Pete Buttigieg and Elizabeth Warren Get Heated at Dem Debate on Medicare for All | NowThis
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2019
- 'Your signature, Senator, is to have a plan for everything. Except this.' - Watch Pete Buttigieg call out Elizabeth Warren for her approach to health care.
» Subscribe to NowThis: go.nowth.is/News_Subscribe
» Sign up for our newsletter KnowThis to get the biggest stories of the day delivered straight to your inbox: go.nowth.is/KnowThis
Mayor Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Elizabeth Warren had a heated exchange on stage during the fourth Democratic debate in Ohio. The two 2020 candidates were discussing health care in America. Elizabeth Warren supports a Medicare for All plan, while Pete Buttigieg disagrees with some of Warren's approaches to achieve universal health care.
#DemDebate #ElizabethWarren #PeteButtigieg #HealthCare #News #NowThis #NowThisNews
Connect with NowThis
» Like us on Facebook: go.nowth.is/News_Facebook
» Tweet us on Twitter: go.nowth.is/News_Twitter
» Follow us on Instagram: go.nowth.is/News_Instagram
» Find us on Snapchat Discover: go.nowth.is/News_Snapchat
NowThis is your premier news outlet providing you with all the videos you need to stay up to date on all the latest in trending news. From entertainment to politics, to viral videos and breaking news stories, we’re delivering all you need to know straight to your social feeds. We live where you live.
/ nowthisnews
@nowthisnews
It wasn't that heated 🤷♂️
Our "heated" standards have gone up.
Erik Salcedo, actually after listening to Trump, this was really tame and cordial. I'm glad none of the democratic debates are radical, it gives me the freedom to listen without having an anxiety attack.
Todd Jones then you’re a moron
Todd Jones then why are you here????
Still better than other disingenuous titles on the lines of “Buttigieg attacks Warren” or “Buttigieg goes after Warren”. I think “heated” here means “holding one’s feet to the fire.”
I like how professional they are when they talk about their concerns. They attack the argument and its technicalities not the person who wrote them. Not too shabby for Democrats.
It's sleazy.
That's because they are all democrats... wait until someone has to face Trump
As well as MSNBC and the "liberal" media.
They are avoiding how they plan to execute medical for all with America growing Dept
@@Oscar-ot7sr Do you even hear mayor pete lmao
Healthcare is not a divisive issue, everyone wants low-cost high-quality healthcare. The only opponents are big pharma and the AMA
Everyone also wants million-dollar houses and driving Porsches and beautiful women as their wives.
kevinmsft healthcare is a basic human need not a luxury ticket item!
Pratik4311 as an Independent I hear you BUT, profit before people healthcare is literally killing people., enriching gougers, and reducing unfortunate families to Go Fund Me!?
Pratik4311 I respectfully disagree ...one human being to another - Healthcare IS a basic human right .
No, but the choice isn't excluding anyone. Germany has one of the most admired health care systems in the world and it works on a Medicare for all who want it system. You can decide whether you let yourself insure at a private insurer(more costly) or the government (cheaper),
That’s mild compared to Biden attacking her, and trying to take credit for her CFBP accomplishment
Warren has yet to come out with an official plan for M4A and is beating around the bush about how it will be funded. Bernie has a more comprehensive plan on this.
Agreed
Medicare for all saves Americans trillions of dollars.
Bernie Sanders Medicare for all plan covers everthing and has no out of pocket expenses and he does it all by taxing the rich those 180,000 families that earn over 32 million dollars a year.
Private health insurance spend under 40% over every premium dollar on actual care 60% goes straight to share holders.
Have you looked at her web site? Or read Bill's she has written with Bernie Sanders? No clearly not. She does have a plan, it involves slowly raising taxes on the top 1 percent to pay for that gap Pete was discussing.
@@lucasdwornik7933 great, then she should have all the details and should speak openly about it instead of tip toeing around the details about taxation. And no, everyone's taxes will go up - not just 1%. The top 0.1% taxes will go up heavily. Bernie's plan is honest about this.
Lucas Dwornik last I checked there weren’t any details about her healthcare plan on her website, just a sentence saying she supports Medicare for all. She didn’t write the bill with Bernie she just co-signed it. Pete is full of it for sure though he’s trying to help his big donors
Jose Rojas Exactly! Bernie is the only one we can trust. Bernie 2020!
Maybe she could pay for it the same way Canada and Europe do. The companies that want to sweeten the pot for their employees can pitch in a free gym membership.
Canada and Europe have private insurance companies.
That's the point. those countries have higher middle class tax.
We're not Canada or Europe.
kevinmsft Yes they do. It’s a form of supplemental insurance for several contingencies. In other words, the Insurance Companies adapted to a universal healthcare system and employers can add Supplemental Insurance policies as an incentive to prospective employees. A reasoned and respectful approach to affordable healthcare in the U.S is overdue. I’d like to see a healthy discussion in Congress with input from our friends in Canada and Europe.
@@anishamdi1160 middle class pays less in healthcare overall and are always covered, youre a worthless shill
"Choice". What I want is someone to eliminate these horrible private insurance companies. I don't want to
choose between a pack of hyenas and a pack of wolves. I want them gone.
Mikhael Bartocci so you want the millions of employees who work for the insurance companies, many of whom are just trying to put bread on the table for their families, to be out of a job? I get it, there needs to be a better more sustainable system, but not if it means creating unemployment on that scale
@@jakes5530 many of them can work in the public sector afterwards. The same thing happens every time we socialize something that was once in the public sector (firefighters, police, sanitation, etc.) Plus all those people would still have health coverage.
