Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has been getting away for years with describing himself as a socialist, when in reality he is an outright America-hating communist.
This belief in communism is reflected in the Sanders platform. Even a brief glance reveals his plan to be hopelessly utopian and insane. It will extinguish freedom and shutter businesses and cause widespread suffering especially among the poor people he claims to want to help. It is a program for exporting the best and the brightest to places that appreciate them.
But identifying Sanders as a communist can be a risky proposition in modern-day America. The Left so dominates American culture that the word communist itself has become jarring, not because communism is bad but instead because leftists believe communism is good .
Left-wingers are students of George Orwell. They understand that language can be used for good or ill; to advance truth or mask it. To undercut the power that that emotionally charged word communism and its variants once had in this country when used by patriots to attack the nation's foreign and domestic enemies, the Left over time reversed its polarity. Over and over and over again in the culture, leftists drove home the false notion that communists were boogeymen invented by those who wished to control the population through fear. Another way of putting it is to say that the Left marginalized its own word in order to protect the profoundly antisocial idea it represents.
When many Americans hear the word communist today, their initial inclination is to believe that there may be something wrong with the speaker, as opposed to the person being described. As Ann Coulter wrote in her book, Treason , "In a stunning demonstration of the power of propaganda, accusing someone of having been a Communist makes you the nut.”
Sanders, like so many of his comrades on the Left, is committing a kind of fraud. It is time for this con man from Vermont, whose ignorance seems boundless at times, to be called out on it.
But first, some background on Bernie, as he prefers to be called, is in order.
Sanders is on record endorsing plenty of dumb ideas. He wrote in the 1970s that the country was close to experiencing a nuclear apocalypse or "death by poison gas." He claimed cervical cancer was caused by women not experiencing enough orgasms.
Like the anti-capitalist, anti-American magazine Adbusters , which gave birth to the ultra-violent small-c communist Occupy Wall Street movement, Sanders is opposed to economic growth if it increases economic inequality, at present the number one bugaboo of the Left. When he launched his campaign in May, this economic illiterate blamed the abundance of consumer goods for child hunger. “You don’t necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants when children are hungry in this country,” Sanders said.
He said he wants a “revolution” to reverse what he calls a “massive transfer of wealth” over the last generation from the middle class to the rich. He wants the U.S. to restore the confiscatory 90 percent personal income tax rate for top earners from the 1950s.
"What I think is obscene, and what frightens me is, again, when you have the top one-tenth of one percent owning almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 [percent]. Does anybody think that is the kind of economy this country should have?”
To people like Bernie, the economy is a plaything, a living entity that can be made subservient to government. Operating on the same assumption, communist countries created bureaucratically-administered "command economies" and millions of their subjects starved. The Soviet Union, which was supposed to live forever, disintegrated after just 74 years and all but a few communist countries followed it into the dustbin of history. Nazi Germany's command economy didn't save it either; the "Thousand Year Reich" perished after just 12 years.
Bernie's first lie is that he is democratic. He specifically describes himself as a "democratic socialist," as if the word democratic somehow makes his belief in socialism more noble. Left-wingers like Sanders play word games, misusing the word democratic deliberately and constantly. If they win, it is a triumph of democracy. If they lose, democracy has been betrayed, greedy capitalists rigged the election, the system is broken, and so on.
And the "democratic" Left won't take no for an answer. Its activists try to implement their proposals by any means available, regardless of the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box. When leftists lost in California's Proposition 8 election, the referendum affirming traditional, opposite-sex marriage, they challenged the results in court and publicly hounded those who had donated money in support of keeping marriage an exclusively heterosexual, binary institution. Eventually they prevailed.
Dramatic losses by congressional and state-level Democrats haven't weakened President Obama's resolve to preserve his command-and-control government health care scheme; in fact, the historic losses only emboldened him to unconstitutionally change the health care law repeatedly by executive fiat. Eventually he prevailed (or so it appears for now).
Even though the name of the Washington, D.C. football team, the Redskins, is not offensive to the overwhelming majority of native Indians and is not unpopular with Americans generally, the "democratic" Left is pressing on. These fanatical activists don't seem to understand that the names of sports teams are intended to present a positive image. When those teams are named after a specific social group, it is intended to honor that group. That's why professional sports leagues have been populated by teams such as the Vikings, Celtics, and Nordiques, and not by teams with names such as the Rapists, Idiots, and Boors. Yet leftists continually call for boycotts and now the Obama administration is telling the Redskins it won't allow them to move from the Washington, D.C. suburbs to Washington proper unless the name is changed.
Sanders has words other than democratic in his tool box.
He takes the standard left-wing euphemism for government spending, "investment," and goes a step further. The senator characterizes what he considers to be inadequate levels of government "investment" in a particular policy area as "deficits." Is this redefinition of deficits imbecilic or diabolically clever? The jury is still out.
As ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, Bernie released a report in January titled "We Must Rebuild the Disappearing Middle Class." In order to cut the so-called deficits he cares about, it will be necessary for the government to spend trillions of dollars more, for starters. In the report he states:
While we must continue to focus on the federal deficit, we must also be aware that there are other deficits in our society that have been causing horrendous pain for the vast majority of the American people. These are deficits in jobs, deficits in infrastructure, deficits in income, deficits in equality, deficits in retirement security, deficits in education, and deficits in trade. [...] At a time when this country has an obscene level of income and wealth inequality, we need a budget that ends the outrageous loopholes that exist and asks the wealthiest people and largest corporations to start paying their fair share of taxes. At a time when real unemployment remains much too high, we need a budget that creates millions of decent paying jobs. At a time when our infrastructure is collapsing, we need a budget that rebuilds our crumbling roads, bridges, dams, levees, water systems, waste water plants, airports, and rail systems.
In other words, American consumers are spending their money on the wrong things, businesses aren't meeting the real needs of the people, and the government, which is controlled by the big bad corporations, isn't doing what Sanders thinks should be done.
Government, Bernie maintains, must drastically increase its expenditures on, well, everything . Because government spending shrinks economic activity overall, Sanders's ideas, if implemented, would not help this allegedly disappearing middle class: they would disappear the middle class.
As the great economist Milton Friedman explained, the government obtains the money it wants to spend in just three ways: taxing, borrowing, or creating new money. Taxing and borrowing subtract from the economy by canceling out the stimulative effects of the spending. Creating new money might boost economic activity to an extent but it feeds inflation, and if done on a large scale, leads to disastrous hyper-inflation, with its attendant images of wheelbarrows full of nearly-worthless cash. Ever-expanding government, no matter how it generates the money it claims to need, ultimately leads to ruin.
Bernie's preferred method of generating revenue for the government is taxation. Boosting taxes beyond perhaps an optimal level, hurts the economy. Although pessimists say it may already be too late for the country, adding trillions of dollars to the nation's umpteen-trillion-dollar debt will certainly doom future generations of Americans. The U.S. will be unable to repay the national debt no matter how high it raises taxes and when creditors lose their patience will be forced to inflate its way out or simply default. It is difficult to envision the United States surviving as a nation when its government eventually collides with economic reality.
But facts such as the horrendous track record of communist countries are not obstacles to the Left, so Bernie's affection for a pie-in-the-sky theory popularized by Karl Marx remains undiminished.
To demonstrate that Sanders is a communist and not merely socialist, it is necessary to reflect on what these words mean. Many have said that a communist is a socialist in a hurry. That is one way of looking at it but it doesn't answer the question of what communism actually is.
Communism is a political movement whose adherents believe that markets are fundamentally unjust and that revolutionary violence should be used to overthrow the existing order and attain a classless society.
