Citizens seem to be getting single payer "socialism"/Medicare for All --

Who do we have to MAINLY thank for that -- ???

RW/corpomedia lies and spin than it did back when the Iraq war was launched.

This recess will NOT work to their advantage.

He's actually on Medicaid, but had to get rid of all his assets to get it. He's been denied insurance coverage because of his medical condition, couldn't work anymore so he had to become poor by spending down on this medical costs until he was poor enough to qualify for Medicaid. He's not old enough for Medicare. When I explained to him that Medicare recipients don't have to make themselves poor, he wondered why he couldn't get it at a younger age? I told him that Medicare for all is what the activists are going for not some crazy govt. plan like Rush/Billo/Sean are trying to push on people. I could visibly see the scales falling from his eyes as we spoke. I hope he spreads the word in his little RW world.

i will say this- NOBODY that i've talked to outside this board is familiar with the meaning of the term "single payer", and most aren't even familiar with the term itself.

at least part of Medicare --

Single Payer is a system paid into by the recepients -- and all Americans,
of course, would create a huge pool of funds to cover medical expenses.

In fact, what we're already paying -- at one point it was near $8,500 per person --
would pay for one of the most luxurious of health care systems, equal to what
Switzerland has.

Also the idea of "socialism" .... the fear of which is usually connected to
Hitler/NAZI's. True, Hitler did take over a social organization which was legitimate
working for women's rights, human rights, etc. However, Hitler then co-opted the
NAZI organization and reversed most of its issues.

What I think Americans are getting now is that socialism is something America already
has -- public libraries, Medicare, fire departments, etal --

We could also use this same pooling idea with all Americans contributing to send everyone
to college -- at least everyone who wishes to attend.

What did you tell the people who weren't familiar with "single payer" . . . ?

Did you ask them what they tune into for news?

Do they use the internet, at all --?

Have they seen "SICKO" or any other Michael Moore film?

Needless to say, there are still a lot of Americans who don't get it.
Randi Rhodes was interesting today on many of these issues --
Amazing how people can be fooled!


:)

"What did you tell the people who weren't familiar with "single payer" . . . ?

i explain to them what it is.

"Did you ask them what they tune into for news?"

what do you watch? in case you haven't noticed, the network television news shows- which the greatest majority of the population still watches, almost never discuss a single-payer system or what it entails.

"Do they use the internet, at all --?"

again- in case you haven't noticed about how the internet works, the VAST MAJORITY of the internet has nothing to do with single-payer healthcare, and people who want information about something have to seek it out.

"Needless to say, there are still a lot of Americans who don't get it."

"lots" = MOST people by FAR.

I was confirming to you my definition of it . . .
and socialism, as well --

I asked you what you tell people because sometimes they're not willing to listen.
Do they "get it" after you explain?

I don't really watch TV except C-span, some Olbermann, Jon Stewart --
Bill Moyers did at least one show on health care -- one was repeated just the other night.

As for the internet, there's always the SEARCH function when you want to know about something.

70% of the public want a single payer system --

While I have to agree not everyone gets it -- and the right wing propaganda is still very,
very loud -- I do think many are waking up.

We'll see . . .

do you have any kind of link to back that up?

i have a hard time believing that 70% of the population even knows what a single-payer system is.

And that's without Obama or Democratic Congress pushing for single payer --

John Conyers supports Medicare for All -- many are familiar with that --

Kucinich, of course --

Imagine what the numbers would be if Americans were properly informed -- !!!?????


Here are some polls . . .


"When given a choice of the current system or one "like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers," voters overwhelmingly chose the latter. A solid majority (59%) say they would prefer a national health insurance program that covers everyone, over the current system of private insurance offered to most through their emloyer."

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/resources/PollMemo.pdf

News Flash - America Wants a Single-Payer Health Care System
Kevin Drum at the Washington Monthly takes the DLC to task for - shocker - not supporting the concept of a single-payer, government-sponsored health care system in America. Drum argues that Democrats have lacked the courage to stand up for such a proposal. He's probably right - they fear the wrath of the health insurance companies. But make no mistake about it - the public would be with Democrats if they had the guts to push single-payer. As an ABC News/Washington Post poll showed in 2003, the majority of Americans support a single-payer, government-sponsored health care system, even when they hear the right-wing's alarmist arguments.

http://www.davidsirota.com/2006/03/news-flash-america-wants-single-payer.html


SocraticGadfly: Americans want single-payer healthcare; what Obama must do
More than 70 percent of Americans, despite Republican-exploited worries about ... Senate offers single-payer national healthcare pla...
socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2009/06/americans-want-single-payer-health... - 719k - Cached

unless you're rounding up by almost 10% points.

although- i do agree that if people understood what single-payer is, most would definitely favour it. the problem is that most of the people have no idea what it is, and most of the people in the media and in government don't seem too interested in informing them about it. even obama pretty much dismissed the term out of hand in his 8 minute speech last week in prime time.

these are older polls --

bye --

got it.

actually do their job.

