Elizabeth Warren’s BRILLIANT Medicare For All Plan

>>Elizabeth Warren has been facing a lot
of questions over the past few week. Since the Democratic debate at the very least,
about how she plans to pay for her Medicare for All plan and what exactly it will look
like. And that is because Medicare for All is a
benefit that you would get, and so you need to explain how it’s paid for. If it’s bombs, it’s free. You don’t have talk about it. But if it’s Medicare, we really need to know. And so now her plan is available, or at least
a proposal about her plan. It’s not the actual legislation, but she does
have a post that’s like 20 pages long about a lot of the details in terms of the financing
and everything. So, there is a good amount of good here, there’s
also some bad, we’re gonna cover both. First of all, in terms of substantively, how
much Medicare for All is it? Well she says, under my plan, Medicare for
All will cover the full list of benefits outlined in the Medicare for All Act, including long-term
care, audio, vision, and dental benefits. That obviously is intended to match the version
that Bernie has put out. Then his substantive Medicare for All that
actually not only gives you everything that Medicare currently provides but actually would
expand the coverage the things like a vision, dental, those sorts of things. So, overall it is, before we get to the financing
and everything it is substantive healthcare>>Yes, all right. First thoughts on it, the most important,
it’s real Medicare for All. Phew, like super worried that she was gonna
listen to advisers going, gotta get closer to the Democratic Party and everything is
just unrealistic. And let’s do, like, Medicare for All but for
some, and for others not so much. And let’s find some compromise on top of compromise,
and I’m positive that she was it had at least some voices counseling her in that direction. She didn’t do that, this is actually Medicare
for All. It ends private insurance, period. And it brings us to a system where we would
all get guaranteed health care, we would get all the benefits that John talked about, and
we would save money. Now, when it comes to how she’s financing
it->>I’m gonna have all the details on it. No, I know. My overall analysis is, I think it’s borderline
brilliant. And so, John mentioned some downsides, I’m
not even sure I see the downsides. And so, we’ll talk her through, we’ll have
a conversation about it. But, she did it. It’s a real Medicare for All, and she clearly
pays for it.>>Yeah, yeah. This was so smart, because now in the debates
what she can do, and I agree, this is Medicare for All. But she can say when she’s being pressed on,
where are we gonna get the money from and I know we’re gonna talk about that in a second. And, what does it mean? What are the parameters of this Medicare for
All that you’re proposing, she can say, read the plan. I put it out there. And if you didn’t do your job journalists
to read the plan, then I’m not the one who should be responsible for the fact that you’re
not doing your work. And it’s out here for everybody in the public
to see into comb through it. Which she starts with is such a great story
about her father and his heart attack and how that led them not only to go to the brink
emotionally, but also financially and how this is such a common story for Americans. But that set the stage for her to really be
committed to interrogate, what is happening in this industry and how can we radically
change it? And the reason why I’m not necessarily surprised
of how this turned out is that, Elizabeth Warren, I’ve known some of the work that she’s
done especially in her interest around economic policy for all middle class folks. She’s worked closely with the Roosevelt Institute,
which is a think tank that writes about the rules of the economy and wants to shift them
dramatically in the favor of average Americans. And so, I expected something like this to
emerge, but I didn’t expect how detailed and how she was gonna answer her critics in a
powerful succinct way.>>Yeah, and I will say on top of that, the
political framing throughout is excellent.>>Phenomenal.>>Makes it nearly impossible to argue with
from a conservative perspective. Okay, John?>>Yeah, so I’m gonna jump into how she’s
gonna pay for. I will say, because many people are gonna
be still suspicious and I get that. No matter who becomes president, even if it’s
Bernie Sanders, passing Medicare for All is gonna be a monumental struggle. And so, who it is that is pushing for is gonna
be really important, perhaps most important to some people. And if you were predisposed to believe that
she just can’t be trusted on it, then there’s nothing that can be written in this document
that’s gonna change your mind at that point. And, I understand, if it comes down to it,
I have much more faith in Bernie Sanders to have the organizing ability and the stick-to-it-iveness
to push difficult legislation through. But we are analyzing this on the substance
of what’s included there. And if you’re knee-jerk reaction is to say,
well it’s really easy to write anything in a proposal, I will counter by saying, I’ve
looked at a lot of people in the democratic primary and apparently it isn’t that easy
because they can’t put together a proposal like this.>>Now, let’s get into the actual financing. So, she talks about different ways that healthcare
could be paid for. The first option is the current system, which
costs $52 trillion over this certain amount of time, and leaves tens of millions of people
