Comments by "Xyz Same" (@xyzsame4081) on "Joy Reid Backs Medicare-For-All After Smearing Bernie For Years" video.

  1. She says "universal healthcare" which is NOT necessarily Single Payer *. Wendell Potter used the word "Medicare For All". This is one thing Sanders did very well: between 2016 and 2019 he connected his name to M4A (whatever the interview was about he ALWAYS also mentioned healthcare), and people know it. Even if the shills leave out the term M4A and his name, they can't undo that branding. * Switzerland mandates that everyone must have healthcare insurance = Universal coverage). The Swiss buy it individually from private for profit insurance companies. That COSTS more than single payer (which is the most cost-efficient solution. Period) - regulation works 1) when it comes to quality of services and good protection of consumers / patients but not so well when it comes to costs 2). 2) the Swiss have 78 % of the U.S. spending per person (while other rich nations pay 49 - 56 %, and most ! are in the range of 50 - 54 %). Numbers from 2017: The U.S. spent 10,260 USD for EVERY person in the country on average (per person includes all ages, healthy or sick. Needed the doctor this year or not. In the U.S. per person or per capita also includes the uninsured, those who get insufficient care too late or go bankrupt). 1) that is what you get with for profit healthcare / insurance (I do not know if the hospitals are non-profits or private - it might be a mix in Switzerland) when the citizens have a LOT of leverage over the government - still higher costs - but at least everyone is covered Plus the services are excellent, they are at the top regarding outcomes, and pay staff well). the Kantons = states subsidize low income people, so that is how they achieve universality. The Swiss government determines a Basic Coverage Package - and every insurer must offer that at the same price within an age group. So they cannot discriminate, and they cannot play games with the patients about what is covered and what not. (if they started to do that - see ballot measures 3), the government would be forced to reign them in). 3) Their private for-profit insurers are very well regulated. The Swiss have the most advanced DIRECT democracy. Every few months the government mails the citizens the latest ballot measures to vote on. To be sure usually only 30 % participate, because there are ALWAYS ballot measures pending. But it is EASY to start a ballot measure, and the results are binding. Now, there is some astroturfing going on, the rich and special interests also know to use that system. But if something is seriously amiss the Swiss citizens are not at the mercy of representatives that turn their back on campaign promises. It shows in the current pandemic relief measures. While many governments have much better provisions for their citizens compared to the U.S. - many also used the chance to do a LOT of favors to big biz. Not in Switzerland. A reasonable package and they passed if FAST. They know if they unduly favor any player, the citizens are going to breathe down their neck. They have to communicate what kind of businesses deserve and NEED help, and they better automatically include some oversight (citizens expect that). It does not take long (maybe half a year) to get a binding vote (preparation and campaign for a measure, and I think the Swiss citizens vote 4 times per year on ballot measures). But in the crisis the politicians do not even need a ballot measure as disciplinary action. The potential of having to deal with that (and getting bad press and unwanted attention) works as deterrent for too open shenanigans. I am sure the Swiss politicians also lend their ear to the special interests. BUT they have to be subtle about it and certain things just don't fly.
    2
  2.  @robertnicholls9917  Shahid Butar is also a great candidate - he challenges Nancy Pelosi
    2
  3. Elective procedures have been delayed, the insurers look forward to raise premiums by 40 % and they expect that people MUST have those procedures later (under higher costs). - I hope Sanders gets behind a general strike to force the Trump or Neoliberal D president to FINALLY clean up the system.
    1
  4. Joe Lieberman the Republican / neocon with a D in front of his name spoiled it - and frankly no one called him out. Al Gore, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama should have dragged his sorry ass (well if they would care about The People - they don't). A public shaming campaign, inciting harrassment for him and his family. He might have folded. They still blame Nader for the loss of Al Gore (which is nonsense anyway). If Gore had chosen an inspiring VP (minority, pro labor, ...) instead of Lieberman the hack he might have won his own state Tennessee. Then the Cheney / Bush cabal would not have ruled the U.S. It says a lot about Gore that he chose Lieberman (even if the party leaned on him). How sure he must have been to be able to win. He wasn't an inspiring figure, he also did not let Bill Clinton campaign for him (Bill is a crook, but he knows to campaign and he could have helped him in the South - for instance in TN. It should be noted that Gore's father and Al Gore both had looooong careers in TN, it was quite an achievement to lose the state to GWB). I wonder if Joe Lieberman was the well liked "bad cop" (the one vote in the Senate that they needed - so he was able to water down the already weak proposal) - HE was able to win his seat as "Republican" and with such shenanigans in wealthy Connecticut. If other donor friendly Senators and the Obamam admin that did not dare to openly undermine the few good provisions of ACA, Joe Lieberman could do the dirty work for them, and they could throw their hands in the air (See - we tried, but sadly we did not have the votes in the Senate.) He EMBRACED the Iraq war, cheered for more bombing, lauded the Bush admin, endorsed McCain in 2008. When he lost the Democratic primary (likely because for his cheering on for the Iraq war) he run - and won - as an "independent". The D (that had won the primary against Lieberman) got 40% of the vote in the general, Lieberman 50 % and the Republican 10 % (he lost a lot of votes to Lieberman). I hope for karma in corona times.
    1
  5. 4:33 because of ACA we have 20 million people "covered". Yeah, with HIGH deductibles. 40 % of the population cannot cope with a 400 USD emergency (they would have to borrow - Fed St. Louis survey *- and that was in 2019 with the "good" economy). * an institution also did such a survey also with a 1000 USD emergency - with even worse findings of course. If people have to buy in via the exchange the average deductible for a silver or bronze plan is 4,000 / 6000 USD. So the costs for the premiums and ON TOP the high deductible and at least 40 % could not afford either in 2019. To be fair the survey may have included people over 65 - but medicare has been hollowed out and does not offer FULL coverage. In order to have GOOD coverage one is forced to buy upgrade package. Which means a two class system if many cannot afford the "Medicare Advantage" (an Orwellian name). Needless to say the inefficient greedy ruthless PRIVATE insurers handle those upgrades (and Medicare is only tasked with monitoring them which means extra admin costs for them, but they do not get the budgets) - politicians have given the PROFITEERS that part of the pie - not Medicare agency with very modest administrative overhead. (The injustice that some find it hard to afford the upgrades would still exist, but at least it would be as cost-efficient as possible. The solution for that: give medicare SUFFICIENT funding and let them have contracts with hospitals and doctors that cover ALL that is warranted in a first world medical system). Wendell Potter mentioned in an interview in 2019 that insurance companies now purge employers that offer plans. The interviewer was perplexed. Potter explained: they have companies under contract that cause them more than usual spending (one or a few employees - OR they family members if the plan includes family members - may need ongoing expensive treatments or medication). Of course the whole principle of INSURANCE would be to even out the risks, the insurers make profit (or are even with their costs vs. revenue) with some companies and other companies cost them more than they take in from them. But they can MAXIMIZE profits (the first and most important goal in capitalism). Then they increase the premiums, the deductibles. Either the company gives up and quits or they have to accept worse conditions for all, or family members are excluded. The mayor from a small town (where Wendell Potter grew up or lives now). They had to exclude family members from the plans - the town just can't afford the better plan anymore. and the rural hospital had closed down. Or the company is wary to not hire certain people in the first place (had cancer, is over 50). Or they fire a person if they or a family member gets sick. That's the wonderful ACA - that was made to accomodate the profiteers - and look what they give back for being STILL allowed to play a dominant role in the U.S. system (needing massive propping up. Also: the most costly group must not be covered by the private insurers the government does that via Medicare. The profiteers have already a cherrypicked pool.
    1