I have sent several faxes and many emails to various members of congress as well as to the White House over the last months on healthcare/public option/single payer. I really got on my Senator - Specter - berating Congress as bought and paid for - and just got a reply today thanking me for my opinion and asking for more.

One org I am connected with sent over 50 thousand faxes to congress and various committee members and I am certain there will be more to come till they get it right.

mark

Medicare for All. Ask for it by name.

:thumbsup:

you're still responsible for 20% of the bill, PLUS- a lot of doctors won't take new medicare patients.

most recently with the help of Bush in the Drug Plan . . . . have

privatized it.

What you're talking about is CORRUPTION of Medicare -- corruption of government.

Yes, it works!

There is no reason why there can't be full coverage --

Obama is planning to cut $313 BILLION from Medicare -- what do you think

that will do to the program?

Starving the program creates a need to privatize ...

Just as your roads are being sold off -- so is Medicare --

Now with the help of Democrats!

because it will scare the shit out of a lot of people who have the perception of medicare as a second-rate program for the old, infirmed, and indigent. they also see the words 'medicare' and 'medicaid' as practically interchangeable, even though they aren't the same thing at all.

And it is up to the public to preserve it's infrastructure, its schools, its

highways, progressive taxation, libraries, fire departments.

It's all the same thing -- it will all be degraded if we don't stand up together

and stop it -- and if right-wing propaganda can continue to make Americans act

contrary to their own interests.

i am. and part d is an obscenity. as for
'medicare advantage' the private supplemental insurance that's supposed to pay the 20% that medicare doesn't- being disabled, and not healthy- nobody will sell it to me until i turn 65, and they have to- although it would be at a ridiculously exorbinant rate that i wouldn't be able to afford anyway.

believe me- you don't want the term "medicare for all" to be associated with our side of the argument at this time.

But, whether you're talking about "pork" in military budgets --

or CIA funds hidden in school budgets -- or lack of funding for bridges --

the doubling and more of our military budget by Bush ---

or giving taxpayer money to religious organizations . . .

or "illegal" wars for oil and CRUSADES against Muslims --

Patriot Act which was ready to go two days after 9/11 --

Homeland Security --

Taxpayer bailouts of Wall Streets/capitalism . . . you're talking about CORRUPTION.

That's why we need to end campaign finance BRIBERY --

The Congress needs to change Part D . . . have you written or e-mailed or

spoken with your Senators/Reps about that?


http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/

:shrug:

is it one of those things where you just like to hear yourself reading back what you type?

the point i'm trying to make is that in it's current state, "medicare for all" is NOT a good catch-phrase for getting people on-board with the idea of single-payer...

AND-

as far as people 'catching on' to single-payer- i'm certainly not seeing it. :shrug: most of the time when i bring it up/discuss it with people, they're not familiar with it, and don't know what it means. the local/network tv news shows NEVER use term, and obama himself pretty much dismissed it himself in the one time he used the phrase in last week's speech on healthcare.

and yes- i contact my reps offices by phone/in person as often as possible on a wide variety of issues.

who you really are --

MEDICARE FOR ALL is the simplest solution and it's ready to go --

And, I agree . . . you certainly don't seem to "see" much of anything --

needless to say the relationships between these issues, the connection to

corruption of government.

So -- bye!

PS: I think you've got half the right user name, there --


:)

:eyes:

why do the supposedly 'simplest' solutions always occur to the simplest-minded?

there must be a connection in there somewhere.

We should always take the time to listen to our elders. They have learned some shit and they tend to hang out with people who aren't as young as us.

I own a clinic and work with lots of other owners so ... here is my 2 cents on medicare and doctors not taking it.

First, it is underfunded. We would take it if it became funded fully, which, by best estimates wouldn't cost nearly what we are already spending per person.

As for doctors not taking new medicare patients that is a completely separate question, but since you brought it up, expanding the system would mandate all doctors into the system which would then have ample capacity for new patients. And the docs would love this because they would then only have 1 set of rules to follow instead of over an average of 150.

"medicare for all" is NOT a very good phrase to use at this time, in order to try to persuade people to support a single-payer system.