Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

112 - Postgame ft. Harvey J. Kaye (Patreon)

Published:
2019-10-30 01:13:59
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

Thanks, patrons!

Files

Previews only

Postgame -112- ft. Harvey J. Kaye

Thanks for being patrons!

Comments

Angela

If we could get a shout out of solidarity for the protests in Melbourne taking part in the IMARC blockade (international mining and resources conference)

Francisco Garcia

Prof. Kaye started a conversation regarding the between closeness between Jefferson and Thomas Paine. Michael you interjected your opinion about Jefferson. Paine has for years been one of my touchstones. I’d would have loved to hear Harvey’s response. FYI: Prof. Kaye and I are the same age ( I’ve been in this game) my entire adult life. I wasn’t aware of their closeness.

Eric Osgoood

Tuned in late. Enjoyed the debunk as always, but obviously i especially appreciate when y'all cover m4a. In addition to prof burgis's solid debunk, would just add that the dynamic between private and public health in 'public option' goes the other way too. The sicker more costly patients get shuffled into the public system, which is underfunded due to more wealthy people opting for private ins, so hospitals and doctors provide under and even uncompensated care, so they in turn negotiate higher prices from private ins, who are happy to do it, they just raise premiums on their enrollees, which makes everyone pissed at the public option, its popularity drops, and it gets defeated. It's a self defeating strategy. Plus most docs won't take patients with poorly compensating plans, so medicare option patients have to find charity clinics and comm hlth ctrs just like current medicaid patients

Jeff Prillaman

I have had Medicare since 1996. I have never found a doctor that does not accept Medicare. I have never heard from anyone I know or have met who encountered a doctor that does not accept Medicare. The payment rates are lower, but EVERY bill gets paid. The elderly and disabled are a huge portion of healthcare business.

Keith Massey

Bernie need to stress the additional services that will be covered by Medicare, e.g. hearing, vision, and prescriptions, I hear my fellow seniors complaining about the $2,000 that they have to pay for their hearing aids. I think one way to communicate the improvements, would be that the services covered and paid for would be similar to those of the Veterans Administration, I think many boomers would understand the advantages of M4A using this approach. Also the elimination the need for a Medicare supplement would substantially reduce Medicare recipients cost.

Bijou Smith
>>28413141

That's the way it works due to the present day psychology of "government funding via taxation" --- but that is a myth which causes an austerity mindset. In reality, a fiat currency government has unlimited spending capacity, the current constraints are artifical. The only real constraints on the governemtn surplus to the public (also called the national debt) is real resource limits and inflation. M4A will be highly deflationary, an there are already plenty of doctors nurses and hospitals so there is no reason on earth why people on M4A need to be given sub-standard healthcare. The Congress only needs to approve the spending, and it can be done, free healthcare, period. It's a no brainer. If you think taxes fund the federal government, think again: every dollar in taxes you pay not going into bank debt is money that came from government spending. Government deficit = private savings --- dollar for dollar. If you bother to learn MMT all of this will be clear. The reason we do not have free healthcare is purely psychological, it is a misunderstanding of what money is in the fiat currency world. Government funding does not require an insurance nor a trust fund scheme, becasue government cheques NEVER BOUNCE. Social Security should not be thought of as a fund. When SS goes broke, the cheques will still be cashed, the only thing that happens is the trust fund goes negative, and that's just a number, it means nothing for a government that issues it's own currency. It does not matter whether it is positive or negative. The negative sign on a government fund is merely fear porn, it is used to needlessly scare people. Do not buy in to that psychology.