@@jakes5530 But Whale men will lose their jobs if we stop butchering whales for oil! Do you want to stop them feeding their families? Both industries are needlessly destructive.
So what you’re saying is if there’s a public option that you can choose to go on, you would be incapable of making an informed choice?
@@jakes5530 That's an old and horrible talking point and excuse. You could literally say that about anything.
"So, your saying that those people who work for Hitler to feed their families should be out of a job?"
Oh Pete. In Canada we all have healthcare that doesn't cost us a small fortune. I have been a successful accountant for over 45 years. I have not met one Canadian who has gone bankrupt because they or a family member got sick but I've met dozens of Americans who have. It's a big fallacy that you don't get to pick a doctor too. What you guys don't get is that your taxes may go up slightly but your medical insurance costs will drop by the thousands. Mathematically you will be ahead. Why do you consistently vote against your best interests? BS scare tactics and pure ignorance, that's why. My cousins in Idaho were paying $800 month in premiums and when she broke her leg, still had over $23,000 co-pays/deductibles. Crazy. My husband broke his wrist....medical cost $0 other than our monthly medical premiums of $150 for a family of two or more. At the present time they are $75 and in January 2020, our province is reducing the premiums to zero.
American health care system isn't the Canadian health care system. There's a different calculus from the start, especially when by our system not all of us Americans are in the same health care position. For some of us, existing health care plans may be on net *cheaper* than what we would end up paying with taxes for a Medicare for All scheme.
Moreover, a Medicare for All scheme subsidizes everyone *including the rich*
Why would we have lower-income, working class, and middle class Americans subsidize the rich? Pete's plan can be best understood as a scheme in which specifically the people who need or want cheap public coverage can get it *thus* avoiding expensive coverage of literally everyone necessitating higher taxes on the middle class and more?
It makes no sense to do it any other way. Have taxpayers cover the plans for those who need it and those who want it but *not* everyone whatsoever. That would be a huge waste and the main way to do it would come at a cost of choice for the relevant Americans, which all else equal is unacceptable.
Other countries have similar systems too. Ie, in Argentina there is a public health care that us completely free, even if you need heart surgery. But also there is an optional private system that is terrible expensive and do not cover preexisting cond. But they always lobby to destroy the public sector.
And in Canada people come to America if they can afford it
The biggest problem about your testimony is that it's based on lies. Canada has 37 million people, less people live there than California. The United States has 340 million people + 30 million illegals. You claim that you have never met a Canadian who has gone bankrupt, apparently, you know all 37 million people in your country.
“Why do you consistently vote against your best interest?” ...... so you assume you know what everyone’s best interest is? Maybe it would be financially beneficial but i feel like something that some Canadians and people from the UK don’t understand about Americans is a lot of us prefer the freedom to make our own choices even if those choices are mistakes. I’d rather be able to make my own mistakes and have the government out of my life as much as possible instead of trade any of my freedom for security of a government safety net over my life. It may sound silly that we value freedom over safety but a lot of us do
End Private Insurance
Mr. Bullet Club Biggz The Verbal Assassin end fake news media.
@@ultron-5600 YES GET RID OF FOX NEWS AND AM RAdio blowhards
Enstigator Official By fox im assuming you meant CNN AND MSNBC. Those are the enemy of the people.
@@redsoxs5870 YOU MEAN trump IS THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE. He ignores subpoenas and all his lawyers go to jail. a crooked scumbucket president , certainly that is the enemy we all agree on.
Yes because the government has never screwed up anything important before... you're delusional.
“I’m Elizabeth Warren and I have a plan for the things you want to hear.”
"Im warren and i have a plan for everything except for the one thing you care most about: health care".
N Xarigow They don’t spend trillions on wars
Omgosh so true. It's like how she is denying that automation is why people are losing jobs, because a lot of her base doesn't want to hear that.
Her phrasing is misleading and that is something you do not bring to a big debate. "Costs" will not go up for middle class families.", What costs? Pete Buttigeig without a stumble called her out on that and was well researched. In fact he knew this before the debate. Warren sank her chances for a win in Iowa. Her "statement" did not leave the debate. Do underestimate Butteigeig. He is only 7 points behind the leader and his chances just got better last night. Warren is a hack and I've never been on her train. She said "I've been all over the country taking hundreds of selfies." Later is was "thousands" of selfies. Which is it Elizabeth?
“I’m Elizabeth Warren and I have no plans for anything I just keep talking about nothing and will con all democrat voters. I’m here to actually keep the rich rich and the poor even poorer.”
Americans have no idea how way less stressful life is with medicare for all. This guy is trying to scare you.
Alright, how? How is it less stressful? Put your money where your mouth is, let's hear it.
He’s just trying to be realistic and not be a leftwing extremist to appeal to more people.
Lmfaoooooooooooooo medicare for all is more scary than Medicare for all who want it.
scaring us by telling us ALL of us can get on medicare if we want to, and saying he's betteing at the end of the day most people will probably switch to it?
You are drinking Warren;s coolaid because you're simply focused on a pure paper dream without taking into account that the plan has to have a chance to pass into law, that it involves more the the left to actually get implemented.
Pete has the plan that gets to the same outcome but actually has a chance to pass into law.
