MHF Democrat Primary Poll

[Hastur]

Social Democracy is always sold by saying the rich will pick up the tab. In reality that never happens. Capital exists in a globalised world. It will move if taxes to much. Taxes will go up on things that can't move. Salaries, homes and consumption. The welfare state is paid for by the middle class.

I think it would be more effective, though, if proponents displayed some agency and dedication. Instead of running on a promise that they will increase gibs to their voters paid by somebody else, they should run on the idea that we all need to take collective charge of our welfare and destiny, and taking control means we need to collectively pay our own way. In other words, instead of demonizing the wealthy, direct attention to those who are capable of carrying their own water but do not so that the people who cannot reasonably carry their own water are properly cared for.

That's a better pitch, unfortunately many social democrats are just communists who prefer a label with less baggage and won't go for an approach that doesn't demonize the successful and doesn't see the best way to help the less successful as tearing down the more successful.

Yes. That is true. People really won't mind paying higher taxes if they know it's getting to good use. Some things are just better suited to be collectively organized. A single-payer model would fit best for the US. No need to go full NFS. Your current insurance model looks FUBAR to me.

[StCapps]

I think it would be more effective, though, if proponents displayed some agency and dedication. Instead of running on a promise that they will increase gibs to their voters paid by somebody else, they should run on the idea that we all need to take collective charge of our welfare and destiny, and taking control means we need to collectively pay our own way. In other words, instead of demonizing the wealthy, direct attention to those who are capable of carrying their own water but do not so that the people who cannot reasonably carry their own water are properly cared for.

That's a better pitch, unfortunately many social democrats are just communists who prefer a label with less baggage and won't go for an approach that doesn't demonize the successful and doesn't see the best way to help the less successful as tearing down the more successful.

Yes. That is true. People really won't mind paying higher taxes if they know it's getting to good use. Some things are just better suited to be collectively organized. A single-payer model would fit best for the US. No need to go full NFS. Your current insurance model looks FUBAR to me.

A public option for all combined with private insurance is the best model. The government or market running the entire health care system is not optimal. Health care needs to be decentralized with many options, not centralized with only one option. The problem with American health care is that it's too monopolistic, not that the private market is involved, more competition is preferable to less competition. The Far-Left Democrat idea to scrap private insurance is retarded.

[Hastur]

That's a better pitch, unfortunately many social democrats are just communists who prefer a label with less baggage and won't go for an approach that doesn't demonize the successful and doesn't see the best way to help the less successful as tearing down the more successful.

Yes. That is true. People really won't mind paying higher taxes if they know it's getting to good use. Some things are just better suited to be collectively organized. A single-payer model would fit best for the US. No need to go full NFS. Your current insurance model looks FUBAR to me.

A public option for all combined with private insurance is the best model. The government or market running the entire health care system is not optimal. Health care needs to be decentralized with many options, not centralized with only one option. The problem with American health care is that it's too monopolistic, not that the private market is involved.

How do you avoid having the private insurers picking up only all the healthy customers and leaving the public option handling all the undesirables, thereby being either too expensive or underfinanced? The point of a single-payer solution is to spread the risk and share the burden.

[StCapps]

Yes. That is true. People really won't mind paying higher taxes if they know it's getting to good use. Some things are just better suited to be collectively organized. A single-payer model would fit best for the US. No need to go full NFS. Your current insurance model looks FUBAR to me.

A public option for all combined with private insurance is the best model. The government or market running the entire health care system is not optimal. Health care needs to be decentralized with many options, not centralized with only one option. The problem with American health care is that it's too monopolistic, not that the private market is involved.

How do you avoid having the private insurers picking up only all the healthy customers and leaving the public option handling all the undesirables, thereby being either too expensive or underfinanced? The point of a single-payer solution is to spread the risk and share the burden.

You don't avoid that. You let the public cover the undesirables and the market handle the healthy customers. You prevent under funding by having the private market fund the public option, that way the more profit the free market makes, the better funded the public option is, their interests are intertwined instead of at odds. You only want to spread the risk and share the burden where it makes sense, you don't want the public option to do what the private market can do for cheaper and drive up the cost for everyone in the name of everyone having the same cookie cutter health coverage, as if that is a desirable outcome when it isn't.

[Speaker to Animals]

Yes. That is true. People really won't mind paying higher taxes if they know it's getting to good use. Some things are just better suited to be collectively organized. A single-payer model would fit best for the US. No need to go full NFS. Your current insurance model looks FUBAR to me.

A public option for all combined with private insurance is the best model. The government or market running the entire health care system is not optimal. Health care needs to be decentralized with many options, not centralized with only one option. The problem with American health care is that it's too monopolistic, not that the private market is involved.

How do you avoid having the private insurers picking up only all the healthy customers and leaving the public option handling all the undesirables, thereby being either too expensive or underfinanced? The point of a single-payer solution is to spread the risk and share the burden.

You pay for basic universal healthcare automatically via payroll taxes. Not an opt-in or opt-out system, but mandatory like Medicare and social security. Then, if people want all the bells and whistles, they can purchase supplementary health i surance on the private market.

If a person has no income because they are poor, you can enroll them. If they have no income because they are rich, you can bill them their premium. Everybody pays who can, and that keeps individual premiums down by using the entire nation as a single insurance pool.

[StCapps]

A public option for all combined with private insurance is the best model. The government or market running the entire health care system is not optimal. Health care needs to be decentralized with many options, not centralized with only one option. The problem with American health care is that it's too monopolistic, not that the private market is involved.

How do you avoid having the private insurers picking up only all the healthy customers and leaving the public option handling all the undesirables, thereby being either too expensive or underfinanced? The point of a single-payer solution is to spread the risk and share the burden.

You pay for basic universal healthcare automatically via payroll taxes. Not an opt-in or opt-out system, but mandatory like Medicare and social security. Then, if people want all the bells and whistles, they can purchase supplementary health i surance on the private market.

Indeed. Banning supplemental insurance to prop up shitty government health care is as dumb as banning government health care to prop up shitty supplemental insurance.

[Speaker to Animals]

It also helps deal with illegal immigrants. No healthcare would be available to them. They can fuck right off back to Mexico rather than stealing from Americans.

[StCapps]

If the government does a less shitty job than the market, let the government handle it, if the market does a less shitty job than the government, let the market handle it. It's not rocket science, those who think the answer is all market or all government, they are the dummies.

[Hastur]

So basically the Swedish system then. Basic public insurance for all paid by taxes. Private options to top up or gett better care available. Freedom to choose any healthcare provider that is plugged into the system.

[StCapps]

So basically the Swedish system then. Basic public insurance for all paid by taxes. Private options to top up or gett better care available. Freedom to choose any healthcare provider that is plugged into the system.

More like Swiss system than the Swedish one, but you have the gist of it. Swiss Obamacare in America is the way to go, if Obama wasn't such a pussy, he would have pushed for it instead of the watered down bullshit he rammed through instead.