Only if the rich and corporations -- who got rich of the backs of the workers -- paid their taxes to fund the system.

My man says we do medicare for all prices will go down if we make them go down. Okay man.

When talking about the military, you focus on the product : good and strong defence. This is what we need, and the population have to pay for it through taxes. When takling about health and education you focus on the money, not the product. Why do you have such different attitudes ? Is it not important to have a healty, welleducated population? How are you going to compete with other countries if your workforce is opioid-addicted, sick , uneducated or disinformed and believe in all sort of crazy conspiracy theroies.

@alanblanes2876

5 жыл бұрын

Excellent points, Ellen!

@trackmonger

5 жыл бұрын

Because defense is actually a primary function of the federal government, education and healthcare are not.

@ellengran6814

5 жыл бұрын

Healthcare and education used to be womens work. Defence used to be mens work. Men found their defence was better when they faced the enemy together, not one by one. In modern countries (- US) women have also found that facing the enemy (diseases and stupidity) together gives much better results.

@charliechaplin7959

5 жыл бұрын

Alonzo Decarrerras The US constitution mentions the general welfare twice and many of the founders strongly supported public schools.

@charliechaplin7959

5 жыл бұрын

Ellen Gran the answer, in short, is because in the United States of America corporate profits are MUCH more important than human health and well-being. We are a sick, broken society.

It is weird that America debates Medicare for all. Imagine if this same debate, in this day and age, was on whether we should abandon horses for cars. And you had people arguing, “that is ridiculous to think we can move to cars. That costs too much infrastructure. How would we pay for such a road system - taxes??. The government taxing to pave roads and then banishing horses and pedestrians from the road is not capitalist democracy. Such a plan would never work”. All this ignoring that countries have used cars and built roads for a century. This is a concept that has been around for decades with our neighbors. Debating whether it would work is like debating we’d be better to just stick with horse and buggies. And truthfully this is basic corporate economics. Every corporation has cost centres and profit centres. Companies try to make themselves more competitive by sharing cost like admin, accounting, IT through out the business. The worst situation for a corporation is when a cost centre tries to act like a profit centre. Affectively they end up over charging their profit centres and slowing the business down. A clear sign a corporation is in trouble is when its shared services keep bragging how much money ‘they made’ last quarter.

@alanblanes2876

5 жыл бұрын

Andrew: Your points are accurate...We have to look much more realistically at social economy alternatives. The laissez faire capitalist model treats people as expenses to use up. A society that looks at people as worthy of investment, tends to get much better results. Look at Germany's corporate adoption of students program - that gives people real mentorship as they enter the industrial world.

@acWeishan

5 жыл бұрын

Alan Blanes I agree Alan America is a mature economy and like a mature athlete one can not compete the same way as when they were a young economy of 18. Young economies, like those up and coming in Africa and Asia will ultimately beat you at a young man’s game. The USA has to run itself like Michael Jordan did in his 30s. With the understanding that the team and playing the game smart is how you win. Michael Jordan, “Talent wins games, but teamwork and intelligence wins championships.” That is the mantra that the USA needs to embrace.

@trackmonger

5 жыл бұрын

Germany's "corporate" adoption of students is done in conjunction with private corporations. It is not a full government program. The problem is that all the american left wants are confiscatory tax policies, so that the government can waste the money.

@trackmonger

5 жыл бұрын

That is the most ridiculous analogy I have ever heard. Using your analogy the ultimate "team economy" would be communism. Show me where that has ever worked out. You people on the left forget what motivates people to innovate new goods and services that stimulate economic growth. It is not more government, but rather less.

@acWeishan

5 жыл бұрын

Alonzo Decarrerras in terms of examples of the Team economy you have no where to but Scandinavia, Europe, Canada, and pretty much most mature economies. The team economy is also a prevalent structure in basically how all corporations set themselves up internally. Basically you have cost centres (IT, accounting, etc) and you have profit centres (sales etc) now the concept of a corporation is to spread the costs of the cost centre to minimise cost while maximising services to the profit centres. You want to know when you can know a corporation will fail ? when their cost centre want to be seen as profit centres and effectively price gouge and stymie external profitability of a company. This is not communism far from it... it is how you have lasting profits rather than success that comes in peaks and valley. I am always impressed at those who point out the current failings of Venezuela without first recognising equal failures of the country as capitalist country. Certainly we have more than enough examples of failing capitalism in south and Central America, Asia, and the Middle East. Now are Not-For-profits corporation communist? No, in fact prior to the USA’s cilvil war and afterwards granting corporations human rights - that was their very nature of Corporate America. Not for profit corporations do make money and are quite lucrative. The Green Bay packers is one of the most valuable teams on the planet and its players and coaching staff are paid no different than any other privately owned nfl team. Or did you think they were paid in grain??

Washington Journal really missed the mark by not having Mr Sanders on himself to defend his plan and this idea.

Oh dear, James went to town on Reagan right out the chute!

Becareful people with expertise and used for their own purpose.

At 12000 dollars per person for 300 million citizens, for 10 years, we will spend 36 Trillion dollars for healthcare if we do nothing. Both of these people know this. Why cant they be honest.

right bring two people that agree on a panel😏

Received private money and expected fair result, or people money with independent and fair result?

The very first question that should have been asked before the Mr. Blahous and Ms. Gee started delving into the all the technical details of who pays how much and for what in a Medicare for all health care system is what is your social ethic when it comes to health care? The country has to reach a consensus about the what our social ethic should be when it comes to health care. It basically comes down to two choices. Social ethic #1: Is health care a right and something that should be provided to all Americans regardless of their ability to pay? Social ethic #2: Is health care a privilege and something that every American is responsible to provide for him or herself? The country can only move forward with designing a health care system only after the social ethic question is answered. It's clear Mr. Blahous and other conservative leaning groups would choose social ethic #2. Ms. Gee and other liberal or progressive leaning groups would choose social ethic #1. What social ethic would you choose?

@sanjeetraghuwanshi6455

3 жыл бұрын

The problem i find with option 1 is that you can have healthcare as a human right however every right comes with some responsibility. People who want healthcare as a right then would have to let go of unhealthy eating habits like junk food,alcohol,smoking plus would need to exercise on a regular basis otherwise the whole system would be overburdened. The responsible people would be disincentived and would be punished for healthy eating choices. Also this kind of system creates a in-group favoritism and out-group animosity as can be seen in many of the European nation-states with welfare programs in form of the rise of Far-right identitarian parties in wake of the migration from east africa and war torn regions such as syria.Even the supposed socialist wonderlands like Sweden have witnessed this phenomenon.

@Maddawg31415

2 жыл бұрын

To what extent is healthcare a right? Does the impoverished 90 yo dying person have a right to receive hardcore critical care (ventilators, ECMO, ect) at a 6-figure operational cost at the expense of the American taxpayer? Mehhh. We heard about the “death panels” under Obamacare (aka the end of life committees). Essentially, that dialysis patient may not have the option to continue receiving free dialysis u set the M4A plan if we did go to such a format. Like they say, healthcare isn’t cheap. Nor do organs grow on trees- one definitely doesn’t have the right to an organ transplant because we can barely find donors as is.

i could not finish this piece ,. first of all were americans we can make anything work....

not 5 seconds in and the host has implied that it's difficult to even define UHC. Is the purpose of these talking heads solely to obfuscate and run interference on behalf of oligarchs? Because it looks like it.

this discussion is annoying.....

It's not even a debate. Medicare for all. Just do it