@@jakes5530 The voice of American propaganda. U.S. citizens know the lie, the scam..the corrupt racket and fraud that is going to disassemble the United States into fragments sending the marauders to your door. Universal healthcare is a can do sensible proposition that the rest of the Western Industrialized nations already have.
It doesn't work when the richest Americans can pull their support from public health insurance.
Also, private insurance runs out and you pay according to how sick you are. Public insurance is always better, even for the rich. You'd have to be a billionaire for private insurance to be better, but by then you don't need insurance you can just pay.
I love Pete but he's aiming too low. The half measure is the problem. Half private half public divides the nation horribly. Trump supporters need proper public health insurance as much as anyone; nobody should be left behind, disgruntled, angry and both invested in and ripped off by the cynical private health insurance system.
Leif Harmsen I love my private health insurance. I had my appendix removed and only paid $50 out of pocket. I only make $47k a year and I have a wife and two kids.
It's not "half private, half public." It's whatever the rational choices of individual Americans and their families work themselves out to be.
Who are you to dictate for them? If public insurance is so much better than private insurance, even for the rich, then under Pete's plan that'll shake itself *anyway by design.* So it's a bit of a red herring argument.
Certainly no one under Pete's plan will be left out -- really, Pete's more on top of including these people than anyone else, Sanders and Warren in particular.
The whole idea is that if you would get Medicare under a MfA plan, you'd still get it here *if you want* and if you *don't want* then you don't have to. It's really simple, and devoid of all these problems people keep trying to artificially attach to it.
He's a centrist, through and through.. take it as good bad or neutral, but that's a fact.
It's not good
He's a pragmatic progressive. I see your logic, but it doesn't quite fit the evidence. No centrist seriously entertains even a superficial appearance of association with M4A -- that Pete maintains a substantive and superficial difference is proof then that he has hardly a centrist or moderate. He's simply reasonable.
Neither of those two are for M4A single payer. Bernie is the only one.
you tube facts don’t be fooled only Bernie
a properly subsidized public option presents competition against the private companies. let 'em duke it out. we'd win.
I agree 100% with Pete here.
Except healthcare professionals will start opting out of Medicare in favor of higher cost insurance, debilitating the public option. That’s the goal of private insurance. Healthcare for profit.
@@miguel-h can we regulate that while still encouraging competition? Not sure why its either or.
Yates Webb it will never work as long as the for-profit insurance companies exist to hike up the prices and skew the market place, making some people uninsurable. Healthcare is a basic need and should not be a privilege.
Yeah, Pete is right here.
Wy does America, the world's strongest and most powerful country struggle with health care??
We don't, people think they do. I have lived my whole life without it (48 years old) I'm doing fine.
Yeah not everyone is that fortunate ..
Raging Tout lol you are for now. You’re aging, things will happen, you’ve just been lucky this far. Sooooo, all you gotta do is keep living. You’re just lucky not to have been a family that went bankrupt because their kid got cancer, or the breadwinner in the family had a terrible accident that could have disabled him
Our govt is in bed with the profit of our medical industry.
@@Toutvids Yes they do, 500k plus people per year going bankrupt for medical reasons, and 2/3 had insurance. 30k+ per year dying due to Americas failing healthcare. Worst Std rates, heart disease, childhood mortality, cancer, etc in the Western World, lowest life expectancy for a first world nation etc. Highest cost for drugs, treatment, and by far the highest cost for administration. The U.S. life expectancy has dropped 3 years straight. And most voters say its their biggest issue in the last 8 election cycles.....
So in other words...its not a problem for you....
Healthcare is a human right. Medicare for all! Don't settle for any less!
@@Pratik4311 Fire trucks are not free, Police man are not free, k-12 is not free, roads are not free, the military is not free, states are not free. Yet all these things last much longer and are far more trustworthy than the sturdiest of corporations. RIP Eastern Airlines, Woolworths, DeLorean, Standard Oil, Enron, Compaq, Kodak, Circuit City, Blockbuster Video, Radio Shack...........Long live the Army, Marines, Post Office, S.S., States and long live the United States of America.
@@Pratik4311 The founding fathers gave many rights and as time goes on we decide what rights to extend to all people. It is the position of the Democratic party that healthcare should be a right. Judging by your confusion on how rights work, medicare for all will never make sense to you.
And it's still a right under Medicare for All who want it!
You just also have the right to *not* have it if you think your current way of doing things is better, or at least that a transition to a new plan should happen on *your* terms and not when, where, and how a congressional piece of paper decides it should for you quite arbitrarily.
Commenting from Australia: Medicare for all is absolutely the best system.
alexstuart283 if you like waiting for treatment.
@@redsoxs5870 eh? My mother waited three weeks for a full knee replacement.
@@phil7394 Ask the Swiss or Dutch if they want Single Payer? Nope. Very few countries with Universal HC use single payer to get there. Japan, Germany, Indonesia, and even Canada (the doctors are private employees) don't have single payer. England's system is trash compared to us if you have HC here.
@@redsoxs5870
Australia's wait times are lower than they are for US private Healthcare.
Australia's populations is merely 25 million which is a little more than the state of New York. The two programs are not comparable. Australia is not even 1/10th the size of the USA.