Karl Marx thought of socialism as a necessary way station on the road to the supposed utopia of communism. The question of socialism versus communism is a never-ending debate in academic circles, and it is one that is too involved to get into here. Suffice it to say that socialists and communists all want government or the collective to be master. They all subscribe to bad, un-American ideas, are all in the same ideological camp, and all tend to believe that the ends justify the means. In ideological terms, there is no bright line or safe harbor that neatly separates socialism from communism. They overlap and blend into each other.
Communism, according to Marx, was a kind of heaven on earth and he was its foremost proselytizer. He argued that human beings could be changed and made to reject their natural, selfish, family-oriented impulses. When this happened, everything would supposedly change for the better. People would voluntarily work hard for a society filled with abundance so there would be no need for governments, taxes, armies, police, courts, and jails. In such a society the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" would prevail.
But before this (impossible) idealized condition can be achieved, there has to be socialism. The working class, according to Marx's theory, disgusted by the supposed evils of capitalism and the misery they feel it inflicts on them, transforms the capitalist nation in which workers are mercilessly exploited, into a socialist state. Under socialism, in theory the "means of production" -- factories, raw materials, machines, the labor force and the system by which it is organized -- are controlled by the people through a powerful government. The "relations of production," that is, the relationship between those who invest in and control industries and those who work in those industries is forever changed. The government steps in on behalf of the people and imposes what some call "economic democracy," theoretically giving workers control over their workplaces.
Obviously, someone who works for socialism is a socialist ; someone who works for communism is a communist . (Someone who joins a political party that advocates communism is a Communist with a capital-C. Someone like Bill Ayers who believes in communism but hasn't joined a party is a small-c communist.)
In the speech that kicked off his presidential campaign in May, Sanders embraced the communist idea that markets are not just bad for people but are fundamentally unjust.
In an address heavy on class warfare, envy, and hatred, he declared that financial inequality "is immoral, it is bad economics, it is unsustainable." This is tantamount to saying that the only just society is one in which everyone has the same amount of money or that anyone who has the ability to make a lot of money is an enemy of the people.
He promised to send "a message to the billionaire class."
"[Y]ou can't have huge tax breaks [for the rich] while children in this country go hungry," he said, or "while there are massive unmet needs on every corner ... Your greed has got to end ... You cannot take advantage of all the benefits of America if you refuse to accept your responsibilities."
Sanders described the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, as a "modest" step towards forcing the U.S. to "join the rest of the industrialized world and guarantee health care to all as a right." (Not surprisingly, the Constitution of the Soviet Union also treated health care as a basic right.)
"And we must do it through a Medicare-for-all, single payer health plan," the senator said.
Obamacare, as former left-wing radical David Horowitz has said , lays the groundwork for a single-payer system which is communism.
What is Obamacare? And single payer? Why do we call it single payer? It's communism. If the government controls your access to health care which is what this is about, as to what you can have and to what you can't have, how is that different from -- that is communism.
Throughout the congressional debate, Obamacare backers worked strenuously to convince their fellow left-wingers that Obamacare was a stepping stone to single-payer health care.
On the campaign trail in March 2007, then-Sen. Obama made it clear he wanted the government to impose a communist-style, one-size-fits-all, health care system on Americans. "My commitment is to make sure that we have universal healthcare for all Americans by the end of my first term as president." He added:
I would hope that we could set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort. But I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There's going to be potentially some transition process.
And that's exactly what Obama and congressional Democrats did in 2010 when they brought in Obamacare. Obama accepted the wealth-redistributing socialist half-measure that is the Affordable Care Act because he knows that it is destined to collapse, at which point he is gambling the American people will demand a single-payer system, the kind of thing desired by the people who raised him, including Communist Party USA operative Frank Marshall Davis.
Bernie has been around communists a long time.
He used to work at the communist-led United Packinghouse Workers Union.
In the 1970s he belonged to the anti-war Liberty Union Party (LUP). Under the LUP banner, he ran unsuccessfully for the U.S. Senate and governor of Vermont. His platform called for all U.S. banks to be nationalized, public ownership of all utilities, and the establishment of a worker-controlled federal government.
Sanders quit the LUP in 1979 and was elected mayor of Burlington, Vermont. During his decade in office he displayed a Soviet flag in his mayoral office and claimed he did so to honor Yaroslavl, Burlington's sister city in the U.S.S.R. In addition, he made Puerto Cabezas in Communist Nicaragua another sister city of Burlington.
In 1989 Sanders addressed the national conference of the U.S. Peace Council, a Communist Party USA front group. The event focused on how to “end the Cold War” and “fund human needs.” Fellow speakers included radicals such as Leslie Cagan and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.)
Interacting with the CPUSA was a dangerous thing. During the Cold War, CPUSA members swore an oath "to the Soviet Union, to a 'Soviet America,' and to the 'triumph of Soviet power in the United States," according to Professor Paul Kengor.
In the 1990s, Sanders repeatedly introduced legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives to cut the nation's intelligence budget. He reasoned that “the Soviet Union no longer exists,” and that concerns such as “massive unemployment,” “low wages,” “homelessness,” “hungry children,” and “the collapse of our educational system” represented “maybe a stronger danger [than foreign terrorists] for our national security.”
Sanders hopped on the global warming/climate change bandwagon years ago, claiming that it both threatens “the fate of the entire planet” and is caused primarily by human industrial activity. He wants carbon emissions strictly limited, which would inflict tremendous damage on the U.S. economy without having much of an impact on global temperatures. In 2010 Sanders smeared climate-change skeptics by comparing them to people who had ignored the Nazi threat before World War II. He accused “big business” of being “willing to destroy the planet for short-term profits,” and in 2013 pontificated that “global warming is a far more serious problem than al-Qaeda.”
Not surprisingly, Sanders is a strong supporter of the Apollo Alliance , a coalition of environmentalists and big labor that wants the government to take over America's energy industry. The group is a hotbed of subversives and other radicals. Former green jobs czar Van Jones who described himself as a "communist" and "rowdy black nationalist" was a member of its board.
Weatherman co-founder and former Weather Underground leader Jeff Jones (apparently no relation to Van), who was a fugitive for 11 years, is director of the Apollo Alliance's New York state affiliate. Jones is proud of his small-c communist, terrorist past. In 2004 he boasted, “To this day, we still, lots of us, including me, still think it was the right thing to try to do.”
For an American politician during the Cold War, Sanders was unusually friendly to the Soviet Union.
As Accuracy in Media has reported , in the 1980s he "collaborated with Soviet and East German 'peace committees'" whose objective was "to stop President Reagan’s deployment of nuclear missiles in Europe.” Indeed, he “openly joined the Soviets’ 'nuclear freeze' campaign to undercut Reagan’s military build-up.”
Bernie also reached out to Soviet allies. He travelled to Communist Cuba in the 1980s where he enjoyed a friendly meeting with Havana's mayor.
In 1985 he visited Nicaragua to celebrate the sixth anniversary of the ascent to power of Daniel Ortega and his Marxist-Leninist Sandinista government. Sanders wrote an open letter to the people of Nicaragua attacking the Reagan administration, which he claimed was a puppet of corporate interests, for its anti-Communist activities. “In the long run, I am certain that you will win, and that your heroic revolution against the Somoza dictatorship will be maintained and strengthened,” he said.
When he was stateside again, Sanders sent a letter to the White House saying Ortega was interested in meeting with President Reagan to try to negotiate and end to that nation's civil war. Sanders invited Ortega to visit Burlington but the dictator declined.
In the event Vermont's favorite communist moves into the White House on January 20, 2017, it seems likely Ortega will at long last accept his comrade's invitation to the U.S.
At that time Bernie Sanders and Daniel Ortega will dance on America's grave.
Bernie is a commie.
And an ignoramus.
Great seed. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
cervical cancer was caused by women not experiencing enough orgasms
Hmmmmm......I think the women of NT has a responsibility to see whether this theory is quackery or not. Who wants to be the placebo in this experiment?
Hey Dean, Sean!
Thanks for more proof of my thesis ...
David Horowitz (Frontpage) is a cynical crackpot who makes his living feeding red meat to right wing extremists. Some people will do anything for a buck.
In the article Horowitz says that Obamacare is communism. I don't recall that coming up when the Supreme Court debated the law.
Attacking the source. Classic John...
Matthew Vadum, Master of Misinformation, Subverts the Truth With More Democratic 'Voter Fraud' Lies
I was shocked to see that this isn't an American Thinker article. It starts out just like one, ie ridiculous.
"Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has been getting away for years with describing himself as a socialist, when in reality he is an outright America-hating communist."
You will probably hear the word communist more in the next six months than in the past 60 years.
So be it. It's the weakest offense immaginable. I hope they pump out hundreds of articles that start out just like this one, suggesting that there's a career politician running for Predident who is literally trying to destroy America because he hates it so much, and somehow nobody deciphered his diabolical plan but the author.
You've got to be kidding. I'm sure close to half the county knows it. As we see there is a blurry line between the socialism Bernie promotes and communism.
I'm sure close to half the county knows it.
46.64%
That's a number I just pulled from my a$$, that being appropriate to this article...
Expect that number to rise as more people learn what Bernie really stands for.
Expect that number to rise...
... back up through my colon?
Yech!
The problem, Hal, is that Goebbels's Big Lie works... If somebody repeats the same thing a thousand times -- no matter how false it may be -- people will begin to think, "where there's smoke, there's fire". They may not believe the lie itself, but they will blame the victim for its existence.
Goebbels's Big Lie works... If somebody repeats the same thing a thousand times -- no matter how false it may be -- people will begin to think, "where there's smoke, there's fire".
Good point . That's why many believe the climatologist lie that CO2 causes global warming ...
Ummm.... No, Petey. Wrong again.
I'll let you think a while longer, to figure out where you went astray.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for you to make the connection . If the earth turned into a giant block of ice you would still be ranting about CO2 !!
Considering that every year is a "record high temperatures" year nowadays... I don't think I need to worry about that block of glass.
Oh, wait ... you deny that temperatures are rising, don't you?
you deny that temperatures are rising, don't you?
It is on the formal record that global temps have plateaued for the last 18 years of so . Any increases that have happened of late are still within the range that qualifies as a plateau .
Oh BTW ice is NOT the same as glass ... DUH !
Following up on this graph... 2014 was the hottest year on record... for one year, and then 2015 was the hottest year on record.
Plateau!
Laugh all you want . But learn how to read a graph . Yours clearly showed a plateau ! Thanks for posting an accurate one . I couldn't have proved my case any better than you just did ! I need to give you a vote up for your accurate graph !!
I never know, Petey, whether you repeat fallacious wingnut bullet points in ignorance or in hypocrisy. The statistical trickery of starting an observation in 1998, an El Niño outlier, is so-o-o-o threadbare...
And I repeat, 2014 and 2015 were successive record years.
Make up your mind Bob . Are you gonna believe the GISS data or the LA Times leftwing propaganda . Never mind . It's obvious which one you are going to believe and it has nothing to do with science ...
From your link :
The idea that the ominous rise in Earth's average surface temperature had begun to slow in 1998 was acknowledged by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, in 2013.
FYI:
The IPCC does not carry out its own original research, nor does it do the work of monitoring climate or related phenomena itself. The IPCC bases its assessment on the published literature , which includes peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed sources. [7]
TS.3.1.1 Global Average Temperatures
2005 and 1998 were the warmest two years in the instrumental global surface air temperature record since 1850. Surface temperatures in 1998 were enhanced by the major 1997–1998 El Niño but no such strong anomaly was present in 2005. Eleven of the last 12 years (1995 to 2006) – the exception being 1996 – rank among the 12 warmest years on record since 1850. { 3.2 }
The global average surface temperature has increased, especially since about 1950. The updated 100-year trend (1906–2005) of 0.74°C ± 0.18°C is larger than the 100-year warming trend at the time of the TAR (1901–2000) of 0.6°C ± 0.2°C due to additional warm years. The total temperature increase from 1850-1899 to 2001-2005 is 0.76°C ± 0.19°C. The rate of warming averaged over the last 50 years (0.13°C ± 0.03°C per decade) is nearly twice that for the last 100 years. Three different global estimates all show consistent warming trends. There is also consistency between the data sets in their separate land and ocean domains, and between sea surface temperature (SST) and nighttime marine air temperature (see Figure TS.6 ). { 3.2 }
It's from the IPCC website.
Am I misunderstand what it says?
Bernie is neither a Communist, nor an ignoramus. He is your slightly eccentric (and sometimes a little befuddled) old hippie type Socialist left wing liberal grandfather or great-uncle. He has big, sweeping ideas and ideals that will never get past Congress (as much as I wish they could come to pass in my life time) and if he is the nominee for President I will vote for him and he'll still lose.
I've tried this once with no takers … but let's have another go at it.
1) DEFINE COMMUNISM
2) Give SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF SANDERS' ACTUAL LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES THAT EXEMPLIFY THE DEFINITION
3) State SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE HOW "COMMUNISM IN AMERICA" WOULD MANIFEST ITSELF UNDER A SANDERS' PRESIDENCY.
We get a load of PRONOUNCEMENTS, DISMISSIVE ARGUMENTS, "REALITY" BY BUMPER STICKER …
… but very little substance behind them.
Go ahead … make your case … without deflections, bullshit questions that evade the issues … just make your case.
Some will see him as a socialist and others a communist. As the article states they are very closely related.
"Karl Marx thought of socialism as a necessary way station on the road to the supposed utopia of communism. The question of socialism versus communism is a never-ending debate in academic circles, and it is one that is too involved to get into here. Suffice it to say that socialists and communists all want government or the collective to be master. They all subscribe to bad, un-American ideas, are all in the same ideological camp, and all tend to believe that the ends justify the means. In ideological terms, there is no bright line or safe harbor that neatly separates socialism from communism. They overlap and blend into each other."
Mac, no one cares if sanders actually is a communist, or not. It's not like a President Sanders would have the political power to enact communist goals , he wouldn't. They just want to CALL him a communist because it's fun and it promises another nine months of chaos if he continues to do well.
To my knowledge nothing Sanders has proposed is communistic. Free college ? We have free schooling now. Because he wants to extend it from 18 to 19 year olds that makes him a communist ? ROFL. People are idiots.
Is he really any different than the communist party members in China?
Is he really any different than the communist party members in China?
Dean,
That's a rhetorical question -- one that if you actually were up to answering … you would have answered my questions.
Neither you nor any of your cohorts are up to it … not before, not now, not ever.
When you make dismissive arguments, pronouncements, use demagoguery, and/or find bumper stickers informative and rest your cases upon them …
… your cases fall through.
But I will give credit to your "leader" in these crap fests … he did respond to my questions …
… with a well thought-out THUMBS DOWN.
Dean,
That's a rhetorical question
Mac , please explain how that is merely rhetorical ...
Dean,
That's a rhetorical question
Mac , please explain how that is merely rhetorical ...
Dean made an allegation via a rhetorical questions without giving any specifics as to how Sanders and Chinese communists are alike.
By asking …
Is he really any different than the communist party members in China?
Dean doesn't explain specifically in what ways they're alike.
A rhetorical question …
A rhetorical question is a question that you ask without expecting an answer. The question might be one that does not have an answer. It might also be one that has an obvious answer but you have asked the question to make a point, to persuade or for literary effect.
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE:
Rhetorical Questions with Obvious Answers
Here are some answers of rhetorical questions that have answers that are very obvious, either because they ask about common facts or because the answer is suggested based on the context of the question.
These types of rhetorical questions are often asked to emphasize a point:
Rhetorical Questions That Have No Answers
When a Rhetorical Question Would be Asked
Now you see how rhetorical questions can be used to make a point and how they are asked without an expectation of a reply.
Mac ,
Thanks for the explanation . Now I know what you're getting at . When you incorrectly accuse me of doing that I will know how to respond ... or will accept that you have made a valid point . Right now I'm not confident in your assertion about Dean's question being rhetorical . It asks for specifics about the differences .
And when you boys get tired of the McCarthyism -- and concentrate on the "socialism," let this be your guide.
Socialism in America is responsible for all this...
1. The Military/Defense - The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world. It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.
2. Highways/Roads - Those roads and highways you drive on every single day are completely taxpayer funded. Your tax dollars are used to maintain, expand, and preserve our highways and roads for every one's use. President Eisenhower was inspired by Germany's autobahn and implemented the idea right here in America. That's right, a republican president created our taxpayer funded, national highway system. This was a different time, before the republican party came down with a vicious case of rabies that never went away.
3. Public Libraries - Yes. That place where you go to check out books from conservative authors telling you how horrible socialism is, is in fact socialism. Libraries are taxpayer funded. You pay a few bucks to get a library card and you can read books for free for the rest of your life.
4. Police - Ever had a situation where you had to call the police? Then you have used a taxpayer funded socialist program. Anyone can call the police whether they pay taxes or not. They are there to protect and serve the community, not individuals. This is complete socialism on a state level, but still socialism all the same. Would you rather have to swipe your credit card before the police will help you?
5. Fire Dept. - Hopefully you have never had a fire in your home. But if you have, you probably called your local taxpayer-funded fire department to put the fire out. Like police, this is state socialism. You tax dollars are used to rescue your entire community in case of a fire. It use to be set up where you would pay a fee every month to the fire dept. for their service. If you didn't pay, they let your house burn down. Sadly, a man from Tennessee had this exact situation happen to him in 2011 because he didn't pay his $75.00 fee. I guess that small town in Tennessee would rather let people's houses burn down that resort to evil socialism. So don't take for granted the fact that you have a 24/7 fire dept. to put out your burning home thanks to socialism.
6. Postal Service - Like having mail delivered directly to your front door and paying next to nothing to send mail anywhere you want? Well it's all made possible by socialism.
7. Student Loans and Grants - Did you go to College? If you did, you family might not have been rich enough to pay your way through. So you got your education anyway through student loans and grants from the federal government at taxpayer expense. Of course you have to pay back the loans, but if not the government, did you know anyone else who was going to lend you tens of thousands of dollars? Probably not. So the taxpayers lent you the money and you paid it back with slight interest. The government grants you accepted were gifts from the taxpayer and the federal government that you did not have to pay back. Socialism got you through school.
8. Bridges - Along with our highways, our government used your taxpayer dollars to build bridges. This allows the public to travel across rivers without having to sail or swim.
9. Garbage Collection - Like having your garbage collected once a week instead of having to drive it to the landfill yourself? Thank socialism.
10. Public Landfills - Taxpayer dollars are used to have places to dump all of our garbage that is collected by taxpayer funded garbage men.
11. War - That's right! War would not be possible without socialism. Your tax dollars are used to fight wars for your country. This is Big Government at it's biggest. Private companies don't attack other countries, at least not yet. Government is the only entity in America that can defend us from foreign enemies and our tax dollars are used for every second of it. Socialism has brought down Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, and Bin Laden. War may very well be the most socialist thing on this list.
12. Farm Subsidies - Our government uses taxpayer funds to pay farmers and businesses to provide their income and keep them growing food for the public.
13. CIA - The Central Intelligence Agency is vital to America's security. The CIA is completely taxpayer funded to protect the public from enemies.
14. FBI - The Federal bureau of investigations is a taxpayer funded government agency.
15. Congressional Health Care - As Republicans in congress warn us of the evils of government-run health care, most of them are covered by taxpayer-funded government-run health care. You literally pay for their health care while they tell you that paying for your neighbors health care through a public option or single-payer system is socialism. They are 100% correct, it is socialism. They're just not telling you that they like their socialist health care, they just don't think you should have it. They are afraid you might like it better than the private insurance you have now that funds their campaigns and gives them money to push what is best for them and not for you. Members of congress are free to opt out of their evil government health care, but most of them don't because deep down, they like socialism too.
16. Polio Vaccine - In the 1950's polio ravaged the United States. Until Dr. Jonas Salk invented a cure, finally ridding America of this terrible disease. Dr. Salk could have sold his vaccine in the free market and made millions and millions of dollars. Instead he gave it to the federal government to begin eradicating polio. He said that he made plenty of money as a scientist and felt it was too important to try and profit from or create a business around.
17. EPA - Republicans hate this taxpayer-funded government program because they have the nerve to tell corporations that they may have to follow environmental rules ad regulations for the greater good of the earth and the people who live on it. But if you don't like breathing mercury, drinking dirty water, and breathing in chemicals, you should like this example of socialism working for the people.
18. Social Security - You pay a tax to help ensure that our grandparents and senior citizens of America have money to live off of when they are retired or too elderly to work. I love hearing rich people bitch about this one because the truth is that they do not pay a social security tax, like most payroll taxes. This little piece of socialism helps prevent our senior citizens from sinking into poverty and starving to death.
19. Museums - Many museums are privately owned by organizations and groups, but many are also taxpayer-funded state, national, and federal museums.
20. Public Schools - Can't afford to send your children to an expensive private school? Thanks to socialism and government, you child can still get an education. Public education has been under attack for decades in this country by the radical right because public schools don't teach Christianity to your children and it enables people like Barack Obama to work hard, gain scholarships, and eventually become President of the United States.
21. Jail/Prison System - Many murders and criminals are behind bars right now and not out on the streets because of our taxpayer-funded, federal and state run jails and prisons. Taxpayer money is collected and used to help protect all of society from murders, molesters, rapist, etc. I know there's a lot of disagreement and controversy about how to handle our prison system, but I think we can all agree that serial killers should not be freed into society. There are also many private prisons in the United States. However, they have a higher escape rate than their socialist counterpart. Besides, don't you see the bad incentives in having a private prison system that profits from having people in prison? Since a business's top goal is to make more money than the year before, the only feasible agenda would be to get everyone in prison.
22. Corporate/Business Subsidies - This is the type of socialism that is acceptable in the Republican party. You tax dollars are given to big corporations to do things they should be doing anyway out of morals and ethics. Like not sending jobs overseas and hiring people. Wouldn't you like a nice big check just for not breaking the law? To be fair though, many businesses do earn their subsidies by advancing green technology and practice, donating to charity, helping communities, etc. They aren't all bad. People just get mad when big billionaire oil companies get billions of their taxpayer dollars while they're paying $4 at the pump. For the corporations that don't earn their subsidies other than donating to their very own political party, it's merely welfare. Though however you look at it, it is socialism.
23. Veteran's (VA) Health Care - Our soldiers bravely go to foreign countries and risk their lives at the request of their government and the American people. For those who survive, we as a country feel committed and obligated to ensure that they have everything they need for the rest of their lives for their service to us in which we could never fully repay. So we the taxpayers fund their health care in a government-run single-payer system for veterans. Many soldiers return with mental and/or physical health issues that would cost them thousands in a private health care plan. Socialism funds the military, the overall war, and also takes care of our troops when they return home.
24. Public Parks - Like going to the park on a sunny day? Just being able to walk right in, or at the worse pay a small fee? This is once again the work of socialism. If it were private, it wouldn't be a park, it would be someones back yard. That small or non-existent fee will turn into a $15 fee faster than you can say "No Trespassing".
25. All Elected Government Officials - From the Supreme Court, to the President of the United States and all the way down to the County Dog Catcher, taxpayers pay their salary and provide the funding for them to do their job. We pay for every aspect of their job. So in a sense, I guess you could say our whole country is run on socialism.
26. Food Stamps - Republicans fill with bitter contempt knowing that our government at the expense of the taxpayer is giving poor people money to buy food they couldn't otherwise afford. This, like welfare, is what the right thinks socialism is all about, along with mass murder. However, just like corporate welfare, welfare is socialism. I'll just end this one with a quick story. I have been down and out in periods of my life and sought assistance via food stamps. Even though I was what anyone would consider poor, I was not poor enough to get food stamps. Which means people who do get them, must really, really need them. As far as my personal experience, they weren't thrown around like candy the way the right would have you believe.
27. Sewer System - Do you like having a sewer system to remove waste and prevent pollution and disease from seeping into our environment? Thank the taxpayers of America and the socialist system it operates in.
28. Medicare - Medicare is one of the most liked socialist programs in America. Most of us don't mind paying taxes to provide our senior citizens with health care and hope the next generation will do the same for us. If you don't believe me, just look at almost any poll. Most seniors would not be able to afford private health care. So this form of socialism is a life saver for this nation's grandparents and senior citizens.
29. Court System - Whether it's the murder trial of the century or a case in a small claims court, the taxpayers of America fully fund our courts and legal process. You may pay for your own lawyer, but the courtroom, judge, and jury is paid for through socialist means.
30. Bird Flu Vaccine - You don't have bird flu right now and probably aren't worried about it because our federal government used taxpayer funds to pump vaccines all over America.
31. G.I. Bill - The G.I. bill allows veterans to pursue an education by using taxpayer dollars to help them pay for most of their schooling. It also helps them with loans, savings, and unemployment benefits.
32. Hoover Dam - Remember when our country use to build things? Our government built the Hoover Dam using taxpayer funds. It is now a vital source of power for the west coast.
33. State/City Zoos - American families have been going to the zoo for generations. A place where kids and adults can have fun seeing creatures and animals from all over the world and learn at the same time. Many zoos are ran by the state and/or city, using taxpayer funds to operate and even bring the animals to the zoo.
34. IRS - I know, the IRS is about as popular and well liked in America as a hemorrhoid, but think about it. The IRS is the reason that we have anything. The IRS collects taxpayer funds for the federal government. The government then dispenses these funds to our military, states, and social programs. If there is no one collecting taxes, no one will pay them. If no one pays taxes, our country shuts down. Without money to operate, nothing operates. This may sound like a good thing to some radical republicans, but for those of us with sense, we know this means anarchy in the USA. The IRS gets a bad rap because if you don't pay your taxes or owe them money, they can be ruthless. Like everything else, the IRS is not perfect, but without them we literally have no country or no means to run it.
35. Free Lunch Program - Some children are living in poverty by no fault of their own. I'm not saying it is even their parents fault, but you surely cannot blame a child for the situation they are born into. In most if not all states, there are programs where children who live in poor households can receive school lunch for free. The taxpayers of the state pay for this. Sounds like socialism to me, and also the moral and Christian thing to do.
36. The Pentagon - Our defense system in America is a socialist system from top to bottom. We as taxpayers fund the pentagon completely.
37. Medicaid - Our government uses taxpayer funds to provide health care for low-income people. Republicans, the compassionate Christians that they are, absolutely hate this program. What they fail to understand is that when people can't afford to pay their outrageous medical bills, they don't. This bill does not disappear. The loss that the insurance company, doctor's office, or hospital takes gets passed down to everyone else. So covering people and giving them a low-income option reduces costs for them and everyone else. This is the main argument behind a health care mandate. It's not to force you to buy health care out of cruelty. If everyone is covered, costs drop for everyone. If you have no compassion for the uninsured, you can at least understand the rational in a selfish sense.
38. FDA - The Food and Drug Administration is far from perfect. It is infested with corporate corruption and they have been wrong many, many times. Countless times they have approved things that they later have to apologize for and have banned things that would have helped people. However, they have also stopped many harmful foods and products from being sold to the public and protect us everyday from poisons being disguised as products. While not perfect, they are needed to prevent harmful food and drugs from being sold to you and you family. Without them, corporations can send whatever they want to your supermarkets and drug stores without any testing or evaluation. I don't mind my taxes going towards a middle man to inspect the safety of the products we are being sold everyday.
39. Health Care for 9/11 Rescue Workers - After beating back GOP obstruction, Democrats finally passed a bill last year to allow government to help 9/11 rescue worker's with their health care after many came down with horrible lung diseases from the toxins they breathed in rescuing people from smoldering buildings. These brave citizens risked their lives and health to help complete strangers. They deserve more, but covering their health care is a good start.
40. Swine Flu Vaccine - Do you have swine flu right now? Then thank government and the socialist structure.
41. Disability Insurance (SSDI) - For those who are disabled and cannot work, our government provides an income for them via taxpayer dollars as opposed to the other option of letting them starve to death.
42. Town/State Run Beaches - Like going to the beach? Like it when the beach is clean and safe? Like having lifeguards on staff in case of an emergency? Then once again, thank the taxpayers and the socialist structure that makes it all possible.
43. Corporate Bailouts/Welfare - The whole point of this post is to prove that we ALL use, benefit from, and like socialism. This example is a form of socialism that the republicans not only like, but fight tooth and nail for. They don't like it when socialism is used for working/poor people, but when it's for millionaires and their corporate donors, socialism becomes as American as apple pie. The middle/working class who are the majority of taxpayers pay for welfare for corporations and people who have more money than all of us combined. When our government bails out a bank or gives a subsidy to a billion dollar corporation, you are paying for it.
44. State Construction - Ever see those construction workers in your town fixing potholes, erecting buildings, repaving highways and roads, and fixing things all over town? They themselves and the work they do is taxpayer-funded state socialism.
45. Unemployment Insurance - All your working life, you pay payroll taxes. Some of these taxes go toward a program that temporarily provides for people who lost their jobs until they can find another one. You pay for others, others pay for you. Especially these days, you never know when you might lose your job. You may need temporary assistance until you get back on your feet. The government recognizes this. UI also keeps the economy moving in times of recession because people still have some money in their pockets to buy goods and promote demand.
47. WIC - WIC is a federally funded program to assist women, infants, and children. WIC helps low-income families by providing funding for nutrition, education, and health care for children.
48. State Snow Removal - Even though sometimes it may take them longer than you like to get to your street, do you like having snow plow service to clear our roads and highways in the winter? This is a state socialist taxpayer-funded service.
49. PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) - PBS operates on donations and government funding. The provide non-partisan news and information to the public. They are the home of Sesame Street, Masterpiece Theater, and The Antiques Roadshow. Surveys show that they are literally the most trusted name in news. I wonder how Fox feels about that?
50. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) - The CDC helps promote and enact the health and safety of the public along with helping to prevent and control illness and disease. The CDC is a government program that operates on taxpayer funding.
51. Welfare - Is there anything the republicans hate more? Of course I'm talking about the welfare that goes to poor people. Corporate welfare is not only accepted in the republican Kabul, but it's mandatory that we give our tax dollars to billionaires and not question the logic of it. Though if you look at it realistically and not through the red scare glasses in which the right sees the world, welfare helps the economy. As I've said many times, when poor people have money in their pocket, they buy things made and sold by companies. This creates a demand. To keep up with demand, businesses must hire to keep up. If you yanked everyone who is on welfare off of it tomorrow, the economy would take a blow and lose jobs due to the down tick in consumer demand because we just took what little money they had away.
52. Public Street Lighting - Like being able to see at night when you walk or drive? Thank Socialism.
53. FEMA - If Disaster strikes, FEMA is there to help pick up the pieces. As a part of homeland security and an agency of the federal government, they use taxpayer dollars to help cities, states, and towns recover and rebuild. I don't know to many private companies that could assist in disaster relief and ask nothing in return. Thank God for socialism.
54. Public Defenders - Ever been in trouble and couldn't afford a lawyer? Well the taxpayers and the government make sure you still get representation.
55. S-CHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program) - S-CHIP is a program that matches funds to states for health insurance for children in families that cannot afford insurance but make too much to qualify for Medicaid. Your tax dollars go towards covering uninsured children, is that so wrong?
56. Amtrak - Amtrak transports tens of millions of passengers a year in 46 states and three Canadian Providences. It is owned by the federal government and your tax dollars are used to fund it. All aboard!!
57. NPR - National Public Radio operates on private and federal funding along with public donations. NPR has been one of the most trusted news sources in America for over 40 years.
58. The Department of Homeland Security - Created after the terrorist attacks on 9/11, this heavily federally funded department of the U.S. government helps protect us from future terrorist attacks. This is the third largest department within the United States government.
59. OSHA - Do you have a safe and healthy workplace that provides training, outreach, education, and assistance? Thank OSHA! Brought to you by the taxpayers of America and socialism.
60. State and National Monuments - The Lincoln Memorial. Mount Rushmore. The D.C. National Mall. All brought to you and maintained with your tax dollars. Socialism is patriotic?
61. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) - The USDA enforces regulations on the farming, agriculture, and food industries to ensure food safety, natural resources, and hunger worldwide and in the United States. Your tax dollars are used to help keep what you are eating safe and even feed those who are not eating.
62. Government Scholarships - if you work hard in school and show true potential, our government will give you a scholarship towards college so you can advance your education. Your tax dollars have been used to send future doctors, lawyers, scientists, and even presidents of the United States to college.
64. Census Bureau - Every ten years, our government collects data about our people and economy, to better serve and represent us. From the forms that are sent to your home for you to fill out and send back in and to the census worker who shows up and kindly asks you to fill out the form if you don't send it in, all taxpayer funded socialism. The information collected is used to better understand the economic situation and population in your area. Not to enslave you in a FEMA camp.
65. Department of Energy - This taxpayer funded cabinet of the federal government oversees nuclear weapons, nuclear reactors, energy conservation, radioactive waste disposal, and energy production. To those of you who care about our environment and would rather not witness a nuclear holocaust might consider this money well spent.
66. Customs and Border Protection - the CBP is the largest law enforcement agency in America. This is big government that republicans actually do like because they don't like Mexicans immigrating to our country like our ancestors did. However, this taxpayer funded, socialist agency of the federal government regulates trade, imports, and immigration.
67. Department of Education - This cabinet of the federal government is actually the smallest. They administer and oversee federal assistance to education. They also collect data and enforce federal laws and regulations involving education. Even though the right thinks that this department is indoctrinating your children, they actually have no control over curriculum or standards.
68. Secret Service - Your tax dollars are used to provide highly-trained, skilled professional bodyguards to protect the President of the United States.
69. Peace Corps - The Peace Corps is a volunteer program run by the government that helps people outside of the US to understand our culture as well as helping us learn about other cultures. However they are more well known for their work with economic and social development in less-fortunate countries. Sounds very Christian for being a socialist program, huh?
70. Department of Justice - The DOJ is responsible for enforcing the law. Socialism keeps our civilization intact.
71. National Weather Service - Like knowing when a storm, tornado, earthquake, or snow is coming? Socialism makes this possible and available to everyone.
72. The White House - Our taxpayer dollars through a socialist means pays for the house that the president and his family live in during a presidents time in office.
73. Government - Like it or not, our country would not be a country without a government. Every single day, government on state and local levels serve us in ways we simply take for granted. Government as an entity operates and functions on our tax dollars through a socialist structured funding system. From the military down to the county dog catcher, socialism turns the wheels that make our society function.
74. Law - Laws and rules make our democracy possible. Remove these laws and you have sheer anarchy. Laws do not appear out of thin air. To have law, you need a government. You need elected lawmakers to make the laws and a government to implement and enforce them. Socialism is responsible for every law in this country. Without our government and lawmakers which exist thanks to socialism, there would be no laws. So the laws themselves, are enforced and implemented thanks to socialism.
75. Civilization - As an American citizen, you enjoy freedoms that many in other countries do not. Like anything else in this world, our government is not perfect, but you should be thankful everyday that your country has a government that feels an obligation to serve the people and protect their rights and freedoms. This is completely possible because of government, taxes, and socialism. Do you think the private sector would do a better job of governing our country? Do you think corporations would enact laws to help protect and serve you and your family or them and their profits? The reason you can read this blog and the reason I can write it whether you agree with it or not is because of the freedoms we have here in America enforced and protected through socialist means. Our entire civilization depends on us being a people united. Socialism is a glue that binds us together and makes possible the things that we could not accomplish as individuals working against each other.
Police - Ever had a situation where you had to call the police? Then you have used a taxpayer funded socialist program. Anyone can call the police whether they pay taxes or not. They are there to protect and serve the community, not individuals.
There are many communities in which the police are used to extort money from the public through improper accusations of traffic violations . I've seen this with my own eyes . Ever experienced a speed trap ? If so then you have too ...
I've seen this with my own eyes . Ever experienced a speed trap ? If so then you have too ...
Imagine how many more extortions and speed traps there'd be with a privatized, for-profit police "service".
I am not advocating private for-profit police forces . I'm merely pointing out the problems with govt actions . And it is not merely speed traps . If the system to enter traffic fines into the computer is at fault then people can be fined twice for the same infraction . I know from 1st hand experience because it happened to me ...
I am not advocating private for-profit police forces . I'm merely pointing out the problems with govt actions . And it is not merely speed traps . If the system to enter traffic fines into the computer is at fault then people can be fined twice for the same infraction . I know from 1st hand experience because it happened to me ...
No argument on any of this, Petey. But a non-governmental, private entity would have a motive for doing the very same … a potentially even greater motive … that being profiteering. And what brought us to this point in the discussion was the comment stating that someone would gladly give up all of the benefits generated by so-called "socialism".
Giving up what one has without proposing nor considering the alternatives is taking a leap of faith (based foolishness) -- couldn't resist that one.
a non-governmental, private entity would have a motive for doing the very same … a potentially even greater motive … that being profiteering.
IMO you are looking at only 1/2 of the issue . Sure there would be profit motive from a private entity to cheat but launching a government probe of that would be easier than "fighting city hall" . Suing the police dept for damages is notoriously difficult . A private firm can't retaliate with force without breaking even more laws ... If the oversight is in separate [govt] hands then it stands a chance of being better than dealing with city hall for their own abuses .
I've experienced the motorbike traffic control cops, the glorified meter maids who get protected when cuts happen to community service officers and crime detectives and they stay because the city uses them as revenue collectors. I'm all for blue lives matter but we could do without male meter maids on their big bad bike.
If anyone is looking for an example of Bernie's plans for communism just look at single payer. It destroys the capitalistic Insurance industry and turns it over to the government. No doubt that will be a huge failure once the government has a monopoly on health insurance. Those insurance companies only make about 8 percent profit but the commies want you to think they are the bad guys and government will be more efficient by destroying capitalism. If that isn't communism what is?
If anyone is looking for an example of Bernie's plans for communism just look at single payer. It destroys the capitalistic Insurance industry and turns it over to the government.
It's Medicare for all … it will create a larger coverage pool and the tax-premium will be less than that of private insurers; after dinner I'll post how it would work.
Expanded & Improved Medicare For All Act, H.R. 676
Introduced by Rep. John Conyers .
Read the full bill from the 114th Congress (2015-2016).
Read the summary of HR 676 from the 114th Congress (2015-2016).
See the full list of Congressional HR 676 cosponsors for the 114th Congress (2015-2016).
Brief Summary of the Legislation
The United States National Health Care Act (USNHC) establishes a unique American universal health insurance program with single payer financing. The bill would create a publicly financed, privately delivered health care system that improves and expands the already existing Medicare program to all U.S. residents, and all residents living in U.S. territories. The goal of the legislation is to ensure that all Americans will have access, guaranteed by law, to the highest quality and most cost effective health care services regardless of their employment, income or health care status. In short, health care becomes a human right. With 47 million uninsured Americans, and another 50 million who are underinsured, the time has come to change our inefficient and costly fragmented non-system of health care.
Who is Eligible
Every person living or visiting in the United States and the U.S. Territories would receive a United States National Health Insurance Card and ID number once they enroll at the appropriate location. Social Security numbers may not be used when assigning ID cards.
Health Care Services Covered
This program will cover all medically necessary services, including primary care, inpatient care, outpatient care, emergency care, prescription drugs, durable medical equipment, hearing services, long term care, palliative care, podiatric care, mental health services, dentistry, eye care, chiropractic, and substance abuse treatment. Patients have their choice of physicians, providers, hospitals, clinics, and practices. There are no co-pays or deductibles under this act.
Conversion To A Non-Profit Health Care System
Doctors, hospitals, and clinics will continue to operate as privately entities. However, they will be unable to issue stock. Private health insurers shall be prohibited under this act from selling coverage that duplicates the benefits of the USNHC program. Exceptions to this rule include coverage for cosmetic surgery, and other medically unnecessary treatments. Those workers who are displaced as the result of the transition to a non-profit health care system will be the first to be hired and retrained under this act. Furthermore, workers would receive their same salary for up to two years, and would then be eligible for unemployment benefits. The conversion to a not-for- profit health care system will take place as soon as possible, but not to exceed a 15 year period, through the sale of U.S. treasury bonds.
Cost Containment Provisions/ Reimbursement
The USNHC program will negotiate reimbursement rates annually with physicians, allow for global budgets (monthly lump sums for operating expenses) for hospitals, and negotiate prices for prescription drugs, medical supplies and equipment. A “Medicare For All Trust Fund” will be established to ensure a dedicated stream of funding. An annual Congressional appropriation is also authorized to ensure optimal levels of funding for the program, in particular, to ensure the requisite number of physicians and nurses need in the health care delivery system.
Families Will Pay Less
Currently, the average family of four covered under an employee health plan spends a total of $4,225 on health care annually – $2,713 on premiums and another $1,522 on medical services, drugs and supplies (Employer Health Benefits 2006 Annual Survey, Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research and Educational Trust; U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Expenditure Survey.) This figure does not include the additional 1.45% Medicare payroll tax levied on employees. A study by Dean Baker of the Center for Economic Research and Policy concluded that under H.R. 676, a family of four making the median family income of $56,200 per year would pay about $2,700 for all health care costs.
Business Will Pay Less
In 2006, health insurers charged employers an average of $11,500 for a health plan for a family of four. On average, the employer paid 74% of this premium, or $8,510 per year. This figure does not include the additional 1.45% payroll tax levied on employers for Medicare. Under H.R. 676, employers would pay a 4.75% payroll tax for all health care costs. For an employee making the median family income of $56,200 per year, the employer would pay about $2,700.
The Nation Will Pay About the Same, While Covering All Americans
Savings from reduced administration, bulk purchasing, and coordination among providers will allow coverage for all Americans while reducing health care inflation in the long term. Annual savings from enacting H.R. 676 are estimated at $387 billion (Baker).
Proposed Funding For USNHC Program
NOTE: HR 676 never passed but it's still viable in concept and may well come to a vote in some way, shape or form in the future.
I fully support the concept of Medicare for all as a way of providing health care coverage for all Americans at birth. The bureaucracy is already in place so it will just need to be expanded, not replaced (we won't have to reinvent the wheel), it's a known program so it will not be a mystery to most Americans and people will still be able to purchase Medigap insurance (as I have) to cover what Medicare doesn't, so there is still money in it for the private insurance companies.
Any plan that costs me at least an additional 10% tax, as this proposal does, won't get any support from me.
Any plan that costs me at least an additional 10% tax, as this proposal does, won't get any support from me.
If you pay X for health insurance now, and (i.e) subsequently a tax for Health Insurance of X - 20%X under Universal Health Insurance/Single Payer … if the 20% you save on your health insurance results in a net gain in your overall income after taxes …
… you'd support it.
Instead of dismissing every idea out-of-hand without knowing the details … doing so because your Republican legislators/politicians and the Rush Limbaughs want to screw over Democrats and will lie to you to do so …
… it's YOU who will get screwed.
Without knowing the details?! I just explained that I would not support that plan based on the details. An additional 10% tax (at least) is egregious. I already pay over 35%. Why would I pay more for less?
Without knowing the details?! I just explained that I would not support that plan based on the details. An additional 10% tax (at least) is egregious. I already pay over 35%. Why would I pay more for less?
I explained the conceptual logistics … in principle, if it resulted in the net gain I posited, could you support that?
Certainly the proposal of any tax increase, one without the attendant details should be consequently rejected for that reason alone.
The Single Payer concept is not predicated on "paying more for less"; it's predicated on paying less for the same --resulting in a net plus.
Establishes the Medicare for All Trust Fund to finance the Program with amounts deposited:
(1) from existing sources of government revenues for health care,
(2) by increasing personal income taxes on the top 5% income earners,
(3) by instituting a modest and progressive excise tax on payroll and self-employment income,
(4) by instituting a modest tax on unearned income, and
(5) by instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions. Transfers and appropriates to carry out this Act amounts that would have been appropriated for federal public health care programs, including Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).
Under a single-payer system, all medical care would be paid for by the Government of the United States , ending the need for private health insurance and premiums, and probably recasting private insurance companies as providing purely supplemental coverage, to be used when non-essential care is sought.
The national system would be paid for in part through taxes replacing insurance premiums, but also by savings realized through the provision of preventative universal healthcare and the elimination of insurance company overhead and hospital billing costs. [2]
An analysis of the bill by Physicians for a National Health Program estimated the immediate savings at $350 billion per year. [3]
Others have estimated a long-term savings amounting to 40% of all national health expenditures due to preventative health care . [4] Preventative care can save several hundreds of billions of dollars per year in the U.S., because for example cancer patients are more likely to be diagnosed at Stage I where curative treatment is typically a few outpatient visits, instead of at Stage III or later in an emergency room where treatment can involve years of hospitalization and is often terminal. [5]
Recent enactments of single-payer systems within individual states, such as in Vermont in 2011 , may serve as living models supporting federal single-payer coverage. [6]
I currently pay $20 per month for health insurance premiums to my employer. I routinely pay less than $3000 a year for medical visits and drugs. These costs are a tiny fraction compared to the extra 10% of my income this plan would confiscate.
