Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: "the Sanders campaign is simply pulling numbers out of the air." [View all]Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)141. which differs significantly from the article in the op
Last edited Tue Mar 29, 2016, 11:02 AM - Edit history (1)
do you have a link?
A family with $4000 month paycheck would notice an ADDITIONAL $800 increase over and above that pittance originally quoted by Bernie
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
174 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"the Sanders campaign is simply pulling numbers out of the air." [View all]
geek tragedy
Mar 2016
OP
"We spend twice as much per capita on health care as any other nation on earth"
Recursion
Mar 2016
#107
We spend twice the OECD average, but not "twice as much as any other industrialized country"
Recursion
Mar 2016
#165
Is that how you rationalize the privatization of Social Security? And ending food stamps?
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#48
Neither of those things will happen with Hillary. With the Republicans-probably
redstateblues
Mar 2016
#66
Where did Dylan Matthews get these numbers? I can't find them anywhere other than in these
think
Mar 2016
#109
So now you claim Freidman is a quack? You're entitled to your opinion but in case you haven't notice
think
Mar 2016
#113
You think it's just wonderful that people failed to notice that their current premiums would--
eridani
Mar 2016
#5
It can work if done right, but to do it right you have to do the math right.
geek tragedy
Mar 2016
#73
Yes, by about 10 percent at the most... that's not enough savings to tear shit up
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#16
Unnnn, still not worth tearin shit up... that's what the national SP plan would do too.
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#29
and keeps the the overtly parasitic doctors, pharma and hospital corporations. So instead of paying
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#38
From an estimate by a couple of UW professors on the Washington Health Security Trust n/t
eridani
Mar 2016
#114
I just wanted to read the details of the info you had and where it came from
Sheepshank
Mar 2016
#171
You guys rationalize why Goldman-Sachs should rip us off and dare pretend that you care.
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#22
+1, Magic asterisks, conciliatory GOP congress's, ponies, unicorns and podium bird..
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#12
This is the reason I think he's staying in, Tad Devine has a Reddit account and someones convinced
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#19
+1, they're even winning nearly the same constituency Hillary lost with in 2008... lol on "whitey
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#23
I disagree with your first statement IE the Sanders camp discontent with Obama. Overnight is relativ
uponit7771
Mar 2016
#142
And you are willing to turn your backs on the 16,000,000 American children living in poverty.
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#25
Don't pretend you care about honesty. You side with those that want money over everything.
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#36
Those that bow before the golden calf are easy to read. Greed uber alles. nm
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#52
She pockets a lot of it. $150,000,000 while pretending she cares about the peons. I guess you
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#50
How do you rationalize siding with those that would kill SS and other safety nets.
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#56
You are mistaken if you think the Class War is between Democrats and Republicons.
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#164
What is sad is your rationaliziations to give all our resources to the wealthy and the hell with
rhett o rick
Mar 2016
#54
Apparently, neither Mr. Starr, nor yourself, are familiar with the concept of "forecasting".
opiate69
Mar 2016
#60
No, what happened was that Sanders claimed he could save $325 billion per year
geek tragedy
Mar 2016
#65
It is 100% possible to save that much. The actual savings will of course depent on--
eridani
Mar 2016
#124
My question is...why don't Sanders and Clinton compromise with the public option?
JonLeibowitz
Mar 2016
#57
Sigh...so single/multi payer (where the math doesn't currently add up) is the only option?
JonLeibowitz
Mar 2016
#64
How long term? She's not campaigning on it, she mentions protecting/expanding ACA
JonLeibowitz
Mar 2016
#82
Yes, but the candidate has to campaign on that! Sanders would no doubt fall back to what she wants
JonLeibowitz
Mar 2016
#89
A shitload of Dems agree with Hillary Clinton. For profit private insurance is forever.
delrem
Mar 2016
#49
Thank you, the OP is such a dishonest and terrible representation of Bernie's plan. n/t
Jefferson23
Mar 2016
#133
When I put in the numbers for me it told me that I would pay more in taxes.
LiberalFighter
Mar 2016
#81
They built their systems over decades without ever relying on employers to provide
geek tragedy
Mar 2016
#100
Taiwan's not strictly single payer (there are copays), but we should emulate their system
Recursion
Mar 2016
#122
Copays or no copays have nothing to do with whether a system is single payer or not
eridani
Mar 2016
#123
Krugman- Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan
Gothmog
Mar 2016
#131
James Galbraith Describes Major Forecast Failure in Model Used by Romers to Attack Friedman on Sande
Jefferson23
Mar 2016
#144
Sad day when so called liberals are supporting arguments AGAINST single payer.
Jackie Wilson Said
Mar 2016
#153
Yeah but he didnt fudge the numbers, at least not on purpose. Figuring out how to do it
Jackie Wilson Said
Mar 2016
#156
Ha ha! Did you see the post of the 179 top economists who endorsed Bernie's plan?
pdsimdars
Mar 2016
#170
''When Wall Street firms lie about their finances, the legal term that applies is 'fraud.'''
Octafish
Mar 2016
#172