The reason “Medicare for some” wouldn’t work is bc the private insurance companies would be able to create super cheap plans that would only be available for young healthy ppl. The way insurance works is by spreading out the costs. If only sick and the elderly are getting Medicare for all then it will burden the govt with high costs resulting in higher taxes which could undermine its existence. The young healthy ppl will be paying cheap fees and happy till they get sick and realize nothing is covered. They’ll then enter the Medicare for all pool. Even the study done by a Koch funded think tank showed a single payer system would cost $2 trillion less then what we have now. Plus the Medicare for all plan that Bernie wrote isn’t your grandmas medicare. It’s got dental, vision, and covers hearing aids. My mom’s been suffering from worsening hearing loss for awhile now. (Probably bc she spent 20 years on Oxy Contin. She was in that first pool of ppl with chronic pain to be put on it. And while it initially changed her life for the better, going from suicidal from pain to able to live work again, opiate tolerance and hearing loss were the downside). Hearing aids are fcking expensive af. You have to be under the poverty level to get some help and other then that there’s charity, being a beta tester for hearing aid companies, if your lucky enough to get picked. Before even getting to the point you have to worry about paying for a hearing aid there’s the apt with the audiologist. And having dental insurance would be amazing. One of the biggest signs of whether your poor or not is your teeth. Pete Buttigieg is using a right wing talking point to undermine a system that is beloved in other first world countries. Can’t stand the sanctimonious bullish¡tting pr¡ck.
Great answer. I'm in my 40s & hearing is getting bad from some reason but I can't function without the other meds. Hope your mom gets her hearing aids. Hugs
sweetboo1022 me too. I hope your hearing gets dealt with as well. Not being able to hear causes my mom a great deal of depression and stress. 💜
You are suggesting that the young healthy people are stupid enough to not make rational choice when it comes to choosing between what was covered and what wasn't
why is being deaf bad?
Buttegieg believes in M4A. He just knows that politically you have to start somewhere else or else you'll never get it passed. Can you imagine how much the rich insurance companies, faced with their immediate demise - will spend to defeat M4A? How much they'll put into pro-Republican super PACs? It's not a perfect solution but I'd rather put on a bet to win 1-0 and move on to the next round, than bet on winning 10-0.
Thank you for the subtitle.
anyone who thinks costs for corporations will go up is out of their minds
How ? Please explain.
why did you cut out bernies ultimate response to both of them right after?!?!
why doesn't anyone bring up the fact that as long as we have insurance companies, working as a for profit middle man, instead of lumping everyone into 1, non profit pool which would also eliminate all the red tape for doctors and hospitals, costs won't go down. Insurance companies are making millions, that money should go to healthcare for everyone.
If people want to opt to that racket, let 'em. If people want to opt instead for a public scheme, let 'em and support 'em.
That's the idea of Pete's plan.
You do know that if there is competition the price would lower right
I hate my private insurance. I liked it until I got sick, and now in the search for diagnosis, they have denied over $40,000 of tests, procedures, and medications due to cost. This is not including my $5,000 deductible and $12,000 maximum out-of-pocket, which were met in one month. We pay over $1,000/month in premiums, and my husband's employer pays the same. All this money, and they are NOT covering me!
And due to the lack of diagnosis and continued illness (I've had to take a break until we can catch up on the debt), I am out of work and watching my retirement savings disappear. I could have cancer. I could have a progressive disease that should be slowed with treatment, but I can't afford to find out so I have to risk it. This is what private "insurance" looks like. Evil.
Why don't they just tax the rich and big corporations and then Medicare for all because if you tax the corp the corp Is not going to give out insurance then.
The problem is that that isn't likely to pay for all of a true M4A. So it would fall to middle class people while other people lose insurance for the sake of something to be subsidized by the same tax money we're paying to...avoid paying for health care.
@@chrissharp6211 Then how do all those other western civilizations do it with lower gdp? and gdp per person? with higher life expectancys at a fraction of the cost?
Pete is right...
Pete!!
I don't agree. My vote goes to Warren.
@@spongebobspongebob24 omg that was like the politest way anyone has ever responded to anyone in a youtube comment section. i love u and respect ur beliefs !!
When a person retires, would they CHOOSE to keep paying the premiums their employer paid for their healthcare instead of accepting Medicare? Because the money that comes out of your check for health insurance, is only a fraction. The company pays the rest. WHO WOULD CHOOSE TO DO THAT? M4A is not that different. What LITTLE more you pay in taxes MORE THAN EVENS OUT what you WOULD pay in premiums and copays AND out of pocket. WHY ARE PEOPLE STILL SO CONFUSED ABOUT IT?
No because when someone retires at 65 they automatically get enrolled into Medicare and they don’t have a choice to keep private insurance. It would work the same way with Pete’s plan except people could buy into a public plan rather than keep their private plan.
You have to understand, the person that is going to defeat Trump in November will have to win over Republican voters. Buttigieg understands this, and he is trying to work a middle ground to unite the parties. I love Bernie, I love the healthcare for all proposal, but we need to lay out stepping stones towards it. Remember, we still have an electoral college, and if candidates don't gather enough support from republican voters, Trump will be elected another 4 years.
Why do we need private insurance if there is Medicare for all though? Does that just mean that rich people will pay for their healthcare while the poor don’t?
The amount of people we know who only get 1/4th of their paycheck because they think they need every form of health insurance is rediculous.... their kids qualify for Medicaid but they'd be damned if they got help, and would rather live with extended family with no money for rent.
Warren looked at BootyJudge up and down and sized him up, LMAO.
Painting a narrative by cutting out the last response, really?? Bravo 👏🏼 @NowThis News
If he runs again he's got my vote. This is exactly the compromise between M4A and private Health Insurance I've been saying they need to do.
It won‘t work though. Costs will go higher regardless.
Yes. Pete figured it out that you can't push 150 million Americans off their private plans, even if you compensate them. The human psychology doesn't work the way Warren or Sanders think. Pete's plan works.
If we’re not paying predatory insurance companies hundreds of dollars a month in premiums then hundreds of dollars in co pays for every single service we can afford to pay a little more in taxes for Medicare for all. It can be done. Stop using republiCANT talking points.
These two should probably team up together for POTUS/VPOTUS.
The problem with the Health System in America is not insurance, is drug pricing and hospitals having a unregulated price in their care
Oooh! Do you have private insurance donors? Your NOT ready Booty Judge!
This isn't that heated at all...
"Kicking people out of their healthcare plan"
Those people would go to another healthcare program called Medicare.
Roberto Giménez you completely missed the point
So if there were a plan to kick you out of your house
you would be fine with it, even tho you want to still live there,
because you would simply go to another house, correct?
@@anxietytreatments No, because, tururum tururrummmmmm: House != Healthcare insurance.
@@anxietytreatments If your house was rented, full of holes in the roof, busted windows and broken pipes, and someone said "here's a fully-functional, safe, wonderful home that is twice the size and can be placed in the exact same location, or another of your choosing, and it is more energy-efficient too," then yes, EVERYONE WOULD.
@@Blodhelm you're missing the point. If everybody wants to be on medicare, with Pete plan they can. So it's a non issue.
Let's make a simpler example:
If there are companies offering a service, and the gov want to offer a similar service, do you want the gov to force you to take their service, or allow you to choose?
It doesnt matter how bad and full of holes the private insurance plans are, if people want it, you let them have it. If they dont want ot they can take the gov option.
You dont seem to understand the spirit and aim of medicare for all who wants it: Pete believes in medicare for all, but he believes showing the medicare plan to be way better is the easy sell to the american people. And by not forcing people into it, it can actually pass into law.
If you can't see the logic and superior approach to actually making this pass, then you're probably the same kind of person who agrees with Beto that the gov should force people right away to give back their ar-15....
...when you can pass all the other laws we all agree on first and very quickly, and then later you can possibly revisit the ar-15 already in people's possession (or not).
Its again the paper perfect laws that won't get passed vs great laws that will pass now. Then take things from there.
Heated?!?! I call Click Bait.
a productive, coherent debate? democrats 2020
Too many big words 😫
Fess up Elizabeth: "Costs will not go up for the middle-class?" What costs.....
when they talk about costs they mean “taxes”
@@juliusclark3911 I was being sarcastic. She is misrepresenting the plan. To her "tax" is a dirty word. Say it because thats what pays for it.
Matthew Cortez oh difference in “...” use i guess
@@juliusclark3911 Thanks. My groceries cost 65.00 with tax 68.93
Matthew Cortez cool...
Good debate! Both candidates have explained their decision making logics and motivation. Either of them would be a better and more qualified president than DJT
Pete's proposal is essential how we have it in Australia. It works well - everyone regardless of income has the right to public cover. However if you are in the 90th percentile of income earners you will be expected to get private cover. If you don't have private cover and are in the 90th percentile of income earners (90k PA) you will pay a medicare tax which is approx. what private cover is valued at.
It is a realistic proposal and disarms many of the talking points the right would use to push back.
Here is my question. Does the existence of private healthcare preclude Medicare for the rest of us from thriving? Please someone tell me I really don’t know.
It most certainly does
1)Public option only gives the illusion of choice. No matter which plan you choose, you’ll still be forced to deal with restrictive networks, multipayer bureaucracy, surprise bills, plans that don’t cover everything, tiered care/inequity, and cost barriers from copays/deductibles that true Medicare For All eliminates.
2)Under a public option, insurers will cherrypick healthy profitable patients and drive sick patients onto the public plan, turning it into an underfunded high risk pool. Biden even unwittingly described this key flaw of a public option himself at the third debate. This will lead to cuts in benefits or provider payments, which will be worsened by the fact that more money will be wasted on needless multipayer bureaucracy instead on going towards actual care. Thus, people will be paying more out-of-pocket, and doctors and hospitals will refuse the public plan in favor of better paying private insurance.
3)In contrast, true Medicare For All doesn’t have cost barriers or restrictive networks. It covers all medically needed care (dental, vision, long term, etc) at no premium/copay/deductible, isn’t tied to employment, and has virtually all healthcare providers in network. That’s true freedom and choice, not the illusion of choice from public option. In other words, a public option and any plan that allows duplicate coverage can never provide all the benefits of single payer Medicare For All.
4)Medicare For All is actually cheaper than public option despite covering more services and having more generous benefits. This is because Medicare For All helps pay for itself by eliminating multipayer bureaucracy, which a public option obviously cannot do. Public option cannot properly control costs either due to fragmented risk pools, whereas Medicare for All has a national risk pool (the best way to spread risk, according to the World Health Organization) with maximum bargaining power via economies of scale. Any plan that allows duplicate coverage would just splinter the national risk pool and cripple the public plan. Studies have shown a public option forgoes over 80% of the savings from single payer.
Private insurance corporations will always do what makes them more money. This includes getting politicians to ruin a public option, sabotage that would cost lives means nothing to them.