without health insurance. Option 2 is switching to Medicare for All,
which will cost just about the same money, a little bit less perhaps, for a number of
reasons we’ll get into. She goes on to say, the $11 trillion in household
insurance and out-of-pocket expenses projected under our current system goes right back into
the pockets of America’s working people under this system. And we make up the difference with targeted
spending cuts and new taxes on giant corporations and the richest 1% of Americans, and by cracking
down on tax evasion and fraud. Not one penny in middle-class tax increases. Now if you think that that is gonna stop the
questions of the debates in terms of, are we gonna raise taxes on middle class people? Of course it’s not, Jake Tapper get rid of
that question many times. But anyway, what is that actually mean? She made references to tax increases on some
people. Well, she proposes a financial transactions
tax of 0.1% of the value of every stock, bond, or derivatives transactions to raise $800
billion. Then she adds a systemic risk fee on financial
institutions with more than $50 billion in assets that will raise 100 billion more. She adds another 2.9 trillion in corporate
taxes by ending accelerated costs recovery and imposing a 35 percent minimum tax on foreign
earnings. Her wealth tax now changes as a part of this
plan, it now goes up to 6%, which will raise another $1 trillion. Warren also proposes taxing capital gains
for the top 1% at the same rate as normal income. And doing so on an annual basis rather than
just when a sale is made to raise $2 trillion. Warren proposes a massive increase in IRS
enforcement aimed at reducing the tax avoidance rate from 15% down to 10% which would raise
$2.3 trillion. There’s a little bit more which we will get
into. But what I like about the financing is, it
shows that you can pay for this, which we shouldn’t need to be shown because we know
that many countries around the world already do. But, also accomplishes a number of different
important goals to finance it like lowering tax avoidance by incredibly wealthy people. Is it objective good by itself? Not to mention that the change to foreign
earnings, the systemic risk fee, the wealth tax. I mean, these are good things in terms of
income inequality and other things, even absent their ability to pay for something like Medicare
for All.>>Okay, so let me break down a bunch of things
that I was looking for and what did I find. So, first of all, in terms of how to pay for
it, she was super realistic. And, so for example, the taxable instead of
people are doing in increasing IRS enforcement to raise more money. What I was looking for is, is she going to
say that we can make up all the money that people normally cheat on their taxes on? Cuz if she said that, I would’ve thought that’s
unrealistic. So she’s stretching things to try to get it
done. She didn’t, she was very conservative on that. She just said, we can raise enough money from
that to make up a third of the money that people are cheating on by not paying their
taxes, only a third. And we would’ve only gotten to a point where
we would be half as good as the United Kingdom in catching tax cheats. And she put down specific numbers, which are
absolutely true, that for every dollar you put into the IRS, the government spends on
IRS, we get back 6 dollars. Now the reason we don’t do that is because
Republicans and corporate Democrats don’t wanna catch tax cheats cuz those are their
donors.>>And themselves.>>And then in some cases, that as well. So, through every step of this, it was not
only very realistic, showed you the exact numbers on how you pay for it. And then also, she framed it well in terms
of, how about you, guys, what do you get out of it? So she points out that the average American
family of four pays $12,378 every year in healthcare cross. That’s co-pays, premiums, deductibles and
what you pay into your own insurance through an employer, right? So everybody that works at a company, your
employer pays part of the cost, you pay part of the cost. When you put all that in, it’s over $12,000,
that’s gone, that’s gone under this plan. Okay, so, everybody just say $12,000. Now the second part of it is, the insurance
part that you’re chipping in through your employer, that then becomes a raise that you
get from your employer. That’s a double raise and then so you say,
well okay, how do you pay for it and then she explains exactly how you do it. So one of the things she talks about is, the
bureaucracy costs and private insurance is about 12% of the cost of the system. And Medicare that already exists is 2.3%. So the difference is trillions of dollars. So when you go to Medicare for All and you
lower those, well you just saved trillions of dollars. And she goes through trillions by trillions
by trillions showing you exactly how she’s paying for it. The only part of the paying for it that I
balked at a little bit, and now I’m more concerned than Warren is in this regard is paying for
capital gains yearly as opposed to when you sell something. I know that there’s a good progressive argument
for that. I think that enforcement’s a little hard to
do. I’m not perfectly sold on that. But my God, we’re talking about around the
edges here, right? So, she nailed most of it. And when they go, I kept thinking as I’m reading
this whole thing. When Buttigieg or Biden or Trump goes to argue
against this, their gonna get slaughtered. Because she’s gonna say, so you want the average
