Most Democrats think "Medicare For All" means they can still keep their plans

I asked you some legitimate questions about your numbers. Instead of a thoughtful, researched answers, you decided to just make stuff up, with no actual verification.

If your goal is to convince me of your plan's validitity, you need to supply verified answers.
If you just want to impress yourself on a debate forum, don't.

 

Lol...You’re not your brother’s keeper, eh?

 

And I gave you answers.
If you don't like using the Obama care age rates, why not? They are after all real.
I told you where to go to see what's included in Medicare costs. Have you looked at it?
No. of course not. Because you know your wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

Yes, you typed something.

I was hoping that an educated, intelligent, enlightened poster such as yourself could give some answers that contained actual verification.
My bad

 

Why wouldn't someone have their own healthcare? That's not being too responsible.

 

I can lead you to facts, but I can't make you understand them.

 

You made some statements.
I asked for the verification.
You have refused to produce it.

 

HHS is part of the Medicare budget?
How very interesting

 

I gave you a source for most of these.
I learned a long time ago if you keep reading to children they never learn to read.
So look at it like I'm doing you a favor.

 

Sometimes. But we know profit in health insurance just makes it more expensive for no reason. We know empirically that single payer is cheaper, and provides better quality care than we do.

 

None of this contradicts a thing I said. Single payer systems are empirically cheaper, more efficient and provide better care than we do.

 

No, you don’t get any of that. You get better care, more efficiently at a fraction of our cost.

 

Good.

That means I can wreck your arguments and you won't even know.

 

That depends on what part of health care you're talking about, and YOU were the one giving me the monetary amounts.

The only figure I provided was the projected amount for adding everyone else to medicare.

Regardless of which figure you'd like to use, is any of them cheaper?

Would you like to discuss the issue or hide behind minutia?

 

Oh, I almost forgot.
The applicable parts of HHS are included in the Medicare costs. It's spelled out clearly in the place I told you to look earlier.

 

I don't think there is any more to talk about.
Once you have agreed Medicare for all costs 3 trillion and total healthcare costs now are 3.5 trillion, the discussion is over.

 

Show me.

 

You can't have cheaper healthcare and expect to maintain a high level of quality and expedient service.

 

Yes, you get all of that.You get what you pay for......longer wait times, doctor shortages and bed shortages.

 

Go look. It's time for you to learn to read.
Go thru the earlier posts that you ignored and you will find where to look.

 

What is it with you guys?
You make claims, post links and refuse to demonstrate your knowledge of the link content.
It's pretty sad.
But I wouldn't expect more from free shitters anyway

 

They just want to steal **** from other people.
***** assed Americans.

 

Until I tell you that since not everyone is on government healthcare now. It costs a projected ADDITIONAL 3 trillion to add everyone to government healthcare.

I noticed nowhere did you explain how your method was cheaper, be it $32k or $64k for a family of four.

Nor did you address how the government, which never does anything better or cheaper than the private sector, will lower costs.

You have nothing, so you run from the discussion.

 

Every first world nation that has single payer manages to do so just fine.

 

No, you get none of that. The empirical evidence clearly shows single payer systems provide better quality care, more efficiently and at a fraction of our cost.

https://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf