well the problem is not what hes doing but how hes doing it. e.g. drugprices: his way is top down, more money and power to the government so they can basically set the prices something something total government power for some kind of imaginary utopia that will never happen, while a more sensible way to lower the prices would be to just stop protecting patents, and therefore the monopoly, as well as ending other methods of propping up monopolies, like import regulations and so on.
Naw dog. Haven't you heard? No way a government could ever handle running health services. (Please God don't look into any other modern country it will absolutely ruin my argument)
Not a single rep voted for it from either party.
If this bill did pass, US med production and distribution would be extremely limited. It would destroy most of the pharmaceutical industry overnight. They never include this in the headline
5210 was about price matching medicare drug costs to the VA saving the US 900B. That was voted on 99-1.
There was a recent one in april of 2026 which was 49-49 about international price matching which is an interesting take because you assume that these companies should operate the same in that stock buybacks and incentives are a higher priority than R&D and that would actually need to change. I can agree that isnt a change you make overnight without some support for the overhaul but im tired of my healthcare being someone's business success story or an investment strategy banking on my death or denial of service.
That is what you got from that? Not that a whole fucking party that calls itself "democratic" and that pretends to be left wing and representing the middle class and the poor, sided with the big pharma and insurance companies?
The pharmaceutical industry deserves it. Meds are artificially inflated in price because of insurance. Insurance deserves to fail too. We need a complete upheaval of everything, but unfortunately that wonāt happen.
Thatās a fair point. Itās just disgusting how much they up charge because of insurance when it doesnāt cost nearly that much to actually produce these medications.
Iām a nurse, so Iāve unfortunately seen how the insurance-run healthcare system affects people firsthand and it can be really sad and jarring. Especially people who come in so sick on deaths doorstep because they donāt have adequate coverage and canāt afford to go see a primary care physician when their ailments only begin to show up. Or when I go to the pharmacy and overhear an older person say that they wonāt buy their meds because they cost $450 for the month and they canāt afford that. Itās just really upsetting. I really wish we had universal healthcare but weāre a long way from that. Even in NY (Iām also in NY, not the city).
His net worth is estimated at somewhere around $3mil. A lot of retirement calculators say your savings and investments should be close to $1mil to even retire at 65 in this country. Bernie Sanders isnāt rich, heās literally just wealthy enough to retire comfortably and heās still working for progressive causes at 85. A ton of workers close to retirement that havenāt lost their asses in the market or on a bad house deal late in life are close to $1mil net worth, and literally being able to retire should not be our barometer for what makes a person unethically rich.
Universal healthcare would cost less per capita than the current healthcare system. If you doubt this compare the per capita healthcare costs in 2025 between the US and any other country with socialized healthcare.
Those numbers would be the same if we had universal healthcare. The entire concept of medical insurance wouldnāt need to exist and a parasitic industry would be eliminated, thus massively reducing costs.
The net cost of care would be reduced for everyone it would just shift from a health insurance expense and care expense to a tax expense. This would have a variety of benefits including the elimination of employment based insurance, which speaking from personal experience, can trap you in a miserable career.
The 2 legit arguments against this are the disruption to the economy caused by undermining the need for several Fortune 500 companies and the potential to see a decrease in quality of care. For that latter point, the overwhelming majority of people would likely see an increase in quality since any care > no care.
Edit: this a common thing - the Republican Party hasnāt had any actually fiscally conservative policies in decades. They just have great marketing.
You're assuming that eliminating private insurance automatically makes universal healthcare cheaper, but that's not necessarily true. Hospitals, physicians, medications, staffing, and infrastructure still cost money, and expanding coverage increases demand for services and also costs more money.
Based on the available data private insurance has made everything astronomically more expensive.
If you and I have a business what do you think is cheaper?
A. You and I interfacing directly for all business
B. You and I doing business with an intermediary that profits off of every single piece of business we touch
Eliminating private insurance doesn't eliminate the need for an intermediary. Government still has to collect funding, administer coverage, process claims, and reimburse providers.
Thereās not enough money toā¦ checks notesā¦ cut the cost of something?
Americans pay, on average, 178% to 322% (generics versus brand names) more than every other industrialized nation in the world for the same drugs, many of which are developed and manufactured in the U.S. with taxpayer dollars.
So Iām not sure what in the world youāre going on about when you say thereās ānot enough moneyā to cut drug prices.
This is the lunacy typical of those opposed to changing the failed American healthcare system, which is STILL based on a WWII wage control system of employer-issued health insurance.
Our failed system is a one-of-a-kind in the world, and costs 50% than the second-most expensive country on a per-person basis, all while achieving significantly worse results.
Almost 1 dollar in 5 of US GDP is spent on healthcare because the SYSTEM will never work and was never intended to work. It's just a Band-Aid slapped on wage controls.
Without the innovation driven by Americaās healthcare system, medical technology and treatments worldwide would be far less advanced, and patients everywhere would ultimately face worse outcomes.
Like, if you were trying to topple another country, having their populace or even citizen spies is very valuable.
"This is my favorite... Russians claiming they don't like russia and want to help the US stop Putin"
Like, yeah. That's great. It's also not hypocritical because in the same way Putin is bad for Russia, this system is also bad for the wealthy.
I could take all my money and be in the top 1% of Romania but Romania isn't a country I want to live in. I would rather be middle class in a great country than upper class in a bad one... and the wealthy harm the country.
What does this have to do with Russia? Are you confused? Bernie used to tell us Millionaires were bad before he become one, and now heās telling us billionaires are bad. Not sure where Russia came into the discussion
The comparison is that just because someone is wealthy, doesn't mean they aren't valuable or hypocritical in advocating for policies that threaten that wealth.
In the same way that just because someone is Russian, doesn't mean they aren't valuable or hypocritical in advocating for policies that threaten Putin's government.
Yeah, the Russia thing confuses me too. What confuses me more is the idiotic take that Bernie switched from saying millionaires to billionaires because they think Bernie is trying to exclude himself or protect his money. When it became possible for working class people to earn and save a million dollars, the language should obvious change to aim at the executive class that add zero value to society.
Bernie has not profited from his office like virtually every other legislator in DC. He was literally one of the poorest senators before he exploded in popularity and sold some books. Do dumb dumbs think the tax reforms Bernie advocates for will have carve-outs so he gets to keep all his money?
Lol Bernie is worth like 2-3 million. That's not that much, especially following a lifetime of public service.
The median net worth for members of the Senate Democratic Caucus is more than $2.9 million, while for Senate Republicans, itās nearly $5.7 million... doubtless because it pays to advocate for the rich.
11
u/Strict_Ad4121 13h ago
Sorry Bernie. Is it greed that keeps people from doing the right thing? I think it isā¦