It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kamalla Harris "i will get rid of private health care".

page: 6
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Allow me to put this in context.

Our government is corrupt.
If our government ran healthcare, then we'd have a corrupt healthcare system.

SMH

It's not rocket science.




posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: chr0naut

Allow me to put this in context.

Our government is corrupt.
If our government ran healthcare, then we'd have a corrupt healthcare system.

SMH

It's not rocket science.



With the most corrupt people this country has ever seen running it.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

You didnt answer my question......you good with dropping public education and social security?



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Most people who leave their private health insurance (due to retirement) and transition to Medicare, are happier with Medicare health insurance.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Only way I'd even consider this along with great reservation is if;

1. Federal prosecutors via Attorney General were ordered by Congress and Executive branch to fully apply ALL existing U.S. laws pertaining to Unfair Trade Practices, Restraint of Trade, Price Collusion, Monopolistic Practices and other current ongoing illegalities allowed by bought and paid for politicians on both sides of the aisle.

Fully implemented at insistence of public I believe we'd soon find there is no need for private insurance, public insurance or government paid programs with exception being catastrophic events, indigent, fully disabled.

This due costs reducing anywhere from 50% to 90% once existing law applied making use of third party payers not only moot but non-cash payers would be ridiculous for use of routine care and checkups.

So really no need give away your destiny to government nor is there a demonstrated need for MFA.

All we have is a lack of education on what our laws are and the will to use them.

2. See #1



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: lakenheath24
a reply to: neo96

You didnt answer my question......you good with dropping public education and social security?


Yeah.

Private schools produce smarter,more successful people, and the cherry on top. Not as indoctrinated.

Private investing gives people a higher standard of living in their golden years than 4 plus decades of forced taxation. That can't be touched until the states say so.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:13 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Mmmk. So get your kids outta public school tomorrow.....and you are not eligible for ss.

On a serious note. Why mess with the whole of the system to include a minority of people. Cannot we provide at least a basic care for peeps that is affordable. I mean the biggest cause of personal bankruptcy is health related.


Hang on a sec! Boom! Get care....declare bankruptsy.....hide assets.....start again. Ust like PG and E.
Damn I a smart.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I don't expect my medications to be free. I do think that charging almost $5000.00 a month for a single medication that has been around longer than I have been alive, is not just wrong, I think it borders on criminal.

The people already burden much of the cost of technology and development, they screw us from all angles. It is going to get worse as the boomers die off and there are fewer peasants to feed the beast.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

Do people honestly think anything would change if healthcare was nationalised.

Which is what Harris and the rest of the left want.

Not a GD thing would change. Except we would be paying MORE.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

Yeah, I am not very optimistic either about single payer.

The only way they could conceivably make it work is to restrict choice, and to increase wait times simultaneously, because they won't be able to get squeeze enough money out of the taxpayers to do it any other way, though taxes will necessarily also need to increase. *shrug*

They would also need to decrease the pay of healthcare personnel, which would initially cause a wave of older personnel to retire (those that can afford to do that!).

Ugly stuff.

The US Healthcare system is run by a corrupted cartel currently, IMHO, but single payer would just shift control to a different corrupted cartel (the US Government) instead.


edit on 29-1-2019 by Fowlerstoad because: added some spices!



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Has Harris outlined how the wage reductions would work?

You know, like doctors and all medical people taking a 50% reduction in pay and fees.

KaaPOW !!




posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: chr0naut

Allow me to put this in context.

Our government is corrupt.
If our government ran healthcare, then we'd have a corrupt healthcare system.

SMH

It's not rocket science.



And private insurance/drug companies are a shining beacon of honor. /sarcasm
edit on 29-1-2019 by narrator because: sarcasm

edit on 29-1-2019 by narrator because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Fowlerstoad

Healthcare reform is right up there with border control, gun control, war on drugs, etc....its fughazzi



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Single payer would be the efficiency of the DMV and the caring of the IRS managing your healthcare. No thanks.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Most people who leave their private health insurance (due to retirement) and transition to Medicare, are happier with Medicare health insurance.


They may be, but they aren't sharing the system with everyone either. It's a restricted system, and does not have to stretch its resources to cover every person in the country. It also does not cover everything which is why most of those people also carry private insurance policies on the side.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated
Single payer would be the efficiency of the DMV and the caring of the IRS managing your healthcare. No thanks.


You forgot that the doctors would be about as competent as you average public school teacher.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Edumakated
Single payer would be the efficiency of the DMV and the caring of the IRS managing your healthcare. No thanks.


You forgot that the doctors would be about as competent as you average public school teacher.


I truly don't understand these arguments. You're saying that if/when we get single payer, all of our current doctors would quit and be replaced with doctors that haven't had the same type of training, and the salary would drop by 3/4? That's just a completely illogical argument. I understand that the US has a larger population than countries that have already implemented single payer. But, why would changing how people pay for healthcare cause some nationwide doctor shortage?

I'm not trying to be sarcastic. I would appreciate anyone trying to explain it to me without being sarcastic themselves. "It'd be like the DMV!" Ok, explain WHY. There are so many more doctors, and doctor's offices, than there are DMV employees and DMV offices. Why would thousands of doctors automatically quit when we switch over? I haven't read any reports of doctors threatening to walk out en masse if the change happens. Where is the research to back this up?

What would doctors do if they quit? It's not like they'd just start breaking the law and start taking back-alley, black market private insurance. They'd keep their job. For the most part. Obviously some would quit, as that happens with any shift in a job sector. I just don't see it as this big catastrophe that so many people here on ATS see it is.

I just want to see a (non sarcastic) actually researched counter argument to us implementing it, because I haven't seen it on ATS, and based on what I've read outside of ATS, I am 100% for single payer. Explain to me why I shouldn't be.

And for the love of god, don't say Venezuela.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: narrator

The U.S. Senate has 51 Republicans and 49 Democrats
Seems the nation does not want it, if the nation did the dems would have 60 seats



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: narrator

The U.S. Senate has 51 Republicans and 49 Democrats
Seems the nation does not want it, if the nation did the dems would have 60 seats


www.pbs.org...

thehill.com...

www.pewresearch.org...

It seems the nation does want it. Number of Senators doesn't show total support for universal healthcare, that only shows how many Senators are democrat vs. republican, nothing more.



posted on Jan, 29 2019 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Ironically, I believe Harris was one of those who berated Trump's attempts to make NATO countries pay their own way, too. Strange... she wants something but is not willing to pay for it.

That's most liberals from my experience



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join