We would already have a public option as part of Obamacare, but insurance companies wrote some big checks, such as to Max Baucus from Montana, to make sure that didn't happen. Now they see people wanting M4A and so they are pulling out all the stops. If they are allowed to stick around, they can damage any M4A system as long as politicians who are for sale are allowed into power. Politicians like Mayor Pete, whose campaign is funded by 23 billionaires which allowed him to beat even Joe Biden in fundraising despite his low poll numbers.
Private plans exist in other countries. It affords a private room. I know a guy who from Italy who works for Microsoft. He chose the Italian plan over what Microsoft offered. Private for profit insurance kills and bankrupts.
Thanks, with the help of your answers and the most recent clip from Sam Seder, I think i get it. One last inquiry, when people say that Canada for instance still has private insurance options, how does that factor into who M4A would work here? Would that need to not exist here or could it?
They're all jealous because she's beating them.
She just has Clinton's crazy stragglers.
Not after this debate she isnt. Didn't think cnn was gonna give yang the chance... lo and behold, cnn really stuck out this time.
I think yang is gonna surpass her in no time.
Pete's rising just about as fast as she is in Iowa where it counts.
Mannn I just wanna see what they are writing
Medicare for All is the gold standard.
Do you remember that Elizabeth Warren was a brunette when she claimed she was Native American?
Elizabeth Warren ☑️ on this one.
If people have great insurance they don't want to go on crappier medicare.
the truth is, many are very happy with medicare. It was better for most than the insurance their employers provided.
I’ll take Medicare for all, thanks
I won't. No thanks
That doesn’t mean force everyone else who doesn’t want it to have it
Calves Pro Shop you won’t need any other insurance. You could still pay more if that’s what you wanted to do, the whole thing is you won’t have to. Understand?
Alex Collazo what if I’d save more money if I’m not on Medicare for all?
Calves Pro Shop what if praying healed us all? I can say whatever as well. Experts show that we would pay less overall for coverage under Medicare for all because we wouldn’t have to pay the high premiums and deductibles. Look at the plan on Bernie sanders website, it has the experts on there as well.
Booty-giggitty-giggitty arguing with Chief Spreading Bull on who is lamer.
If it wasn't for the elite superiority we could call this bill what it should be called ( Medicare for the poor..)..but not on my dime ,not on my taxes ...and the refusal to contribute...( Now everyone will pay advertently or inadvertently
Warren isn't even gonna fight for m4a idk why buttigeig is even getting mad?
He's not mad. She's the front runner and he's trying to knock her down a peg.
I like Mayor Pete for the most part. But I agree with Sen. Warren when it comes to Medicare for all. I get the point that Mayor Pete wants to give America a choice because the freedom to choose is so American, in most cases, I think. But Medicare for all sounds more convenient and less complicated.
All americans wants : the MAJORITY of americans wants MEDICARE FOR ALL
Uh isn't MFA Bernie's plan
Go Mayor Pete!!!
Let government run healthcare completely opens the door for a Future fascist Administration to make smoking, drinking, fatty food, skydiving, contact sports illegal. As well as mandate exercising, eating healthy, and a limit on weight. Maybe even forced sterilization for family with sick genes. Give a little freedom and the government will always take more.
now too much on my girl!!!
The only 2 candidates worth any discussion or consideration are Sanders and Warren. The rest can go back to their "respective" corporate donors.
Firefighters for those who want it is going to be his next bill...
My votes with Buttigieg
My hidden treasure chest
Golden grand piano
My beautiful castillo
None of the pro-M4A people have any idea whatsoever the magnitude of a TRILLION. BTW I'd love reasonable or free-ish healthcare.
what we have now costs more lol
@@goodbeans and it's going bankrupt... Because Medicaid is a Ponzi scheme.
@@emotionscomeandgo I'm talking about all health insurance. What Americans currently pay for health insurance is more than what M4A would cost.
Mayor bootyyes?
League of Women Voters used to host presidential debates until both parties decided they wanted control. The LWV president said "the campaigns' demands that they control the selection of questioners, the composition of the audience, hall access for the press and other issues."
"It has become clear to us that the candidates' organizations aim to add debates to their list of campaign-trail charades devoid of substance, spontaneity and honest answers to tough questions,"
They pulled out stating "The League has no intention of becoming an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American public."
We only have to look at 2016, Hillary getting the questions in advance. Bernie and super delegates. 2019, the DNC determining who can be part of the debates based on how much money they've raised thus eliminating some candidates entirely. DNC leadership has been shown to play favorites. Caught in Colorado pressuring potential candidates to drop out prior to a primary because the DNC & DCCC had already made their choice.
Bernie! Still Bernie.
Okay, here's the thing, I'm on Medicare, which only pays 80% and I am responsible for the rest of the cost (20%), so I have to pay another $200.00/per month to cover the 20% in a supplemental insurance plan, plus I have to pay for more insurance ($58/mo. and rising) to cover my prescriptions (this is the law), and that insurance doesn't cover it all. I still have to pay from $5 to $25/prescription, depending upon the type of prescription. Now, Social Security automatically deducts $134 for Medicare and then I have to pay the rest I mentioned above, totaling an extra $392/mo. out of pocket not including the extra approx. $75/mo. I pay for my medication. All this is on a fixed income. Don't even get me started on the Medicare Advantage plans, they are worthless. So, I would like to know exactly what that "Medicare for All" covers, 80% or 100%? If only 80, you would still be wise to get a supplement, or hope you don't have to go to the hospital. Btw, if they go according to regular Medicare coverage of 80% then you would/should get a supplemental insurance, which won't put private insurance companies out of business. Any of this make sense?
