is completely wacko.  He's now promoting Medicare for everyone.  Private insurance will be against the law, which means the Medicare Supplement policies that allow seniors to meet their copay obligations will cease to exist and the copay will have to  come out of each person's own pocket.  Typically, Medicare only covers 80% of medical services, so there is a co-pay of 20%.  If that sounds like a good deal, consider the cost of a heart bypass operation is usually around $150,000.  Medicare will cover you for 80%, in this case $120,000.  Your copay would be $30,000.  Meanwhile, income taxes will double to pay for the program, but industry experts say it is still unsustainable.  If it STILL sounds like a good deal to you, vote for Bernie.  

-- Modified on 5/10/2019 6:01:25 PM

People are discussing many different versions of Medicare for All.  Historically, even businesses have supported some form of MfA. Currently, annual health care expenses in the US are around $4T. That is paid for by personal and business premium payments to insurance companies, gov payments (which derive from taxes), out-of-pocket cash payments, etc..  The basic idea of MfA is to collect and distribute that $4T differently.  
.
- No more monthly insurance premiums to worry about (and lose your health insurance if your payment is late by one day) - but it might mean a higher income tax out of your paycheck.
- No more insurance premiums AND human resource department costs as a business expense, but it might be a higher biz tax.  
- Various studies have shown that single payer will save money ($4T would be only $3.4T using single payer).  
- The basic idea is to shift the $4T that people and businesses are currently paying in (premiums, co-pays, out-of-pocket) to a different form of payment (e.g., various taxes) and to shift how $4T of health care is paid out (some version of gov Medicare or Medicare + private, just like it is now).
.
In some MfA plans, there is still a place for private insurance as an add-on or enhancement to whatever the basic coverage is. Just like we have now. You can buy regular insurance (shared room in a hospital; shared nursing; ugly nurses) or the deluxe package (private hospital room; 24 hour private nursing; prettier nurses).  Amazon, Google, etc., can still offer those deluxe "private insurance" premium perks as an employment incentive. Walmarts and Mom and Pop stores will not have to keep employees below 20 hours per week (or whatever the cutoff is) to avoid having to pay for health insurance.  They can finally give people full time jobs.  Walmart will pay more in biz tax, but not have to pay for employee health insurance.  Employees with health insurance (and regular check ups, etc.) will be healthier, happier and better employees.

In more extreme versions, private insurance will be unnecessary but not against the law. "We will do away with private ins" means "do away with the NEED for" not "criminalize private ins".  Regarding sustainability, some observers think that the current trends in health care and health care costs are not sustainable and that something must be done.  Some of those people point to the Scandinavian models of health care which is single payer gov health care.  
.
"income taxes will double" is a scare tactic. Different proposals have different funding mechanisms. For SOME families, taxes will go DOWN, for other families, taxes might go UP but their health insurance premiums will go to zero. It's a trade off.

-- Modified on 5/11/2019 8:16:12 PM

I didn't attribute my post to "people", I said it was Bernie.  Your post is too long because you're trying too hard to manipulate my post into something it wasn't.  I think just about everyone here is on to you now, so your cred is near zero.  

A single payer system such as Medicare For All is the only way to cover ALL US Citizens and reduce and control healthcare cost. You don't hear many complaints for people 65 + complaining about their healthcare.  
Sure you will need a supplement policy to cover the 20% but that's better then no coverage.

Fact is insurance companies would not cover anybody except healthy 35 y/o's if they could get away with it!!
I say "FUCK'M"!
Well in actuality, they have fucked themselves by their greed.

Its coming !!!!

convince all of the employed people and union members who ALREADY have a better plan that is COMPLETELY paid for by their employers/unions to get on board with accepting a lesser plan so you can cover illegal aliens for free, too.   Obama care was a disaster for all but those with pre-existing conditions and had no effect on those groups that had good plans already from their work.  To sell Medicare for all, they would have to be willing to GIVE UP what they have already, which is pretty awesome and take something inferior.  They didn't lose anything with Obamacare, so it was a zero-sum game to support it for others.  I don't think the majority of voters will go for it after their experience with Obamacare.  Just my opinion.  

is just Socialism at its worst.  FREEDOM is being able to keep your own money and buy whatever insurance plan you.  Having the government tax you and then TELL you" this what you get, and you don't have any other choices" is Socialism to most reasonable people, regardless of party affiliation.  Do you think Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerburg or even George Soros want to switch to the same Medicare plan everyone else gets when they can afford anything they want?  They won't have a choice because under Bernie's plan, private insurance will be against the law.  

