s little wonder, then, that New York ranks forty-sixth in voter turnout.

 

Cuomo has worked with Republicans in the state house to help block voting reform in the state because he is awful.

[Reddy]