Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)

6. Ummm...no. I didn't wade into the whole...

Reply to ehrnst (Reply #2)

Sun Sep 17, 2017, 04:24 PM

Sep 2017

...sourcewatch garbage. What would I be smarting from? That fact that they had a typo that you said was impossible for them have?

I'm not even disputing the findings here (typos excluded). I'm only saying that this doesn't paint a bad picture. If anything, it indicates a cheaper, more efficient system with a single-payer environment.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

8 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Urban Institute response to attacks on their analysis of the Sanders Single Payer plan [View all] ehrnst Sep 2017 OP

Hmmm...$3.2 Trillion per year? Less than we spend now and not everyone is covered... TCJ70 Sep 2017 #1

You are still smarting about this, aren't you? ehrnst Sep 2017 #2

Ummm...no. I didn't wade into the whole... TCJ70 Sep 2017 #6

So the fact that the analysis says that disruption to health care would be due to the short time ehrnst Sep 2017 #7

They should put their worst case numbers out there... TCJ70 Sep 2017 #8

TMYK ★ ... NurseJackie Sep 2017 #3

Confirmation bias.... it's a problem. ehrnst Sep 2017 #5

K&R ismnotwasm Sep 2017 #4