American to pay that $12,000? Because that’s the current statement. Just say it, it’s okay, no problem, that’s
your choice. You’re saying the average American should
pay the $12,000, so why is it really Medicare for All? So Buttigieg says, I’m doing Medicare for
blah, blah, blah, right? And what does that mean? He says, no, no, I still want you to pay,
the co-pays and deductibles to premiums. But I’m gonna have you pay the government
and have that be a public option. Or you could pay all that stuff to private
insurers and it keeps a private insurance system intact. That’s useless, okay?>>Yeah.>>In this case, she says, no, you don’t have
to pay for any of that, right? We’re gonna raise the money through other
means and she explains meticulously how. So it’s a real Medicare for All. And when Buttigieg says, no, I wanna defend
the current system where 87 million people are either uninsured or under insured. 37 million people don’t buy prescription drugs
they need cuz they can’t afford it. 36 million people don’t get treatment that
they know they need, that doctors told them they need, cuz they can’t afford it. Let alone all the bankruptcies. When the Buttigiegs and the Bidens of the
world try to defend that, they’re gonna get politically hammered. And so, I think that with this proposal, I
know it’s a bold thing to say, but she’s cut off the conservative flank of the Democratic
party, they’re done for. So I think it’s Warren versus Bernie going
forward, cuz they both believe in Medicare for All. Fighting against this from a conservative
perspective is gonna be a fools errand.>>Right, and I’m just gonna bring up a stat
and then give another sort of framing on the finances. So, the other part of the numbers that you
mentioned, it’s there on her fact sheet. 40 million people don’t go see the doctor
because they can’t afford to per year when they need to, to get the tests that they need. So also imagine the amount of health cost
savings that we have when we have a healthy public. And that’s the other thing that the expenses
are going towards is emergency procedures, overcrowded ERs, and these are things that
this could solve for. The other thing that I love that she does,
we always talk about how people don’t ask where the money’s gonna come from corporate
welfare. Nobody really cared or asked about Obama and
Bush bailing out the banks, and where that came from, our tax dollars. But she also held the military industrial
complex accountable in this. So part of what she is going to reign spending
on is the defense industry. And so she said, since the 9/11 attacks, the
United States has appropriated $2 trillion to fund combat and counter-terrorism operations
around the world via the Overseas Contingency Operations Fund. And so that amount is $116 billion per year,
she’s proposing to cut that. Imagine how much we would save when we also
pull from these industries that aren’t doing anything for us. And they are taking our tax dollars. We don’t ask how we are funding the military
or how we are funding corporate greed. We just always ask about the things that actually
is the most imperative in our lives. And it’s funny that you bring Buttigieg because,
I don’t know folks no but Buttigieg’s father is a pre-eminent scholar on Gramsci. He translates Gramsci. And Gramsci’s like a godfather in communist
socialist stud, so he clearly made calculations because he was exposed to Gramsci’s thinking
via his father. And, I hope that that does wash away that
tide of the Democratic Party and especially young folks who think that they could masquerade
as Democrat wall as opposing espousing conservative values.>>Yeah, all right, last thing, guys. One other part of the proposals that I loved,
it shows that she’s a true progressive. Now you could, by the way, if you say, no,
I think Bernie can get it done better. He has a higher likelihood of passing it with
putting grassroots pressure, etc. That is a perfectly fair thing to think. So, and Bernie is the one who wrote the damn
bill in the first place. He’s the one-
>>He’s the one that we’re talking about.>>He’s exactly, he’s been pushing it forward
for 40 years and you wanna vote for Bernie based on that, that makes perfect sense. Okay, but the thing you cannot say is that
Warren is not a real progressive. This is massively progressive. And on top of the cutting the defense spending
and charging more for the banks and etc., is she brings corporate tax rates back up. Now, you’ll know a fake progressive when they
say, yes, these corporate tax cuts were terrible, we need to bring them back up to 25%. You’re like, wait a minute, they weren’t 25%,
they were 35%. And Warren says, yeah, we’re gonna bring them
back up to 35%. Not only that, we’re gonna go all across the
world and say, hey, you wanna hide your money in the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Netherlands,
wherever you wanna hide it? No, you’re gonna pay 35% no ands, ifs or buts. Wall Street would read this and they will
be furious because it has a financial transaction tax. It holds corporations accountable and wipes
out the healthcare industry that’s been bilking us for trillions of dollars, sucking off of
us, the American people for trillions upon trillions of dollars and putting it into their
pockets. She talks about how the the top 62 CEOs got
$1.1 billion in pay last year. Okay, that’s all coming out of our pocket
for no damn reason. Wall Street will hate this. The American people will love it, and it proves
beyond of the shadow of a doubt, that she was a true progressive

