The Hillary Clinton presidential campaign has begun using an odd new line of attack against upstart Democratic primary rival Sen. Bernie Sanders: He’s too liberal on taxes and universal health insurance. Why is she doing this? After returning to the position in which she entered the race—as the near-certain nominee—she seems to be setting herself up for the general election.
Hillary is a Conservative on everything with the possible exception of women's reproductive rights.
Typically, Conservatives push only PART of the story and hide the deeper truths. I would GLADLY pay that extra 6% or more to gain "universal health care" for all.
As it is, the phony Obama plan allows insurance companies to act as drug-cartels deciding who will get the medical cures (or drugs) and who won't. It's an insidious control paradigm that takes decisions AWAY from genuine health CARE providers and lands them in the laps of functionaries who work for insurance companies whose driving interest is profit.
Oh, and now that Insurers' right to extort money has been enshrined into law, note how rates are moving up into the stratosphere!
This is bang-on:
"Sure, under Sanders’ plan, the combination of the income and payroll taxes would add up to 8.9 percent (assuming employers pass on the full 6.7 percent payroll tax) on most earners. But people would not be paying for health insurance anymore, and a universal, public system would save money by eliminating all of the actuarial costs and profit expectations associated with the private insurance system."
As I often point out, if a system is corrupt and its corruptions systemic, endless arguments about the alleged flaws in candidates are wastes of time.
Ultimately, what better method is there to "sell" the corporate agenda and its privatization of public schools, health "care," major segments of the ubiquitous war machine, and now post offices... than to package these policies under the Dem. Brand?
Hillary and her master-of-triangulation spouse are not Democrats. They shifted the meaning of the brand and now Hillary tries to posture somewhat Progressive because Bernie Sanders' popularity is a real downer to the Washington "anoint the next king" machinery of American Dynasty, Inc.
I don't know Ms. Clinton's motivation in attacking Bernie and single payer, but I don't buy this gentlemen's alternative explanations either. It's strange, there is such a thing as being too smart by half.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Ever since they founded the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in 1985 the Clintons have been second to none in refining the art of rewarding the perpetrators while blaming the victims. We will see more examples of this in the coming months.
Only folks afflicted with Stockholm Syndrome could support any Clinton.
I don't like Bernie's 2013 plan either. It's time to stop putting the burden of financing Medicare on businesses. As a small business owner, I can tell you that the primary concern regarding giving employees a raise is the extra tax burden that goes along with it, including Medicare, Social Security, State and Federal Unemployment tax. Not to mention that insurance such as workman's comp. is based on wages. I propose that we tax all income for Medicare. Why should the only revenue stream for Medicare be the payroll tax. When Medicare was first implemented, most people worked for a paycheck. Not any more. There are many forms of income other than a payroll check, such as interest, dividends, rent, etc., etc. It's a scam people. If you work for a living and receive a paycheck, you are 100% responsible, along with your employer, for funding Medicare. We should tax the gross income at the bottom of the first page of the federal tax return. There would be an enormous increase in revenue so that we could reduce the percentage substantially, helping middle and lower income families.
I forgot to include the fact that there would be plenty of money to provide Medicare, or single-payer, for all, as a right and not a privilege. Plus we would be able to pay providers what they deserve.
But it’s strange to see her now...attacking a candidate whose supporters she’ll need in any general election campaign over an issue that his supporters care about very deeply.
Ah, but you see, the fix is in.
Sanders has already promised, more than once, to support his "good friend" when he loses the nomination. HRC's campaign realizes that most Democrats currently supporting Sanders shall come around to supporting her, because - look! - over there! - scary Republicans! - think they're gonna give you SP? All of this has been planned out and coordinated at the highest levels. Such is the DNC's Primary Theater, playing the rubes like fish on a line.
Single Payer shall not happen in our lifetimes. The abject sellout of the Democrats to the insurance parasites is the reason. Bernie Sanders is the DNC's sheepdog... don't get fooled again.
Your idea, in essence, would amount to redistributing income from very profitable businesses to struggling businesses. Therefore I approve it, and Bernie Sanders should too.
You may or may not be a "real businessman," Stanley. God knows the scripted Talking Points found throughout Internet message threads are anything but organic and natural.
In any case, do you expect me to agree with you? Your frame sounds like something taken from a think tank that uses the small business owner as a club through which to attack the programs that would help America's working families.
Tell you what: tune into the 55 minute Elizabeth Warren speech and HEAR what she has to say about the TRUE breakdown of corporate taxes and THEN get back to me.
According to the US General Accounting Office (GAO) in response to the 2008 meltdown Congress has put US taxpayers on the hook for more than $16 trillion in various bailout schemes that benefit the too-big-to-fail banks that caused the meltdown. Since 2008 merger mania has created too-big-to-fail insurance companies and drug companies who don't want to miss out on the bailout gravy train when the next meltdown occurs.
If the DC politicians break up all of the too-big-to-fail outfits, the bailout funds can be diverted to Medicare for all and nobody's taxes will increase.
But what if Bernie Sanders, despite his best efforts to help Hillary, keeps getting more votes than her, and starts winning primary after primary. What will he do then? Quit the race? Wouldn't that make for awkward theatrics?
But what if Bernie Sanders... keeps getting more votes than her...
Of course, Sanders won't win Primary after Primary. HRC has the money, and the name recognition to overwhelm him.
But, if he did "win", unfortunate circumstances would intervene. Health issues. Family issues.
The fix is in.
"Stanley" just happened to find this obscure article, and ginned up a login today, to regurgitate RNC Talking Points.
A typical paid poster during election season.
Are you saying he would get the Paul Wellstone treatment?
Oh, of *course *not.
Why would the One Percent or the MIC be angry at one of the key players in the theater which keeps Americans from having a clue about their evil?
Were Sanders an *actual *socialist, were he an antiwar Senator, then his supporters might need to worry. But this Lockheed-sucking poseur is safe as milk.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Disgusting smear of Bernie.
How about the imported anti-Muslim racists on at least 2 other threads... what is that, politics' version of "spontaneous generation"?
Does anything support your idea other than your hatred of Dems, and by extension, Bernie Sanders?
If Sanders wasn't running the same arguments would be made about why we need to elect a Dem - and progressives would either fall for it or not.
So Sanders isn't herding us and we aren't sheep - you condescending ass.