If you could make the plan financially neutral for me, I could possibly support it. However, proposing I spend tens of thousands of extra dollars annually for no benefits leaves me cold.
I currently pay $20 per month for health insurance premiums to my employer. I routinely pay less than $3000 a year for medical visits and drugs. These costs are a tiny fraction compared to the extra 10% of my income this plan would confiscate.
If you could make the plan financially neutral for me, I could possibly support it. However, proposing I spend tens of thousands of extra dollars annually for no benefits leaves me cold.
Your employer would pay less under Single Payer and your portion wold be correspondingly lower.
And certainly at worst, it should be financially neutral.
I just don't understand how it could be neutral when my current health care costs are less than 20% of the extra taxes I would pay. It doesn't make sense.
It's completely impossible.
Which makes perfect sense, AMac. However it'll never get through the House in Congress because of GOP gerrymandering, which will still make for more grid lock with a Democrat as President or destruction of the progress that has been made with a republican President. As a Democrat I believe we have to be pragmatic and work with the parts of the GOP that we can and accomplish small steps. Big, sweeping ideas are not going to pass, as much as they would be great if they did.
It's not that what you described is wrong or what Sanders proposes is wrong. Quite the opposite, IMHO. It's just not realistic to think they could come to pass right now.
"GOP gerrymandering". Lol. No bias there...
"GOP gerrymandering". Lol. No bias there...
I said GOP gerrymandering because they're the ones most opposed to to universal healthcare and will most likely be re-elected. They were in charge of redistricting after the last census in enough places to lock in control of the House and may be again in 2020. The Democrats would be smarter to pay less attention to the Presidential race and much more attention to the races for state legislators.
"GOP gerrymandering". Lol. No bias there...
Take your pick … you got three thumbs up with not a single specific word of confirmation!
The groundwork for the 2016 GOP strategy has been laid, all too well, by gerrymandered districts that delivered a large Republican House majority in November despite the fact that 1.3 million more Americans voted for Democratic candidates. How did this happen? As the 2010 Census data came to light, the savvy Republican State Leadership Committee invested $18 million in state-level efforts to optimize legislative district boundaries for the GOP in states that would be gaining or losing seats due to population changes. In their words:
The so-called REDMAP strategy to “to erect a Republican firewall through the redistricting process” worked, in spades. Obama won Ohio by two points, but Democrats lost all but 4 of the state’s 16 House races . In Pennsylvania, Obama won by 5 points while Democratic candidates suffered defeats in 13 of 18 districts . Listen to the RSLC bask in its success:
Yes, you read that correctly: the GOP is flaunting an electoral strategy that defied the forces of democracy and the will of the people to usher in another Republican majority in the House of Representatives. They’re proud to have won despite having received fewer votes.
Do you never tire of dismissive arguments?
Back your one-liners or back off.
Because you asked nicely, I'll do neither. Enjoy your partisan fantasy! Lol.
Because you asked nicely, I'll do neither. Enjoy your partisan fantasy! Lol.
TRANSLATION: "Don't confuse me with the facts."
It's just not realistic to think they could come to pass right now.
But someone has to begin the push, embarrass those standing in the way AND ABOVE ALL, RELENTLESSLY EDUCATE THE PUBLIC AS TO HOW THEY WILL SPECIFICALLY BENEFIT!
RELENTLESSLY …
… like all advertisers do.
Sorry. I am not interested in subsidizing the takers any more than I already do.
I would say, that if indeed Bernie is a (a little drum roll here) Communist (Joe McCarthy is smiling), it matters little to nothing.
It is my thought that what he brings to the discussion (in regards to US Economics at least) is something that has been missing for so long that I almost did not recognize it, the truth. The system is and has been rigged for sometime now, at least he's acknowledging what we all know.
Bernie will most likely take NH, after that it gets very tough for him so I wouldn't fret too much, the Pink will soon fade from the picture and with it most likely the truth.
We all know government is corrupt the problem is Bernie wants to expand that corruption not reduce it. His biggest donors the some of the most corrupt oganizations in the country that buy politicians the unions. Listen to his stump speeches and you will see he is a puppet for the unions that are buying this talking head.
It would appear that the THUMBS-DOWN-GANGBANGERS pooled their resources (limited though they be) and engaged in a non-specific, content-and-fact-free attempt to rebut that which they cannot.
Where will they go and with whom will they next wage low-level agenda-foisting of metaphorical feces-flinging and pissing-on-the-floor … after they corrode The NewsTalkers in the way the old place has been so corroded.
It's one thing to have an opinion and to support and sustain a political ideology … by all means be passionate and dedicated …
… but to do so without interjecting an occasional complicated thought or fact-based rebuttal only expedites the exit of intelligent individuals who come looking and hoping for substantive dialogue.
Keep on thumbing and promote the dumbing.
When the momentary anger passes, I feel genuine sadness for people who are well into their adult years but who can barely express themselves any better than recalcitrant adolescents.
Losing your argument isn't any worse than never gaining the respect of those with whom you argue; that's kind of what one might refer to as "a rule of THUMB".
Referring in general to the unspecified "they" is not a good policy . It promotes discord and makes those who have not participated feel put upon .
Referring in general to the unspecified "they" is not a good policy . It promotes discord and makes those who have not participated feel put upon .
Agreed; I wouldn't want anyone to feel "put upon".
I'll start naming names … I mean who wants "discord"?
Let's see, what else might be creating discord … hmmmmmmm … let me think …
Oh, I know!
The "comments-without-content" with which this comment will be met.
Blessed are the peacemakers, Petey.
Matthew 5:9
I guess you want the rest of us to whine about getting undeserved thumbs down as well Mac . But I'll pass . I've stopped receiving the info of who is doing that from the site . It is too much work .
The "comments-without-content" with which this comment will be met.
Oops ... Mine seems to be the only response . Was that enough content to meet your approval ?
I guess you want the rest of us to whine about getting undeserved thumbs down as well Mac . But I'll pass . I've stopped receiving the info of who is doing that from the site . It is too much work .
The "comments-without-content" with which this comment will be met.
Oops ... Mine seems to be the only response . Was that enough content to meet your approval ?
Actually, Petey, that's real close!
You may be emerging into near full-fledged conversation!
A thumbs up for you!
I'll have to take your word for it that it was your thumbs up Mac . I gave you one as well . Peace out .
I give you my word on the Thumbs Up … and giving one more as a gesture of good faith.
The interesting question is whether or not this kind of swarming is concerted, or just one goose-brained critter doin' like the others do...
I suspect it's the beginning of an anti-communism movement. Won't be long until they unite and take our country back. The south will rise again.
Ooooooh Dean !
Won't be long until they unite and take our country back. The south will rise again.
W.A.S.P. privilege, Jim Crow and antebellum!
Dean, you're a man of vision …
… myopic and demonic though it may be.
Happy Monday everyone!!!!
Is there even a way to like or dislike anonymously? If so, can someone let double X know so when he "dislikes" my comments it will be anonymous. hehehehe
Seriously - I'm not a fan of the "dislike" option unless its to show displeasure due to a personal attack. Otherwise, I think everyone's entitled to their own positions and opinions even if they're in contrast to reality. Of course, we can't put stipulations on "disliking" someone's comment but I thought I'd throw in my 2©
I think there should be a voluntary ban on all discussions of the like and dislike button. Whatever there is to be said about the situation has already been said, and more.
ban on all discussions
Only likes and dislikes.