  1. Brilliant my ass. She’s a wolf in sheep clothing. Why do you think all corporate media wants her elected? Why do you think she’s speaking with Hillary Clinton in private?

  2. It's painful hearing Cenk say the financing is 'borderline brilliant'. Its a regressive head tax, its a disaster. Wtf is he talking about??

  3. Just cause she isn't technically raising taxes on people doesn't mean its brilliant. The tax gets pushed onto employers completely who will try to hurt worker pay to compensate.

    Bernies paying for it through payroll taxes does result in higher taxes for people but is much more equitable and doesnt discourage shitty corporate behavior.

    Also please note that UBER would make out like a bandit not paying a god damn cent towards Medicare for All under Warren's plan.

  4. This is a performance by Warren. She doesn’t support Medicare for All. Cenk is harmful to the progressive movement. This network has turned into a dumpster fire. Ana is the only person worth listening to and I wish she and Michael Brooks would start their own 5 day a week show. They aren’t idiots.

  5. The plan of Warren is wrong on so many levels. Obsessing with "I will not raise taxes on the middle class". Accepting the neoliberal framing, cowering before it. Her triggered reaction to that disingenuous framing is a BAD plan hwo to finance it (and I think she got herself into the mess by stating she would not raise "taxes" on the middle class. Likely an attempt to differentiate herself from Sanders. Well that was disingenious as well – and it bites her now in the behind.

    Poor political instincts.

    Not fighing when she should fight / hit back verbally against a right wing / neoliberal framing (I am a capitalist to my bone – well then she would not question the framing, she would rather weasel around)

    In 2015 Sanders nuged her to run and then he would not have entered the race. I think if she had wholeheartedly supported a genuine ! single payer system he would have endorsed her right away. And supported her. Can you imagine Sanders and Warren working the country in 2015. Warren would be president now.

    HE thought some issues needed to be discussed (so he finally started a grassroots campaign with a planned budget of 30 million USD – of course they did not expect that they could give Clinton a run for her money). Warren declined – "having a platform to discuss the issues" was not worth the problems it could cause her career.

    She did not want to offend the Clinton machine, her democratic collegues, maybe she was afraid she would not get (military releated) contracts for her state.

    She played it safe, did what seemed to be politicially expedient. She sat on the sidelines when she should have shown some bold leadership and should have endorsed Sanders (before the primary in Massachusetts).

    Also on the sidelines regarding DAPL and Assange. There is a pattern to cozy up to the party establishment, to not offend the donors too much (telling off the banksters did not really hurt them, did it ?) to be career oriented and to play it safe.

    She obviously has no REAL interest in M4A – never mind that is such a hot issue in people's life (the crowd that Warren currently supports can afford the overpriced healthcare, and they can defend themselves legally if the insurers try to screw them).

    She is strangely incurious about WHAT makes other single payer nations (all of them !) so much better and more cost-efficient (and yes at roughly half the spending per person, usually the governments give less subsidies per person than the U.S. government, and individuals and companies pay much less).

