Progressives (Liberals)

Sorry to sound like a broken record, but people are dying because they can’t afford medication and healthcare.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/

Excerpt:

Uninsured, working-age Americans have 40 percent higher death risk than privately insured counterparts

David Cecere
Cambridge Health Alliance
September 17, 2009

Nearly 45,000 annual deaths are associated with lack of health insurance, according to a new study published online today by the American Journal of Public Health. That figure is about two and a half times higher than an estimate from the Institute of Medicine (IOM) in 2002.

The study, conducted at Harvard Medical School and Cambridge Health Alliance, found that uninsured, working-age Americans have a 40 percent higher risk of death than their privately insured counterparts, up from a 25 percent excess death rate found in 1993.

“The uninsured have a higher risk of death when compared to the privately insured, even after taking into account socioeconomics, health behaviors, and baseline health,” said lead author Andrew Wilper, M.D., who currently teaches at the University of Washington School of Medicine. “We doctors have many new ways to prevent deaths from hypertension, diabetes, and heart disease — but only if patients can get into our offices and afford their medications.”

The study, which analyzed data from national surveys carried out by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), assessed death rates after taking into account education, income, and many other factors, including smoking, drinking, and obesity. It estimated that lack of health insurance causes 44,789 excess deaths annually.

Previous estimates from the IOM and others had put that figure near 18,000. The methods used in the current study were similar to those employed by the IOM in 2002, which in turn were based on a pioneering 1993 study of health insurance and mortality.

0 Replies

@Lash,

She is not a republican by any means. She has even worked with Bernie on several bills. I really wish you would get off this division thing you seem to have an obsession with.

Bernie has yet to come up with a convincing way to pay for his all of his many proposals.

Amy Klobuchar has some good ideas and she doesn't offer pie in sky ideas with no chance of passing or of being implemented.

Having said that, at the end of the day, I'll gladly vote for Sanders if he should win the democrat primary and hope with all my might that he wins against Trump. I don't doubt at all, he will whip Trump into the ground in the debates, I hope that will be enough win over those who are not already won over by Sanders.

If he should win and becomes President and God willing we are both still around and kicking, it will be interesting to see just how much his supposed revolution ushers in a way for all his programs to passed into law and not challenged by the conservative governors in the courts which are heavily republican right now and the foreseeable future.

My point is simply that I had all that hope with Obama and all his positive "yes we can." We all watched how forces against his programs worked against him and his programs were not as far left as Sanders. Republicans are more aggressive than democrats at fighting against something. Much more than they are at fighting for something.

If Sanders becomes President, I hope he shows some willingness to compromise on his proposals in an effort to get something passed and having a chance to stay passed.

2 Replies

@revelette3,

Quote:

She's quick and able to run with the big runners any day of the week.

You're absolutely right. I think if Biden hadn't decided to run she'd be much further ahead. That's what Carville was getting at:

Quote:

And then Biden gets in and blocks out good candidates like Cory Booker or Michael Bennet or Steve Bullock by occupying this mainstream lane. There just isn’t enough oxygen and they couldn’t get any traction. But these are serious people, professional people, and they could’ve delivered a winning message.

Having twenty-four people running at once for the same office really skews the process, even after the field shrinks.

Quote:

Not to mention, she doesn't sound like a broken record.

There's an art to sounding concerned, addressing problems, and proposing solutions. But when policies are distilled into predictable applause lines with little chance of enactment a rather cruel joke is being played on the electorate. Carville, again:

Quote:

We have candidates on the debate stage talking about open borders and decriminalizing illegal immigration. They’re talking about doing away with nuclear energy and fracking. You’ve got Bernie Sanders talking about letting criminals and terrorists vote from jail cells. It doesn’t matter what you think about any of that, or if there are good arguments — talking about that is not how you win a national election. It’s not how you become a majoritarian party.

For ****’s sake, we’ve got Trump at Davos talking about cutting Medicare and no one in the party has the sense to plaster a picture of him up there sucking up to the global elites, talking about cutting taxes for them while he’s talking about cutting Medicare back home. Jesus, this is so obvious and so easy and I don’t see any of the candidates taking advantage of it.