You need more than 10 second sound bites from Fox to learn enough about the MfA proposals to criticize them accurately. Different proposals call for transition periods (from old or existing coverage to new coverage), grandfathering (of old or existing coverage) and other accommodations.  Unions could still bargain for better or premium supplementary health insurance.  Simplistically, Old Premium Insurance becomes an equivalent New MfA plus New Premium Supplementary Insurance.  
.
Some union pension funds (and health care funds) are drastically underfunded due to mismanagement. New union members are being hired with fewer or less generous benefits than their predecessors were receiving in the 1970s-2000s (but still better than zero security, zero benefits, minimum wage jobs). Some benefit managers have tried to unilaterally cut benefits to retirees but they usually get shot down in the courts.  
.
If mandatory MfA obliterated the need for a union negotiated health benefit and thus weakened unions, wouldn't Trump supporters be in favor of that?

and they love him.  He provides jobs for them on his building sites.  You're ignoring that fact that Trump is NOT like others in the GOP that oppose unions.  I stand by my analysis.  Good luck trying to get government workers, teachers unions, blue-collar unions, etc., to give up their "Cadillac" plans in favor of Medicare for All. I say it can't be done.  

Warren Buffet and George Soros are in fact on Medicare.
Don't know about Bill Gates but if he 65 y/o then he too is on Medicare.

That's not true. There will no longer be a NEED for the traditional, basic (minimum) private health insurance plan. There will still be options for private, supplemental, premium insurance plans.  Having Private Health Insurance will not be against the law.

to sign up for Medicare when you turn 65, you are merely "eligible"  I know many wealthy people over 65 who never signed up, because they don't want the government to dictate what procedures they can get and which ones they can't.   The very wealthy almost always "self-insure" (by putting a few million tax-deductible dollars in an HSA, a program started by "W")  and don't have any insurance coverage at all, or else they have  large-deductible "catastrophic"  coverage and pay the premiums themselves.

 
The first flaw in Medicare is that the government is the one who decides which treatments you are eligible for, and there are often limits on how often you can be treated for certain things, as well as limits on how long you may receive certain kinds of inpatient coverage.  

 
The second flaw is that the doctor must agree that if he accepts Medicare payments, then Medicare will also be the ones to decide what treatments or procedures you may receive.  Accordingly, there are instances where some doctors will not recommend certain treatment options to their Medicare patients because Medicare will not authorize payment for it.  There are still seniors who go broke because they can't pay for the treatments that Medicare says they won't cover.  

 
Regular folks don't have a choice, because the premiums for private coverage for those over 65 are cost-prohibitive for most, so they must accept Medicare, even with all of its flaws.  Wealthy people are under little, or no, cost restraints, so they do not have to subject themselves to Medicare's limitations on coverage.  

 
I have not ever seen it said anywhere that Warren Buffet and George Soros are actually ON Medicare, although I agree they are eligible strictly on the basis of age.  Have you ever heard of them making such a claim?

-- Modified on 5/13/2019 6:11:04 AM

Analyze this:
.
http://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/27/nyregion/trump-tower-illegal-immigrant-workers-union-settlement.html
"Trump Paid Over $1 Million in Labor Settlement, Documents Reveal"
.
"Donald J. Trump employed a crew of 200 undocumented Polish workers who worked in 12-hour shifts, without gloves, hard hats or masks, to demolish the Bonwit Teller building on Fifth Avenue, where the 58-story, golden-hued Trump Tower now stands. The workers were paid as little as $4 an hour for their dangerous labor, less than half the union wage, if they got paid at all."
.
In addition, Trump stiffed the union pension fund out of ~$1M.  Trump dragged it through the courts for over 15 years but eventually lost on all counts and then agreed to a confidential out of court settlement by paying 100% of what the court had said was owed.  
.
During that time, Trump claimed that he didn't know that illegal, non-US labor was working for him. That was proven to be a LIE by testimony of many people, including a labor consultant that Trump had hired and to whom he had explained the trouble he was having with illegal laborers and a threatened work stoppage on the job site.  
.
From the article: "But Mr. Kaszycki stopped paying the [illegal Polish work]men, and they eventually took their complaints to a lawyer named John Szabo. Mr. Szabo went to Thomas Macari, a vice president of the Trump Organization, threatening to place a mechanic’s lien on the property if the men weren’t paid. According to testimony, Mr. Macari began paying the men in cash himself. The delays and disruptions were adding to the pressure on the Trump Organization to meet its deadlines.
.
One evening, Joseph Dabrowski testified, Mr. Trump arrived on site to tell the workers that he was taking charge. “I am telling you for the last time that Trump told us, ‘If you finish this fast and I will pay for it,’” Mr. Dabrowski recalled in court.
.
Still, there were problems. Mr. Szabo filed the lien, prompting Mr. Trump to ask for help from Daniel Sullivan, a labor consultant. Mr. Sullivan later testified that Mr. Trump described his “difficulties,” and “that he had some illegal Polish employees.”  Mr. Trump, however, testified that he did he not remember that there were undocumented Polish workers on the job, or signing paychecks for the crew. “I really still don’t know that there were illegal aliens,” Mr. Trump said on the stand."
.
"Now that the documents have been released, Ms. Sloan said that “the settlement we obtained recovered 100 percent of the maximum amount plaintiffs could recover,” plus lawyers fees and costs.