    No, there are not "several paths" and they do not get the private insurers at the table to discuss with them how to run systems that lean strongly towards "public, non-profit).

    She does not "get" and it is crucial to make the private insurers obsolete. As quickly as possible !. The less role the private insurers and "for-profit" plays in those countries they better they do.

    They do NOT even have an insurance industry with predatory behavior who have the systems, departments, software and know-how in place to rig the system on a large scale.

    And no, they also do not have a REGRESSIVE HEAD TAX. ALL have wage related contributions (you can call that a "tax" if your want). A percentage of the wage (before taxes) is deducted from the wage – so paid for by the staff member . Plus a wage related contribution by the company (sometimes the same amount sometimes one party – often the company pays more – think 4 – 8 %. Usually with a yearly cap). The contributions are affordable so that helps small, new, hardly profitable biz and low income people. The rest comes from government funding (tax revenue or debt).

    REGRESSIVE HEAD TAX. So as president she would not mind screwing businesses – as long as this provides her with a cheap tactic to counteract the accustion of "raising taxes on the middle class". (And I think she jumped into the trap by claiming she would not – instead of orienting herself on the rhetoric of Sanders.

    Her tax (is she means that) would effectively punish those businesses that offered generous plans (and they cannot help but pay way too much for them). It punishes companies in the service sector (lot of labor needed) and which would be stupid enough to hire employees instead of resorting to having mostly temps and contractors.

    The plan includes huge loopholes to evade paying and it is not hard to see them. So the companies will not pay – meaning Medicare agency will miss out on a lot of contributions.

    If she wanted to set it up as impossible to pass and becoming a failure due to missing funds if it passes – she did good !

    Companies will find 101 ways to lower the head tax of course or avoiding to pay it alltogether. That could cause real harm right in the beginning (when the project is vulnerable, relentless propaganda and citizens have not yet experienced the good effects of the overhaul).

    There is a strong incentive for companies to severely cut the amount they spend on the healthcare plans before the head tax is implemented. Or to fire people ahead of time and rehire them as contractors. Will do wonders for the employees ! and for them having coverage in THAT time. Moreover the Sanders plan does a rollout in the course of 4 years. The preemptive reducing of a head tax will affect ALL not only the group that is integrated into Medicare coverage this year (all 55 year old in the first year. And I used to think also all until age 25 or 26 – Sanders does not mention the young ones recently. So not sure, if they stay on the plans of parents under ACA for a few more years).

    What were they – Warren and her team which consists of a lot of fromer Clinton staffers – thinking ? – Or is it just a gimmick and she is not serious about it. I do not know what is worse, that she is serious with that financial plan – or that she is not.

    I think she is intelligent, able to learn, and capable of processing the big picture and the pesky details that could make all the difference and have unintended consequences.

     – in the light of this – how did she EVER go public with this half baked plan.

    Politically it is a mess as well – it depends on many bills that would be equally hard to pass. M4A in itself would be a battle. it is not a good idea to tie it to bills that would be equally contested (like immigration. or a wealth tax. Warren – and Sanders might assume it would be on the credit card = more debt – until they can push that through.

    Fine, but why can't Warren just come up with a more realistic scenario – a capital gains tax before sales ? HOW is she going to enforce that ? Good luck with having enough staff to go after the large tax cheats.

    They cannot say that the extra costs would be financed with debt (in the first round !) Obviously. First overhaul the system to make it more cost-efficient, especially in the long run. The transition WILL cost additionally but on the other hand there are also costs that will go down right away. The advantage of a streamlined simple admin does not manifest right away.

    Checking applications, purging companies that are not deemed profitable enough (by raising their premiums or worsening conditions until the companies quit). The call centers. Going back and forth with doctors, hospitals, nurses (yes they also call in on behalf of their patients and fight over treatments), and insured. The sales staff. Likely the insurers will double down on the costs for lobbying and propaganda. Hiring ex politicians or family members of politicians to get their support (or reward them for former services)

    The complex expensive billing will still be around – it applies to fewer and fewer bills over the course of the rollout.

    The insurers still will have hoards of bean counters, medical experts, statisticians, lawyers. _It is a lot of work to deny care or to screw the insured while pretending to keep the laws that are supposed to help the insured. And they will likely double down to go after the fewer and fewer insured that are left in the pool.

    Let citizens experience the benefits (even if that means more debt) and win the next midterms in a landslide. It will also help to prevent costs in the future (like untreated diabetes !). – THEN go after the top 10 % the billionaires, the wealth tax. FDR did it this way).

    From financial regulation she SHOULD KNOW that you should opt for simple straightforward rules if possible (like a uniform payroll tax). Else there will be evasion and companies will lobby to expand existing loopholes.

    The best I can assume is that she knows it would require some more debt in the beginning. Well, she is stupid that plan is an invitation for the neoliberal crowd (how will you pay for it) and the right to shred it apart.

    She did the cause a disservice. Showed poor political instincts. Is willing to tie herself into a pretzel just to "differentiate" herself from Sanders.

  6. Nice corporate Trojan horse med-4 all bill Liz, borderline brilliant. Cenk, I know she hugged you man, but you gotta snap out of it, pal ,brake the spell and stay awake. The fact that corporate media supports her is the unmistakable test fail beyond all else.

  7. Cenk Uyger should run Elizabeth Warren's campaign. Because Uyger has demonstrated time and time again that he's Warren's biggest surrogate on his TYT program.

  8. "Much more confidence in Bernie's organizational abilities and stick-to-it-iffness to push Medicare for all through" over Warren based on what? Sanders, though I love him, doesn't have the strongest record on passing legislation through the Senate. We can't view Sanders with an objective eye, just more hero worship and if you're not with the program then Bernie is being victimized….

  9. This is exactly my points all politician talks about what they will do, they all say oh that is so easy to write a plan, BUT why is Elizabeth Warren is the only one came up with a plan? Tired of politicians talk the talk, fantastic to finally have a politician to walk the talk.

  10. I watched a video from secular talk on this too. Do I think warren's plan is brilliant? eh its certainly not bad. It's supposed to be close to Bernies if I'm correct, I just think Bernie does it better. Although both of them do it better than the other Dems running XD.

  11. Is the title sarcasm? Her plan refuses to pay for itself and guarantees it will come up with even less money by encouraging employers to classify their employees as independent contractors. It’s insane she wants to give middle class people free healthcare.

  12. Wow not surprised tyt supports this shitty M4all plan. Anything for Warren. Its almost comical. You guys really suck. Brilliant plan? hahaha.

  13. Are they serious about this title? Read the plan and how she suggests funding it. It will promote contract working among other issues. The head count payment for employers to help fund it is a major mistake.

  14. Elizabeth Warren has done the math. There is a lot of money being spent around the world on wars that are never won and there are a lot of government programs that are not very necessary and are very expensive to keep. In jail, they have a lot of people that they can't prove guilty for up to two years just because they get money from the federal government for every person incarcerated- this costs billions of dollars a year.

  15. Her plan is a confusing mess to avoid saying she's raising taxes. Stop trying to push the agenda like the MSM does. No to Beto, No to Kamala, No to Kloubachar and Pete. And no to you guys with your OMG look it's warren! She's done it! This is the turning point! Stop trying to sheep herd. She has 0 zero 0 working class base.

  16. Issue is that her plan is too confusing and requires too many moving parts. Just do what other nations have done, increase income tax and if necessary a small sales tax can help as it helps balance the cost of the program.

  17. Reactions from Republicans about Warren’s Medicare For All: “Oh that witch! How dare she’s gonna make the rich and the trillionaire corporations pay for the costs of Medicare For All! How dare she’s gonna take that burden away from the poor and the middle class like we have planned it forever!”

  18. As much as i like her medicare proposal she has stated that she will help fund it by strengthening FATCA compliance. FATCA has been a huge failure in catching tax cheats but has had hugely negative impacts for legitimate Americans living abroad and paying tax in their home countries. I cant vote for somebody who has such a huge disregard for American expats. Mortgages are being pulled, bank accounts closed, life savings wiped with huge FBAR penalties, and the list goes on. Hugely disappointing proposal and downright lies – middle class Americand overseas will continue to be screwed.