The Republicans have destroyed their party and turned it into a personality cult, but if anyone thinks they can’t win, they’re out of their damn minds.

0 Replies

@revelette3,

If the Klob worked with Bernie—how does it escape you that Bernie worked with the Klob? Bernie is the Amendment King and his fruitful cooperation with McCain and plenty of other republicans and moderates is written in as history for anyone who’s not avoiding the facts.

The same is true about Bernie’s researched plans to pay for these changes. You just don’t want to see it. I’ve brought the links about 20 times. You don’t want to know.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Well, then I would wish he would say that somehow in one of many repetitions of his programs. I would wish he would somehow say, even if we can't get all of what we want, at least we have a goal to work towards. I could behind a message like that. So far, I haven't heard it from him.

His research has been proven to not add up.

4 Replies

@revelette3,

What has Bernie done while in congress? Nothing. What will he do if elected president? Nothing. He has no backing in congress. He went get anything passed. I keep thinking about the trouble Obama had getting ten votes in his own party to pass Obama care and he was fairly popular in his party. Bernie has about 20% of the popular Dem vote who want vote for anyone but Bernie. He is a drag on the deems and INS backers are worse than the republicans. Just listen to Lash if you think I am blowing hot air. Bernie has all by himself practically destroyed the democratic party.

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Trump won because the democrat party had devolved into nothing but dividing people by their demographics.

That’s sexist! That’s racist! They’re Nazis! Democrats left the middle and lower classes.

Fewer and fewer people vote because they had nothing to vote for. I’m not Trump is not a rallying cry.

Bernie is reviving the democrat party. He’s bringing in kids, Muslims, immigrants of every background—he’s expanding the party toward liberal and independent voters.

Get out of your own way and see what’s happening.

0 Replies

@revelette3,

You just blab but you don’t care if you’re lying. I hate that.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/us-policy/2019/05/28/bernie-sanders-backs-policies-dramatically-shift-corporate-power-us-workers/%3foutputType=amp

Bernie’s plans are ALL research-based.

1. Bernie knows how to make regular workers benefit more from the success they create through their work.

1 Reply

@revelette3,

2. Bernie’s Thurgood Marshall plan for Education: RESEARCH-BASED

https://berniesanders.com/en/issues/reinvest-in-public-education/

0 Replies

3. M4A
Excerpt:
That's a central finding of a new study by Harvard University researchers published Monday in the peer-reviewed journal JAMA Internal Medicine, examining 20 years of government data between 1998 and 2017.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.commondreams.org/news/2020/01/27/medicare-all-what-patients-need-new-harvard-study-shows-even-those-private-insurance%3famp

Also:

The study found that, overall, the share of adults aged 18-64 who were unable to afford to see a doctor rose by nearly a third—from 11% to nearly 16%—between 1998 and 2017. Among adults with health insurance, there was a 60 percent increase—7% to nearly 12%—in inability to afford a doctor visit.

"Inability to see a physician because of cost also became more frequent among most clinical risk groups, especially those with coverage," the study found. "In 2017, the proportion of persons with cardiovascular disease who were unable to afford a physician visit was 25.6%, 5.9 percentage points... higher than in 1998."

0 Replies

Congress passes bill that would strengthen labor movement

Congress has passed what is considered one of the most significant bills to strengthen workers' abilities to organize or unionize in the past 80 years.

Quote:

Earlier this week, House democrats were applauding the passage of a bill that would strengthen the federal laws that protect a workers' right to join a union.

It's called the "Pro Act" or Protecting the Right to Organize.

Those in favor of it believe it will go a long way in protecting employees rights and ensuring they receive a fair wage, and fair treatment in the work place.

Others believe it will never become law because it won't pass the Senate.

Congress has passed what is considered one of the most significant bills to strengthen workers' abilities to organize or unionize in the past 80 years.

It's what's known as the Pro Act or Protecting the Right to Organize Act, to give workers more leverage during work disputes.

