Andrew Gillum’s platform: free government cheese, abolish ICE and impeach Trump

Because one size fits all for health care is working out so well.:unamused:

I agree with the Original Poster. These “free cheese” programs confiscate from those who are steadily working & producing.

Many of us with steady jobs & health insurance plans we liked have seen costs double & revised plans with more out of pocket costs.

I hope Mr. Gillum loses.

I see. So you’re saying the socialist candidate is making promises he will have no possible way to keep. I’m not surprised.

Because one size fits all for health care is working out so well.!

Yes, it’s doing fantastically well in the rest of the developed world. Given our nearly endless resources, we should be able to do it better than anyone and eliminate some of the minor problems other countries face.

I agree with the Original Poster. These “free cheese” programs confiscate from those who are steadily working & producing.

This whistle is hard to hear for some, don’t monkey it up

Many of us with steady jobs & health insurance plans we liked have seen costs double & revised plans with more out of pocket costs.

Sounds like you want health care reform?

1 Like

It won’t. Increases in costs will be passed on to the consumer. New businesses that may have relocated to Florida and created more jobs will find a more tax friendly state.
.

sounds like we need more tax cuts. Critical trickle down levels have not been achieved. If corps get just a few more billion they can finally start handing out 1% cost of living raises.

I want to return to what health care was before the “A” C A—not paps, mammograms, & free birth control for the men—is the rest of the developed world doing that, too?—and deductibles in the thousands of dollars.

Incidentally the “rest of the developed world” isn’t offering the free cheese free. Goods snd Services Tax (GST) last I heard in Canada was 17%, although tourists can apply to get it back once they’ve left. Just show those receipts.

The U K is having some trouble with its National Health Service (NHS) in part due to there being smaller families, less individuals to finance it. Some British pay for private health insurance.

In France, last I went, one slice of pizza was roughly 8 USD😱 & in Norway, a high cost of living society, the average McDonalds meal costs 23 USD.

Benefits like free health & day care don’t materialize out of the air, & U S poor always have had access to public health clinics, Planned Parenthood, Medicaid & thise hospitals that accept uninsured.

They’re also permitted to increase wait times for emergency medicine. The E R should not be available to anyone for, well, other than emergency care, but it is.

1 Like

This is almost entirely incorrect.

Before the ACA healthcare costs were accelerating. In fact they were accelerating faster than they have been post ACA.

Incidentally, the rest of the developed world has a much more robust social safety net, including low cost higher education, 1-2 year long maternity leave, and of course universal health care.

UK’s health care system has problems like anyone will, and it’s still substantially better for the average person than US health care, on a dollar for dollar basis.

Cost of living between the US and France is only marginally different. The price of a big mac in Norway is $0.30 cheaper in Norway than the US. Keep in mind that there’s literally a big mac index that tracks this.

No one is asking for free health care. We’re asking for a single payer system which will flatten out costs. Uninsured people using the ER is one of the most expensive and inefficient ways you could possibly do health care and it costs us all a ton of money.

So basically everything you said is wrong.

They’re already handing those out—in part due to the costs of providing one size fits all plans for their employees when the ones they offered before were far more reasonable.

In MA, these same employers get hit with additional fines if employees get Medicaid or a plan on the exchange—even if these employees aren’t benefitted due to their working under 30 hours per week or being probationary.

“Duh, dere’s nuthing that says you can’t benefit an employee because he wawks pawt time aw is probationary…”

Just how much will that part timer take home with part of the cost of health insurance coming out of his or her pocket? Diddly/squat, then they’ll be demanding a living wage.

Florida when I lived there offered a reasonable cost of living & nice, reasonably priced housing. That will change should Andrew Gillum get elected.

I think he will lose.

I hope he does.

How are things looking now?

Who is ahead?

Well said, Janet. I agree with all that you posted.

1 Like

Um, we’re going to agree on some things, but on others, no.

I agree on E R as a means of care being wrong and not working.

However, did I make up reasonable health plans I’ve had in the past being replaced with high deductibles & free female birth control, paps & mammograms being offered for all?

Are other posters on this board making up a doubling of their health insurance costs, or policies they liked being replaced with ones they wouldn’t have chosen for anything, & are far more costly?

Also, since northern & western European nations are offering 1-2 years family leave for both parents, why are some citing low birth rates in these nations?

Seems like an impetus for 3+ children for all who want them. Yet lower birth rates are being cited, at least for native born populations.

And if the NHS in the UK works “for all”, why are some opting out by purchasing private insurance?

I don’t get why some Americans seem to think that they deserve health care when they don’t even work 30 hours a week.

I’m not sure if you are being serious or not?

There are so many truly disabled that can’t work and elderly without family to help. These people need as much help as they can get and I have no issue with tax money being spent to help make their lives livable.

The rest should be a hand up, not a hand out. Temporary. I have no issue either with vocational school education being subsidized, so long as people who need a hand up can become self sufficient.

That’s all I’m talking about. If you’re not disabled, but not pulling in 40 hours a week from a single job, you’re not pulling your weight and you don’t deserve medical treatment if you get sick.

That’s kind of harsh, Cali.

My issue is with what people are concocting these days to call themselves disabled.

My issue is no civil war yet.

I’m not sure why you’re stuck on a tangent about people claiming to be more disabled than they are. My comments were always about the able bodied person who can’t seem to hold a 40 hour a week job. If all they can manage is a stable 30 hour a week position, they shouldn’t expect subsidized health care.

Do you disagree? Why or why not?

Now that you have added “subsidized” then for the most part I agree.

Socialism vs capitalism vs a free market system

Well, I can’t comment on your remark about “capitalism” since I have no idea what you are talking about when you use the word “capitalism”.

I would like to point out the word “capitalism” was unknown to our founders. In fact it was used and popularized by Karl Marx to describe a free market system in an evil light. By contrast, our founder’s often describe our system in a manner promoting a free market, free trade, or free enterprise ___ “free” being the operative word. For example see Thomas Jefferson : First Annual Message to Congress

”Agriculture, manufactures, commerce, and navigation, the four pillars of our prosperity, are the most thriving when left most free to individual enterprise.”

I have never found our founders using the word “capitalism” to describe our system. In fact, the very reason for granting power to Congress to “regulate commerce” among the States was to protect and advance free trade among the States by forbidding one state taxing another state’s exports which passed through its borders. This is further illustrated in Article 1, Section 9 which declares: No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one States over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one States, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

But our progressive/socialist domestic enemies do not like the word “free” being used to describe our economic system because it is hard to attack the word “free” which clearly implies the people are to be “free” to pursue their own happiness and freely trade by mutual consent ___ an original inalienable right of mankind which socialists despise and hate with a passion.

“Capitalism” on the other hand gives great latitude to socialists to cast America’s system in an evil light, particularly as a system manipulated by evil “Crony Capitalists”.

Are you a socialist?

For more on the distinction between our system, as intended by our Founders, and “Capitalism”, see: PART TWO: Free Enterprise is Better than Capitalism

JWK

The freedom to fail or succeed at one’s own hand is a PROGRESSIVE`S nightmare and not the American Dream