  19. You know why Republican politicians hate Medicare For All so much? Because with Medicare For All it completely eliminates for-profit private insurances and it limits how much money the pharmaceutical companies can charge for the medicines that they sell to the American people, which means Republican politicians can no longer receive kickbacks in the form of hundreds of millions of dollars from these industries! If Medicare For All is in place there are going to be a lot less Republican politicians in office because their main source of campaign aids would dry up!

  20. The word 'progressive' is now useless to anyone who's on the left. It basically means soft left/centrist, hence Cenk can't stop saying it about everything he likes.

  21. Hey tyt, i like you for the most part but you need to watch kyle's video about how warren's plan is no where near bernie's and its even harder to pass. There is also a lot of loop holes in it. Cenk cmon man you got to get serious here.

    Read the Jacobin piece which pokes many holes in this plan.

  22. The best plan Warren can make, is to drop out and let candidates who aren't flip-floppers who lie about their nationality handle Medicare.

  23. What about the full time employee wording on the bill? seems like its a good excuse to go contractors and goodbye full time benefits!

  24. No new taxes on middle class? Straight up lies. I find it hard to believe that this would ever be cheaper than the $200 deducted from my paycheck for the insurance that covers my entire family's health and dental

  25. One thing that I did not hear on the show. Maybe it is in her plan which I will check. But if we have Medicare for all then we won’t need Medicaid. Is that cost to the federal government going to be a savings, or is that figured into the Medicare for all? A lot of Medicaid is paid by the states, if I understand it correctly, so would this mean that the states would not have to pay for their share of Medicaid for their citizens?

  26. andrew yang said it really well on the debate stage in response to warren that the wealth tax has been tried and does not generate enough money to fund m4a properly

  27. My confusion summarized.
    A few days ago you were educating us on a regresive tax on employers that would ultimately be passed to the employee hence a tax on middle class.

    Today, Elizabeth's plan is flawless and is true medicare for all and you cannot see the drawbacks.

    Why are we flirting with an inferior candidate? Is TYT not confident in Bernie's chances of winning the primary?

  28. I want you to be mad at Cenk for his support of Warren on this over Bernie but he makes a compelling argument. The only problem is that you did not let John get to the issues if he's still with Warren's plans and I wish she did allow that. There are some big issues with supplies. He does not allow John to touch on and that's a problem. Still with Bernie!

  29. FFS stop kissing Warren's ass politically and do a proper deep look into what her plan says. I watched Kyle Kulinski's video on this topic before I watched this one and he covered so many more substantive points on why Warren's plans are more progressive than anyone else in the race (other than Bernie) but not nearly as progressive as Bernie's. From the way she's trying to pay for it to the fact that there is room to opt out of it, her plan is just weaker than Bernie's and omitting that information does a disservice to your viewers and makes you guys look as biased as MSM outlets.

  30. Either these guys are idiots or they are smart and realize how much information they left out of this. Take your pick.

  31. Her plan has a regressive head tax. It'll never work and even if it passed as usual regular folks wouldn't be better off.

  32. You know this was a Cenk titled story; I really think he misses working for MSNBC. He put people on the panel with him that will not push back.

  33. the plan doesn't even come close to bernies, to many loopholes and the fact that it's nummerical instead of percentage is troubling as well, looks to me she just wanted it to seem like the middle class wouldn't have to pay taxes, while in actualitty they still have to

  34. typical.. her plan isnt Bernie's and the Bernie toxic supporters '' her plan sucks and she is shit ''. I would be totally happy as a american if could choose between warren of sanders. Don't fight her fight the moderates!!

  35. If you think cutting corporate expenses will be transferred to workers you haven’t been to Walmart recently! Minimum wage was increased and Computer Self Checkout Kiosks increased!

  36. she is a fraud and a snake. stealing bernie’s ideas and plans by name only so she can sell us out behind the scenes. there is literally nothing about her better than sanders. she is a charlatan who takes his ideas and reworks them to benefit corporate interests

  37. the best thing that Cenk could do now , is to continue supporting Warren, attract more Warren supporters and then surprisingly at some point in the end uncover the truth about Warren to all his and her followers and smash her support when it becomes clear that she is NOT a progressive

  38. Cenk, Cenk, Cenk… 😔
    There are flaws in these financing ideas. They won’t pass. Bernie’s plan is MUCH stronger and much more honest.

