Proof Positive the Public Option Will Lead to Single Payer

President Obama has said repeatedly that those who claim that healthcare reform will ultimately lead to a government take-over of the health system are not telling the truth. So are these Democrat supporters of the President's plan not telling the truth?

• Category

  News & Politics

[morgenr]

Hey librophile, why don't you tone it down a bit. You have the right to express your views but you lose all credibility when you just echo liberal talking points IN ALL CAPS!!!!!

There are no insurance companies behind this video...or any of the videos I've posted. I'm just a normal citizen who is opposed to the idea of the government controlling our health care system. And there is no question that the public option was intended as a backdoor to a single payer system.

[Screamingguitar1]

1. Van Jones: Communist

2. Valery Jarett: Communist

3. Obama: Member of New Party Socialist / Communist

4. Kathleen Sebelius: Communist

Stop This Socialist TAKEOVER! NO COMMUNISTS IN GOVERNMENT!

[footblock2]

A right is something that cannot be taken away by your government or anyone or the law/constitution is violated. (ala: life, liberty, pursuit of happiness)....healthcare can be taken away at the whim of government, it is not a right, they'll just decide how much you'll get.

You are very afraid of BIG (anything private) but at least with private entities you have a choice. With BIG GOVERNMENT there is no choice but what the all mighty bureaucrats decide is best for you

[A. Jacobs]

Only 9 million people live in Sweden. And they're a mostly homogenous bunch, ethnically and culturally. What works in a tiny country without the same problems of illegal immigration and generational poverty does not automatically work in a massive country.

[westerleighroad]

It is possible that Obamacare will not last long but will lead to a single payer system. But a single payer system will not last long either. The problem is money. America is broke, and there is no reason to believe that a single payer system will be any less expensive than Obamacare. With either single payer or Obamacare, it will not be long before Washington runs out of money and defaults.

[rhsimard]

In a few words: unintended consequences.

(Also, dynamic scoring, as applied to this and the federal government's fiscal state in general)

[chuck3377]

If we had single payer then 50 million Americans without health care would have coverage. That is bad, health care and helping ppl is evil. Constant War and death are good. Killing ppl is good, helping people is bad, don't you know anything?

[rpare666]

I'm in

[whoo689]

It's called COMPROMISE. That's the name of the game in politics! If you don't know that, you're either a little kid or a moron. LOTS of times in politics people propose or settle for more moderate measures when they really want more radical stuff to be implemented. It DOES NOT necessarily mean that the moderate proposals will automatically turn into the radical stuff.  You've gotta be an IDIOT to assume that!

This video is utterly pointless and just a stupid attack.

[whoo689]

You could make a video like this about ANYTHING that's proposed at first by Congressmen or presidents. I could easily show a video of Bush proposing in 2001 that we invade Afghanistan and then fast-forward to people talking about how Iraq might be the next target and say, "AHA! This is really just a pretext for a bogus invasion of Iraq. It's not about security." What's the point of this stupid video? Ooh, some of the people who favor a public option want single payer. big whoop

[whoo689]

If states like Sweden can easily afford "socialism" on a massive scale, why can't we?? Scandinavian states are consistently ranked very high on SO MANY MEASURES of prosperity, economic growth and development! They have plenty of economic freedom and business growth (as well as high incomes for the average person), yet they STILL have strong social welfare. If they can do it, we should easily be able to. Our economy's not gonna die or anything. for christ sake

[whoo689]

In some nations the waiting times and inefficiencies are much shorter than in others, but it's not like our system isn't riddled with problems as well. Overall, I think every major HC system has a fair share of flaws and good points. No one system is TRULY "much better" than the other in the long-term. The trade-offs aren't nearly as large as Republicans make it out to be. I think we could easily afford UHC. $14 Trillion econ, why not?

[whoo689]

Overall, I really don't think a single-payer or other kind of universal coverage system, such as the types in Switzerland and Germany, would REALLY be much worse than what we have now. I've looked at the data and evidence, and a lot of the crap right-wingers peddle about OTHER HC systems being apocalyptic are just phony talking points. The fact is, the vast majority of people DO get coverage when they need it even in single-payer states! Yes, unfortunately, there are waiting times, although