I think Bernie's proposed system would, indeed, make us pay less, not more, .....

[Cal33]

Last edited Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:12 PM - Edit history (3)

It's very likely that what we save with Bernie's Universal Health insurance system will more
than compensate for the rise in taxes for the Middle Classes. The average family is
paying $6,000+ for health care today. Under Bernie's system, the average Middle Class
family will be paying $600+. This means a savings of $5,000+ per year. The rise
in income tax for the average family certainly will be a lot less than $5,000.

Bernie is correct. There is nothing to fear. Under his plan Americans will be paying less.

[Auggie]

1. $6,000? Try $14,400, plus the $3,000 yearly deductable.

Blue Shield PPO (Covered California) for two adults.

It's highway robbery.

[Cal33]

5. Yes, it is highway robbery. Some places are worse than others. Well, the vast majority

of people will be paying far less than they are paying now.

[Auggie]

8. By the way, let's be sure to call this health insurance, not health care

[Cal33]

13. You're right. I have made the correction in the OP.

[FreakinDJ]

2. Bernie is right

[Sheepshank]

3. it's unfortunate that Bernie actually said he would need to raise taxes

certain buzz words seem to stick.

[Cal33]

6. Yup, the same idea occurred to me. Or he could have added the explanation that the

Last edited Thu Jan 28, 2016, 11:06 PM - Edit history (1)

savings on health insurance would more than make up for the income tax increase on the middle-classes.
On the whole, the savings for the average person would be quite substantial.

[Odin2005]

15. Cuomo basically forced him into saying it.

Which is what I think was the whole point of that BS "town hall".

[Metric System]

4. How will he implement this system given the difficulty Pres. Obama faced in passing the ACA, not

just in Congress but also selling it to the American people?

[Cal33]

11. In order to get any biggie through, Bernie and Liz Warren would have to motivate

the American people to vote in more Progressive Democratic candidates into the
House and Senate, and have fewer Third-Way Establishment Democrats as candidates.
I'm sure Liz and Bernie are willing to work very hard at this, because no bill will get
through without adequate votes.

Democrats do not have the reputation of complaining very hard when
Republicans make things rough for them with their well-known shenanigans.
For example: During Pres. Obama's first term alone, the Republican Senate
filibustered 400+ times. They knocked down every bill proposed by the Democrats
-- bills that would have benefitted the American people, if they had been allowed to
pass. With few exceptions, most of the Dem. congressmen and women said little or
nothing, This is a golden opportunity to let both Dems. and Republicans know what
the Republican congressmen are really doing to them. The proof (filibuster of a
bill useful to the American people) is right there.

Why the Dems. kept on saying nothing afterwards, did get me angry many times.
Dems. do not have the luxury of a slough of Democratic news media to broadcast
to the people afterwards. This is a kind of self-destructing death-wish.


The Republican Main Stream Media certainly said nothing. The news media are 90%
Republican-owned anyway. Democrats have nothing to fight back with in this area.

I think, with Bernie and Liz working as a team, they would not hesitate to let the
world know -- loud, clear and long -- each time that the Republicans vote out a bill
that the Democrats want to pass that would benefit the American people, as a whole.
They can describe in detail what the American people had just lost in benefits, that the
Republicans were the ones who do not want the American people to have a better
life, And those bills made by the Republicans for the benefit of their super-rich
masters would be blocked by the Dem. Congressmen and Senators, so that the rich
would not get richer at the expense of the middle-class and the poor.

All this will be pointed out loud and clear and often. In time, even the none-too-
bright citizens will begin to catch on who means them well, and who is stealing from
them - the Democrats or the Republicans?

This simple plan must be repeated over and over again, and each and every time
an unfair blockage has taken place. Naming the names of the perpetrators, what
type of harm it would have on the American people. And if you are sick and tired of this
Republican nonsense, vote for (name the Progressive candidates) who will be running
at the next election.

I hope it will be quicker, but Democrats could quite possibly have both Houses of
Congress within 4 years (perhaps within 2 years).

For Bernie to get his agenda through, he and Liz will first have to concentrate on the
work of getting sufficient numbers of Representatives and Senators, where they cannot
be blocked or filibustered by the Republicans.

With Bernie in the WH and Liz in the Senate, they will be a tremendous team. Both
of them have bulldog tenacity, They will inspire others to work with them. They are
both winners.

[reformist2]

7. I am still amazed that Hillary has decided to make taxes an issue.

[Cal33]

14. She's trying to hit him with everything she can rustle up. She's panicky. It's hard

to think well under these circumstances.

[kelly1mm]

9. Technically you are wrong. Taxes paid (to government) would go up. Medical Insurance payments

to insurance providers and medical expenses would go down. The NET would likely be lower overall expenses for the middle class family, but TAXES themselves would go up.

[Cal33]

12. You're right, Kelly. I've made the changes. And thanks.

[Gothmog]

10. Krugman-Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan

I trust Prof. Krugman on this http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0

On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders “plan” isn’t just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.

To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich — and single-payer really does save money, whereas there’s no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, it’s not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.

Again, as noted by Prof. Krugman this plan does not add up. Sanders proposed savings are hypothetical and unrealistic

[Cal33]

16. Let's see your hypothetical figures which will show the savings of Bernie's plan to be unrealistic.

[mythology]

17. As opposed to the grounded in reality claim that

The Sanders plan will save more on prescription drugs than is spent yearly?

[Cal33]

18. "The Sanders plan will save more" is also based on hypothesis, but I gave my figures

supporting that hypothesis. Would you also come out with your figures?

[ViseGrip]

19. Economists think so too! And the Physicians for a National Health Plan!

www.PNHP.org