Tulsi Gabbard: Stand Up Against Big Pharma/Insurance Cartel

The latest polling shows that 70% of Americans supports Medicare for All, including 52% of Republicans.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...percent-of-americans-support-medicare-for-all

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-ame...blicans-say-the-support-medicare-for-all-poll

Tulsi points out that there is Medicare for All legislation in both the House and Senate but neither bill lowers the cost for prescription drugs. A lot of seniors on Medicare still often have to choose between paying for their prescriptions and being to eat or pay their bills on time. My mother's heart medication, for example, costs her $200 a month. The only reason she has internet is because I pay for it. She needs her Netflix.

 

Allow us to purchase our drugs from overseas.

Problem solved.

 

Cory Booker voted against a bill that would've done that. It was defeated. Big Pharma is one of Cory's top donors.

 

I guess he was wrong then wasn't he?

 

Medicare for all and prescription purchase from overseas.

 

Um, of course.

 

I have a huge supply of amoxicillin because my aunt goes to Mexico a lot and you can buy it over the counter there.

I give it out to people who need it at work or school.

 

"But if they were told that a government-run system could lead to delays in getting care or higher taxes, support plunged to 26 percent and 37 percent, respectively. Support fell to 32 percent if it would threaten the current Medicare program.b
https://chomutov.info/poll-finds-medicare-for-all-support-drops-when-details-are-included/774/

And of course it would be the end to Medicare.

 

People would pay a lot less with Medicare for All and have better health outcomes.

Right wing fail.

 

Medicare for all would end the big health and medical and insurance and pharma corporations' strangehold on how we live.

 

We do purchase drugs from overseas, just not on the retail level!

 

C'mon please- a poll paid by the kaiser family? Kaiser Healthcare one of the largest healthcare insurers in the US. I am surprised that even that many was ok with medicare for all.

Gee, let me guess how they asked the question. "Sir would you rather have Medicare for all if when you went to use it there was going to be a 3x longer delay in getting seen if you were going to be seen at all"

Did they say that your employer since he is no longer paying $6000 a year for your insurance out of your wage benefit package will probable share the bulk with you? I don't think they asked that do you?

 

You can call it whatever you like, but it would still be single payer/private delivery.

 

And it would not be Medicare and when you tell people that and that they will no longer be able to have their private insurance and their taxes will go support drops dramatically.

 

And we don't pay retail level here.

 

If you have a poll that gives the details of the plan and refutes this one then post it.

 

Single payer would save 30% in administrative costs immediately.

I suppose if you wanted to pay for private insurance or even concierge medicine, you could still do that.

 

Why can't you have private insurance, you can in England, Australia, New Zealand, Canada why not here? If you mean that the government is not going to subsidize your insurance by 40% as they do now, yeah your right. But if you want to buy A supplemental policy why not.

And did you tell people that your next review when you go for a raise, that your wage benefit package no longer has 6000-10000 contribution an send some of that my way, or I go to the place next door that did?

 

Go ask Kamala Harris, she said no more private insurance. And do I think the employer cost will now be paid to me in toto and that will cover the cost of my government health care along with the cost if all the others I have to pay for. Not for a second.

 

There's this Mexican hombre in L.A. who has a large supply of cocaine, marijuana and meth because he goes to Mexico a lot and can buy it anywhere and can bring it back across the border where there is no wall.

He sells it to people who have the monkey on their backs and always needing a fix.

 

There is no reason to believe that. Even if it did cut administrative costs by 30%, it would only mean there is 50% less access to healthcare. Nothing the government provides is efficient. If it gives a dollar to anyone, it always has to take more than a dollar from somewhere else. We have a $22 trillion dollar deficit for a reason, and its not because the government is efficient.

 

That was the number jump I saw in all my practices as they took on multiple payers.. Clear as a bell.. It may be more now.. The paperwork is grueling and endless.

 

So he's crossing on foot or in a vehicle with sandtires?

 

First he takes the San Diego trolly to the border crossing.
Then he gets a Tijuana taxi.
After a donkey show he buys his drugs.
Then he pays the cartels to take him east of the San Diego wall where there is no wall.
Then he crosses across the border into the USA on foot then he calls Uber.