Darwin Cooper is the Vice-President of UAW Local 1112 in Lordstown, "You have rights when you have a union, you can't be discriminated against. You can't be fired without cause. You can't be bullied by management. And I think unions are a blessing for people."

The bill would also allow the National Labor Relations Board to fine companies $50,000 dollars per violation, if they fire a worker for attempting to start a union.

But some don't think the bill will ever become law because the Republican controlled Senate and business groups have argued against it.

"They have no use for unions," Cooper said.

The Youngstown/Warren Regional Chamber of Commerce declined to comment on the PRO Act at this time.

However, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce responded to our request for comment saying:

WE ARE DISAPPOINTED TO SEE THE HOUSE APPROVE THE PRO ACT. WE BELIEVE THIS LEGISLATION WILL HARM WORKERS, EMPLOYERS, AND THE ECONOMY. IT TAKES AWAY PRIVATE BALLOTS IN UNION ORGANIZING ELECTIONS, AND THREATENS WORKERS WITH THE LOSS OF THEIR JOB IF THEY DON'T PAY UNION DUES.

- Suzanne Clark
U.S. Chamber President

But whatever happens, it's a chance for decades old labor laws to be updated.

wfmj

Sounds great — it's about time. So, where is this legislation going? Nowhere. Not as long as the Republicans control the Senate. And unless the Democratic presidential candidate has sufficiently long coattails to preserve the House majority and take control of the Senate, legislation like this, and the more ambitious plans proposed by some of the candidates, have no chance of succeeding.

1 Reply

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EQRjLVGWAAECmo1?format=jpg&name=small

I’m having a hard time believing this. How to find out?

2 Replies

@Lash,

I mean, you can’t release the name of a teen, so it seems somebody went to a lot of trouble... not sure.

0 Replies

@Lash,

The ‘newspaper headline’ is verified to be faked. Faked stuff like this is assured to make the campaign season even more fun than expected./sarcasm

1 Reply

@Lash,

no joke

0 Replies

@Lash,

The cost of Sanders' agenda -- possibly $60 trillion -- would set a peacetime US record

Look no one doubts all the things Sander's wishes to improve, need improvement; including Obamacare. However, there is no reason to go hog wild. Just try to be realistic.

4 Replies

@hightor,

That's sure to get a veto from Plump.

0 Replies

@revelette3,

Finding more value in Americans’ lives by taxing billionaires and slowing down our MIC isn’t hog wild. This country has been brainwashed to believe it’s radical when the truth is —this utter bullshit that we’ve been conditioned to accept is radical: people can’t afford to live, so they just die. Too bad for them. Just move on.

We can afford to destroy the world five times over, but we need to authorize 76 billion more for our war machine.

Completely insane.

At least, take a look at how much money we have and what we spend it on.

Billionaires and multimillion dollar corporations MUST PAY THEIR SHARE. We have enough here for free tuition like we had in the 70s. We have enough resources for everyone to have Medicare. The problem is the wealthiest and those they enrich to sell their narrative just don’t want us to have it.

1 Reply

@revelette3,

It would be a wonderful record to set.

0 Replies

Quote:

(...)

The $97.5 trillion price tag is made up mostly of the costs of Sanders’s three most ambitious proposals. Sanders concedes that his Medicare For All plan would increase federal spending by “somewhere between $30 and $40 trillion over a 10-year period.” He pledges to spend $16.3 trillion on his climate plan. And his proposal to guarantee all Americans a full-time government job paying $15 an hour, with full benefits, is estimated to cost $30.1 trillion. The final $11.1 trillion includes $3 trillion to forgive all student loans and guarantee free public-college tuition—plus $1.8 trillion to expand Social Security, $2.5 trillion on housing, $1.6 trillion on paid family leave, $1 trillion on infrastructure, $800 billion on general K-12 education spending, and an additional $400 billion on higher public school teacher salaries.

(...)

With more than a year to go [now nine months] before the 2020 presidential election, Sanders may well top $100 trillion in promised new government spending. He should be pressed to explain the feasibility of his agenda and how he would finance it.

city-journal

1 Reply

Progressives (Liberals)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know