Medicare For All covers all medically needed care (dental, vision, long term, etc) at no premium/copay/deductible. You can get a private supplemental plan if you want to, but since all medically needed care is already covered, you won’t need to
The real M4A plan, Bernie's, expands Medicare to cover 100% and covers all medical needs, including medication, without co-pays, deductibles, spend-downs, or any deduction from Social Security. You would get better coverage and have more money in your pocket. It also removes the concepts of "networks" or "we don't take Medicare" providers because all doctors and facilities would be covered.
It does this and would save the country $2 Trillion dollars in the next ten years over what we are paying right now for incomplete and fractured private coverage. This is an estimate that came from a Koch brothers study that was trying to disparage M4A and so didn't include things like the new system being able to negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to prevent price gouging. To ease the tax burden of it, which wouldn't even apply to those of retirement age, Bernie's plan also raises taxes on the ultra-rich like billionaires, who have gotten so many tax breaks in the past 20 years, they now pay the lowest taxes of any income bracket.
Mayor Pete's plan, what little there is of it, allows people to buy an insurance plan from the government that is nearly the same as private insurance and does nothing to help seniors or limit drug prices. This is because Mayor Pete's campaign is funded by 23 billionaires. Bernie's is funded by none and is constantly attacked by the super-rich because they want another mansion/yacht/private jet, that they can already afford if they really want, instead of letting regular people get the healthcare they need.
It's because people continue to vote for people like Rand Paul, Mitch McConnel and a host of politicians making up the DNC
@@Blodhelm Thank you, that explains a lot and if this makes it through it would give me $400 more a month to live on. Seems to me these politicians have forgotten all about the seniors on fixed incomes. Like I said before, thank you for explaining.
@@stillbernie4386 Thank you, I forgot I still pay for vision and dental.
LFG PETE!! Make us great again bring back the good world 🙏
This guy is a monster. Salesman for those medical corporations.
When threatened, render enemy a monster.
I'm not a.... Look, I'm a pragmatist, okay? That's just how I tick. And I can attest to the fact that, yes, skilled tradesmen like my pipefitter father, Local 562, St. Louis, many of the union guys & gals just like him, they really don't wanna go from their current insurance to a M4A-style public option, & I understand & respect that! Pete's got a good idea IMO.
bernie or bust 😫💯
I like Bernie but do you want Kavanaugh? Because thats how you get Kavanaugh...
@@blazingreporter9742 I thought we got Kavanaugh because people cheated in the last primary and then failed to campaign in several swing states.
I want a choice, my choice is Medicare for All
Pete Buttigieg is phenomenal! He has my vote! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👍🏻❤️
He is a disgrace a corporate fake political puppet.
Medicare for all saves Americans trillions of dollars.
Bernie Sanders Medicare for all plan covers everthing and has no out of pocket expenses and he does it all by taxing the rich those 180,000 families that earn over 32 million dollars a year.
Private health insurance spend under 40% over every premium dollar on actual care 60% goes straight to share holders.
Listen pete,it's a shame and a disgrace to see American are dying because they can't afford to pay a private insurance,it hurts me so much to see that, it should happen somewhere else in the third country world not to the first country of the world .we should have an universal have an universal health care affordable to all Americans not only for the privileged. Private insurance has never been in the interests of middle class families and working class, it has always been in the interests of multinationalists and pharmaceutical drugs industries.
I personally believe Buttigeig has a chance at winning this! Also Elizabeth but I prefer Buttigeig... don’t mind either one, I’ll be happy with both! 🥰
I like that Pete speaks to everyone and speaks for everyone - whether you’re for this or not. I want a President for everyone, who can find a way for everyone.
I don't want a choice, then doctors will stay with private insurance. It should be free for everyone with all the doctors and that's it. Who you talking to Pete?
He's talking to his 23 billionaire donors.
Pete, You are lying for Corporations or Misinformed.
The Reality is that Majority of Americans HATE their Expensive Private Insurance which lacks Coverage.
I vomit in my mouth a little bit when I see how some democrats will passionately defend insurance companies.
Go Pete!
Yeah! Fight for those 23 billionaires who fund your campaign! People don't really need healthcare! If the price is raising taxes on the super-rich, that price is too much!
*sarcasm*
The most that we can say is that capitalism is necessary, but isn’t sufficient, for progress. And the tense matters: even that’s arguable, and I’d say dubious because Europe has less capitalism, but far more progress, whether higher life expectancy, happiness, democracy, trust, or meaning. A more sophisticated way to say it would probably be: capitalism was, once upon a time, perhaps the only workable way to let people enjoy some of the benefits created by great public goods. But it also came at a steep price of unfairness, exploitation, depletion, misery, meaninglessness, atomization, isolation. But at this juncture in human history, it might just be like our American thinking, obsolete. Improving life today depends on society investing capital directly in people, which means greater and greater public goods , which can weave together in even more sophisticated and improbable ways, healthcare, education, media, finance, precisely so that dance of integrating together all of yesterday’s knowledge, learning, insight, wisdom, truth can go on, in new ways, which reach higher heights. If people were free from “jobs” at “corporations” (which seem to do precisely nothing meaningful for anyone except create allow a tiny number at the top to amass absurd amounts of fictional paper chits called “money”) can you imagine what they might create? Discover? Share? Explore? Give to one another? So why do American thinkers keep pushing the tired, old, obviously by now false myth that capitalism equals progress? The reason American thinkers tell the myth so desperately today is precisely that it’s a last-ditch attempt to avoid facing bitter reality. If they questioned it for even a moment, they’d also have to grapple with the fact that their most cherished belief is a fairy tale, and no one wants to do that. , here in America, if you question capitalism, you’re a dangerous heretic, someone to be excommunicated. No wonder American thinkers never challenge their greatest myth. Who wants to pay that price? The Soviets didn’t challenge their myths, either. What do you know, They fell, too.