“When you get one hundred cents on the dollar in a settlement, that is a great settlement,” Ms. Sloan and Lewis M. Steel, another of the plaintiffs’ lawyers, said in an email."
.
Harry Truman governed by the motto, "The buck stops here."  
Trump's motto seems to be, "The money comes to me and stops with me, but all blame and all responsibility rests with my family members, my employees, and anybody else OTHER than me."
.
Trump: "I don't remember." "I don't recall." "The FBI never warned me about Russian interference." "I didn't know anything about a payment to Stormy Daniels." "I have one of the greatest memories of all time."  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1yKaeeBCOA  "I don't remember saying that I have the greatest memory of all time."

-- Modified on 5/13/2019 10:21:43 AM

Bernie and his followers need to move on to something else.  They will forget about it when they see his poll numbers continuing to stagnate.  

who come here for a better life should have the same opportunities as Mexicans who come here?  Personally, I don't see a distinction.  

 
When it comes to testimony, its difficult to "prove" someone is lying.  The best way is if there are contemporaneous written records that support the opposite of the person's testimony.  In this case you're talking about, it doesn't appear that there were any supporting documents on one side or the other, so its overreach to say that what Trump said was PROVEN to be a lie.  In a civil trial, one side just has be more "believable" by 50.1% to 49.9% in order to win, based on the totality of the evidence.  Its not uncommon for the wrong side to come out on top just because they had a better lawyer.  We all know from the example of Michael Cohen that Trump is not very good at picking his lawyers.

touting that as part of his plan.  I think you are talking about someone else's plan, not Bernie's.

So you skipped reading the whole story and doing any sort of analysis. You just toss out red herrings and distractions. OK.
.
LEGAL immigrants are equally entitled to the take advantage of LEGAL job opportunities. Sweatshops and other exploitative working arrangements are NOT legal job opportunities.  
.
ILLEGAL immigrants, who lack proper work authorizations and permits, should not be allowed to work at any US job. Criminal employers seem to have no problem exploiting illegal, undocumented workers for the sake of a dollar, or even a penny.  
.
(Or 13 pennies: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/trump-files-spy-magazine-prank/
"In 1990, Spy Magazine sent 13-cent checks to the world’s richest people. Only two cashed them: an arms dealer & Donald Trump.")
.
During testimony, Trump tried to lie his way out of responsibility. They weren't his employees, the other guy hired them; the judges repeatedly rejected that excuse over 15 years. He wasn't paying them; but Trump Org set up an illegal payment system operating thru the Polish-American guy's company; judges cited that over 15 years of litigation; Trump WAS shown to paying them. In some cases, Trump Org paid the workers in CASH without keeping proper records. Etc..  
.
Trump continued to employ undocumented, illegal immigrants at his golf clubs as recently as 2018 (google for the news stories; it might not have been reported by Fox).
.
http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/penalties-for-employers-hiring-illegal-immigrants.html
- Hiring illegal immigrants can lead to many severe penalties, such as:
Criminal and civil fines
Loss of business licenses
- Most fines are broken down to the following:
First offenders can be fined $250-$2,000 per illegal employee.
For a second offense, the fine is $2,000-$5,000 per illegal employee.
Three or more offenses can cost an employer $3000-$10,000 per illegal employee. A pattern of knowingly employing illegal immigrants can mean extra fines and up to six months in jail for an employer.
- This does not include “harboring” illegal immigrants, or employing ten or more illegal immigrants in one year. Harboring an illegal immigrant can lead to ten years of prison time. (Note: 200 illegal Polish immigrants is "ten or more".)