Bijou Smith
>>28423369

Do not buy in to the rhetoric about taxes funding M4A. Every dollar the government spends but does not tax back is your savings (or some other households or firms savings). Taxes only serve to make the currency of value in demand) or to limit inflation. When a government can issue otherwise worthless fiat currency tokens, taxes are what create value for the currency. But having legal authority to issue fiat money means the Congress is truly unconstrained in spending power, the current constraints are psychological and artificial, and legalistic, they can easily be removed by Congress. That would make M4A not a public insurance scheme but actual free healthcare. Period. The "cost" of free healthcare merely is a shift in resources away form some other sector of the economy. Also, the government can always fund the VA, in perpetuity, unless it returns to a gold standard ad runs out of gold. You cannot ever run out of a fiat currency if you are the monopoly issuer, since it is a legal construct, much like an IOU used as a tax credit. Remember, the Congress/Fed neither has money nor does not have money, they can create money at will by approving electronic account transactions a the Fed. So with M4A, debt cancellation, the GND, social security, all of it, it is ALL never a funding issue, it is a resource prioritization issue. We have finite human and material resources, a government budget is how we choose to move those resources around, the money is never a real issue, thinking money is scarce for the only legal issuer of the dollar is just a construct, coming from a flawed neoliberal mindset. Money is only an issue for those who cannot legally create money (private households and firms). So TRUTH is Bernie can pay for anything he wants when demanding Congress spends, the problem will be whether, (a) he can muster the resources to use the spending, and (b) do so without creating a supply crisis and inflation. M4A will not create a supply crisis, and is already well resourced at present, and in fact will require fewer employed, so M4A will be deflationary, and will likely need tax cuts to prevent severe deflation. THINK ABOUT THAT!!! Medicare for All will require either tax cuts or raising deficit spending to create jobs for the insurance industry lay-off workers. (M4A goes together perfectly with #GreenNewDeal and a #JobGuarantee, since GND and JG will give people those jobs once M4A makes insurance workers redundant. No taxes required. Got it?! NO TAXES REQUIRED!!) Bernie can make the tax code more progressive, but that's for a different reason, it is not for government funding, it is to limit the power of the wealthy, and as an automatic currency inflation stabilizer.

Bijou Smith

Ben Burgis gives ok debunk. However it is missing a second HUGE laughable fact about the NYT "argument". Local States like Vermont cannot create money, so they NEED taxes for funding. So a local state will always struggle to fund free healthcare, while a Federal government never has a money issue. The Federal government does not require taxes for funding, since it is the sole monopoly legal issuer of the currency. Congress can write money into existence with legislation (it's called a budget) and issue the money at virtually no cost by incrementing private bank accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank. M4A does not require any taxes at all. It might require lowering taxes to offset the massive deflationary event of losing thousands of insurance industry jobs and lowering business costs. The real cost of Federally funding free healthcare is the cost of shifting real resources in the economy, in the case of M4A is the cost of thousands of newly unemployed workers (from the now redundant health insurance industry), which is a significant cost (called unemployment) causing massive deflation (due to lost wages) and so to "pay for" M4A the government will need to either cut taxes or raise deficit spending (either will work to stop deflation, but raising spending to create GND public sector jobs is preferable IMO).

Bijou Smith

@24:50 WTF??? For gaddsake Brooksy, stopping automation is the LAST thing a leftist democratic socialism wants. You need to increase automation and give workers less hours of work but pay them the same. Every machine automation story should be a win for workers. Those are the regulations. Richard Wolff talks about this all the frickin time, have you not been watching Economic Update? So the regulation is: no worker can be fired by being made redundant due to automation. There is always other work that can be done, always. It takes extraordinary lack of imagination to not see how a worker with freed up time can benefit a company, by doing safety inspections, making the workplace more comfortable, doing public outreach and community service work on behalf of the company, doing more education on company time, the list is endless. Yang and the Libertarians always think "work" is doing stuff for the boss. We need to quit that framing and think of work in far more leftist liberal terms, not libertarian terms. Of course, my favourite is that workers can quit their jobs if they don't get meaningful work, and do work they love on a federally funded but locally administered #JobGuarantee program at a living wage.

Bijou Smith

@29:00 Yang is a moron, and so are you guys sometimes, face it. VAT tax on luxury goods is not itself regressive, but it does depress sales for those goods a bit, which is deflationary. Warren's corporate taxes on the other hand ARE regressive, because companies always pass off costs onto consumers. The government is not funded by taxes. Why don't you folks know this? If the Fed wants to give everyone $1000 they can do it right now by pressing keystrokes to increment bank accounts (or simply $1000 tax credit everyone at the IRS), provided they get Congressional approval. No extra bureaucracy with VAT is necessary. UBI is just a tax credit, you can do that more efficiently by just cutting all FICA taxes, that way the idle rich who are not getting wages won't get any credits, so it acts like more of a socially progressive #BasicIncome than a stupid UBI.

Joel Smith

Great post game. Exactly why I’m a patron