BERNIE 2020!
He’s right.
Actually Mayor Pete's plan is almost just the same from the Philippines as there would be options of medical care of whether in public or private for as long as it would be affordable for the people. Though the private insurance's role would be for the very severe cases like cancer or heart disease for as long as it would be supported by the insurance companies. And the public medical care would be covered for the basic treatments that would be either free or much cheaper as it is payed by the taxpayers. It is just the balancing way of choosing the healthcare for the people
Debbie Nina Boc It’s also similar to Germany’s system.
@@matazstec of course. And the Philippine government does know where the budget for the public medical care would get from
Is there anything more disingenuous than Pete?
No. Americans do not want "Medicare for all who want it"
We want free healthcare that most other advanced nations, who have a lower GDP than the US, already have.
If the Mayor wants any proof of that, perhaps he should compare his poll numbers to that of Sanders and Warren.
And Biden? Who has a public option plan? Also note that not every nation with a universal health system does so via single-payer
Idk about free, but administered the similar to a public utility
@@ggg3595-z6d I genuinely believe that Biden is only polling as well as he is, because
A) the way the media covers his name,
and B) centrist Democrats think he's the "safe bet"
His arguments at the debates have been mostly shallow "look at my record", which actually led to him being called out for some less than appealing decisions he made back in the day.
As far as Medicare for All goes, I know not all nations function on a Single Payer system like Sanders is suggesting, but the most BASIC math of taking out private insurance companies = lower medical costs, is undeniable, and the the Mayor and Biden both blatantly ignore that fact.
we already pay more for healthcare than any other country and get substandard healthcare. He is so full of it, and it is perfectly obvious. And how much have we been paying for wars for the past 20 years. I didn't despise him before, but I do now.
Substandard? Please see what healthcare is like around the world.
If big corporations and companies truly care about the life of its employees and those who are unfortunate enough to not be able to afford paying for health insurance, M4A is the most ethical thing the US can do for its citizens
Where are the name callings and insults? Never mind these are Democrats not childish monster Republicans.
Why does it require everyone?
I don't think buttegieg understands how insurance work...
In Germany there's a governmental and a private health care choice. So it's Medicare for all who want it, and it's one of the most admired health care systems in Europe.
I don't get your point?
EXACTLY!!! He needs to read about anti selection.
To lower costs of course. But you can just accommodate for that with a few more bucks on top of that $30 trillion.
Yes, I think he understands it just fine. Probably just concerned with the part where we all have to pay more than we should ;)
@@chrissharp6211 it's not just about cost. It's also about anti selection. The whole concept doesn't make sense and will cost an extortionate amount for those who are in, if you allow people to select if they want to opt in.
Also is it fair to allow someone to opt out their whole working lifetime only to opt in when they "become ill". this is why his plan doesn't work.
Alexander Anonymann Yep, same as Australia and it works great too. I
Don’t understand this socialist mentality of completely abolishing private healthcare
Debates aren't for reasoned discussion....they're mostly for PR and mud-slinging. Everyone, especially on a big stage like this with a dozen or so candidates are fighting for the spotlight. It's a bit of a toxic environment for trying to learn about the candidates, actually. It matters less who won the discussion on facts and rational responses than who the audience thinks won, and ofc, no those aren't mutually exclusive.
And as an example; Pete B made a good point that Warren isn't explaining how to pay for it, let alone Sanders. But honestly that is best if the audience actually has some background info about healthcare in general to be able to follow the discussion. And you can have a reasoned discussion on how to pay for it, but I doubt that can happen on a presidential debate stage. Nobody's gonna try to hear it and process it.
The existing employer health insurance budgets are more than double what is needed to fund Medicare for all!
@@merbst
like i said, nobody's gonna listen to that. I suppose if there were 5 candidates at a time you could bring props and a slideshow or something for a brief presentation of your case.
Too bad both these candidates are already bought out by corporate interests 😪
Pete you speak for your mega-rich donors not the majority of American ppl.
Yeah mega-rich donors like me and my $30K/yr income! Rolling in the...money...piles?
It's such a cheap shot insult by the hyperleft when they are backed into an intellectual, academic corner of substantive criticism. HAHA IT'S THE RICH PEOPLE ALL ALONG!
Chris Sharp Oh please if you don’t want to pay taxes move to Zimbabwe. The rest of us sane ppl are willing to forego premiums deductibles & co-pays in order to have peace of mind.
Chris Sharp Besides under Bernie’s plan your minuscule income would be exempt anyway.
@@himerosTheGod I guess you're right because your arguments included a bunch of things that the other person never even mentioned but yk, greed I guess
Pete, I love you BUT you're wrong on this one!
Pete, You are lying or misinformed.
The Reality is that Majority of Americans HATE their Expensive Private Insurance which lacks Coverage.
Even in the case that that's true, that "majority" can just use public insurance, while the rest stick with private. It gives a choice so that the minority won't be upset.
Elizabeth Warren 2020.