I think that Trump would see a "white vs brown" distinction, but I think that Trump would not discriminate and would support and practice equal opportunity exploitation.
.
Regarding lying under oath, every aspect of the case went against Trump. For 15 years, the judges weren't convinced by his nonsensical excuses. The records do not show whether the judges were thinking "Trump 49.9% believable vs Plaintiffs 50.1% believable".  (Do you remember why Trump's lawyers would not allow him to testify before Mueller?) At the beginning of the final trial, the Judge compared the 15 year long dispute to Bleak House and said, let's get this done, finally.

-- Modified on 5/14/2019 4:50:16 AM

how much New Yorkers don't have a clue to what is really going on the in rest of the country, and yet, they want to tell us all how to do things.  You don't get many Mexican illegals there because rents are too high, so illegal immigration doesn't seem  like a big deal to you.  I don't disagree that much (at least not enough to write three or four paragraphs about it) with what you are saying.  IN THEORY, you are correct.  However, that's not the way its playing out in the Southern border states where the illegal crossings take place.  There have only been a handful of cases where ICE has come down on an employer of illegals, and there is a reason for that:  All of their resources are needed AT THE BORDER to try to stop the flow of illegals until the wall can be finished.  

 
From your ivory tower in NYC, it doesn't seem to be a problem, but for most of the country, its a huge problem.  BTW, I still think you are harboring some prejudice against Polish workers.  

I stand corrected my friend. No I do not know for sure if either is on Medicare.

I still believe a single payer system is the best system to cover ALL Citizens.

I think most people who oppose this type system like yourself are only thinking about themselves and not what is good for the nation as a whole. I use to be that way myself.
But as I have gotten older, I have seen so many people that really do need our help. Some because of their own past mistakes but some just because of the environment they were born into.
Anyway I was very lucky in life, (sold my business and retired at 55), and guess my heart as soften.

I was at one time a die-hard republican but no more.

Is it a socialist concept, Yes. But we have many socialist type programs in our country. Hell collecting income tax to fund government programs for ALL citizens is the ultimate socialist program. Collecting property taxes from all property owners for education when not all property owners have a need for public schools is a socialist concept.

of the people in the US may come out better under government Medicare-style health care, and it is not lost on me that you have limited your proposal to "all CITIZENS."  If it were limited to citizens, I would probably be a little softer towards the idea, too, but the only proposals I'm hearing from the Socialists is that everyone, including illegals who pay no taxes and often earn their money in the US in cash, under the table so to speak, should be covered.  I just can't abide that concept.  I also agree with you about property taxes.  Only those who have children in school should have their taxes going to public education, IMO.  Indeed, the income tax has become a government slush fund for politicians to raid for whatever they want.  In the pre-income tax days, people were taxed on things they used.  If you didn't consume certain things, you didn't have to pay the duty on them.  I don't have problem with a luxury tax, ether.  If a rich person wants to buy a new Bugatti, or a yacht, let them pay a Federal excise tax on their purchase.  If that makes a difference on them buying it, then they probably  couldn't really afford it in the first place.

What? Bernie + Medicare for All ... unions would hate / would not hate MfA ... Trump loves unions ... Trump has fucked with unions and got nailed for it in the courts ... How did you get to Mexicans at the Southern border?  
.
There are MANY illegal immigrant, undocumented workers from south of the border in the Northeast (and all over the country).  **Some of them worked for Donald Trump at his Golf Clubs and other properties!**  They enter the country legally (e.g., fly into NYC or Chicago on a tourist visa) and then overstay their visas.

The 200 Polish workers were, in modern terminology, TRAFFICKED into NYC to work on Trump's construction project. They didn't come in via Mexico. They were recruited and brought in from Poland by the Polish-American guy who had the construction job contract with Trump. I don't remember the "trafficked" terminology being used back then, even as the case was covered in the newspaper over the ensuing years.  
.
Illegal immigration is a problem all over the country and the government's own statistics show that the southern border is not the major source of the problem: it is illegal entry at OTHER ports of entry AND visa overstays.  Trump's Wall will not solve the illegal immigration problem.

-- Modified on 5/14/2019 2:19:43 PM

You went on a rant about how it was Trump that brought in the illegal Pollacks to work on his project.  NOW you are saying it was the contractor he hired that did it.  That sounds more feasible.  So before did you mean that Trump should personally vet every single person working under an independent contractor on one of his buildings?  

 
This is yet another example of your complete lack of knowledge about how the real estate business works.  If I hire a landscaping contractor to redesign and build my rose garden, am I supposed to find out if every guy he brings to my home is a citizen, or is here legally?  THAT'S why you hire a contractor, so that you don't have to hire every worker yourself.  You pay the contractor, he is responsible for paying the workers.   HE is the employer.  I deal only with him.  You are so desperate to bash Trump, you want to blame him for mistakes others make.  This is a little bit of a sleazy argument, even for a Socialist.  

You have devolved into just flat-out lying.  You say, "the southern border Is not the major source of the problem."  Here's a link that says 50-60% come in through the Southern border.  No need to make things up when you're wrong.  Just do what I do and say, "I stand corrected."  Try it, you'll feel like a man.

under my immigration post?  Are you talking about illegal babies?  You're not being clear as to what you're talking about.  I started another thread about the new abortion law.  You should have put it over there.  IF you can't stay on topic we will have to start reporting your posts and they will be removed.  I don't care if your response is not exactly on the OP topic, but it should at least respond to the point made by the post you are responding to.  Otherwise, its just random garbage.  

DESPITE HIS REFUTED DENIALS (like Sgt. Schultz, "I know nothing!"), TRUMP WAS FOUND TO BE COMPLICIT IN **ALL** OF THE LAWSUITS.  Yes, for legal and other reasons, TRUMP DID HIRE UNDOCUMENTED POLISH WORKERS AND HE KNEW IT.  No, Trump did not talk to people in Polish and take down their names on index cards and enter that info into a spreadsheet, ... but Trump was found to be completely liable for what he had contracted that Polish-American guy to do on his behalf.
.
Harry S. Truman: "The buck stops here."
Donald J. Trump: "The buck$ stop with me, but the responsibility for anything bad always belongs to someone else: my family, my employees, my lawyers, the Fake News, ... I am NEVER to be blamed!"

-- Modified on 5/17/2019 7:47:51 PM

there's no link, so I don't know enough of the details to comment further.  When you go into the weeds with the minutia, you usually lose me anyway.  

There IS a link, in my post, above.  And there are many other articles with more info about Trump, the undocumented Poles, and his attempts to bypass and cheat the Unions.

It was just stupid and didn't make sense.  What does Trump lying have to do with anyone here lying?  Are you saying that Trump's lies justify your own?  That's an interesting justification and speaks to your own lack of integrity.  

Above, I said, "the southern border is not the major source of the problem: it is illegal entry at OTHER ports of entry AND visa overstays."  
http://www.npr.org/2019/01/10/683662691/where-does-illegal-immigration-mostly-occur-heres-what-the-data-tell-us  
"Where Does Illegal Immigration Mostly Occur? Here's What The Data Tell Us", January, 2019.
Using recent Homeland Security and other Gov data: "When it comes to people in the country without proper documentation, the majority of them didn't cross the Mexican border at all. Most of them came to the United States legally — but then don't leave."
.
You (deliberately?) misinterpreted my post and say about me, "You have devolved into just flat-out lying."  
.
You chose to link an article from 2013 that uses even older data and refers to something quite different, the demographics: "It is also the case that the NUMBER ONE DEMOGRAPHIC  in terms of illegal immigration to the United States is Latin Americans, largely from Mexico (around 55% to 60%)." HOWEVER, in your post, you said, "Here's a link that says 50-60% come in through the Southern border." The article did NOT say anything about them "coming through the Southern border."  Some would say that you made a mistake or made an incorrect assumption or drew an incorrect conclusion; some would say that you deliberately lied about what the article said to try to make a point to try to make me look bad. You could have provided the link (which, btw, is a broken link) AND quoted that sentence ... but that would have exposed your incorrect use of that statement.
.
According to Homeland Security, etc., the problem is not ILLEGAL immigration across the southern border, it is visa overstays of LEGAL immigrants from all points of entry.  
http://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/despite-trumps-claims-most-illegal-immigration-is-not-at-the-southern-border.html  January 2019:
"- President Trump has repeatedly overstated the severity of illegal immigration at the southern border in order to convince Congress to approve more than $5 billion in funding for a border wall.
- Government data shows that arrests are down at the border compared with the Obama administration as most illegal immigration occurs when people overstay their temporary visas.
- During fiscal 2017, the Department of Homeland Security found that the number of immigrants that overstayed their visas was more than double those apprehended at the border during the same time frame."
.
Please reread your own post and follow your own advice.

-- Modified on 5/18/2019 8:54:20 PM

Trump is a uniter and is bring diverse segments of the population together with a robust economy.  He knows he will never get the support of the Left's lunatic fringe, but he doesn't need them.  That's why he will win in 2020.  

And the Lefties are all going to be shitting their pants at the diverse groups that will be supporting Trump this time.  Its going to be a landslide, rather than just the sound thumping he gave Hillary.