  39. John starts off on point. It would be silly to trust Warren at this point. She's not honest. Says one thing and does shadiness on the low. She's supported the military ins. And alot of the messed up foreign policy they've thrived on. Her plan sounds good, but does she truly intend to implement any of it. I don't think we can afford to take that gamble. I'd rather see them reinstate Obama care or go with Bernies plan.
    Cenk loves Warren, but idk!

  40. Terrible and misleading clickbait title for this video. Also, Cenk is really drinking the Warren kool-aid. This is why I rarely come to tyt anymore.

  41. Guess what- conservatives will still oppose it even though they can’t “argue with it.” Y’all are better than this.

  42. My SUPPORT for Elizabeth Warren breaks down to: Bernie: Awesome Message, WRONG Messenger. Warren: Questionable Message, way BETTER Messenger.

  43. Looking at the last 100 tyt videos. I've noticed tyt support for Warren has increased. They're doing way more videos on Warren than Bernie. They know she's popular

  44. Don't worry, everyone: They are just teeing her up as a reasonable second choice. Bernie is still the choice. The ignorant might bring his campaign to an end, based on his "socialism" and his hair. We need reasons to support the 2nd choice.

  45. I was just thinking about what happened to TYT haven't heard these guys since 2016…. then I watched this and realized oh yeah these idiots.

  46. Is this the Elizabeth Warren network? Sorry I must have clicked the wrong video.
    Do you guys ever even look at her history?

  47. How did the conversation go from:
    “We should have healthcare for all and have it compete with privet healthcare providers to expand options”
    “This is your only option hope you like it”?
    This is why people are voting Yang. Being given a thousand dollars a month to choose from a number of different plans is more appealing than being mandated only one option.

    We’re the healthcare liberals, you’re the healthcare authoritarians

  48. Question….is Cenk IN LOVE with WARREN? I mean cmon, she will not fight for this, she has only ONCE got a big bill passed compared to Bernies 40. Leave the Banks to Warren and the rest of the country to Sanders. She is clearly a capitalist and can't seem to move past this "label". I really thought he was smarter than this. Warren voted for the extremely bloated military bill, stood and applauded Trump. She KNOWS capitalism no longer works yet just like every Republican before her and the ones to come will just keep trying. Warren is PRO -ESTABLISHMENT we don't want this anymore, the question is CENK…..WHY DO YOU??

  49. Cenk Uygar is a former registered republican and a capitalist defender like Elizabeth Warren. I figure people like Cenk and Warren went to the democrat party once they felt comfortable that the democrat party has moved so far to the Reagan center right on economic and trade issues. Warren is just another reagan republican lite democrat like Obama. Cenk Uyger loves Elizabeth Warren because he's as center right on economic policies as Warren is. Warren has been intentionally misleading and ambiguous on medicare for all, her voting record on military spending is atrocious, she's flip flopped on almost all the issues. Warren is a disingenuous liar who has horrible political instincts. Trump will eat her lunch and expose her in the general election. Michael Brooks, Jordan from the Status Coup, and Kyle Kulinski does an excellent job in exposing Warren's hidden regressive tax on the middle class and working poor when it comes to her funding mechanisms on medicare for all. While Sanders has a modest progressive payroll tax that will offset and eliminate the private taxes in monthly private insurance premium increases, out of pocket co pays/ deductibles/ overhead administrative fees, etc. an increase in the top marginal corporate tax, a wealth tax, and a wall street tax to fund medicare for all.

  50. Trump and Pence are Conservative mostly, FASCISM is Utopianism to the nth degree, it’s very Violent, toleration is not tolerated.

  51. Incremental pragmatism are for political cowards and political wimps. Warren is a closet centrist incremental pragmatist. for the corrupt democrat party establishment trying to siphon votes away from Bernie Sanders in the primaries. And Warren's coalition of managerial upper class professionals and yuppies is not a coalition that will defeat Trump in the general election

  52. I support universal medical system. current medical system is obsolete. Basic/essential care must be provided by a single payer system and the reset (supplemental) maybe be paid by cash or private insurance. "Free market system" with many small insurance companies failed to provide basic consumer protection (pre-existing conditions denial, don't cover basic/essential health problems, bankruptcy, very low annual limit, highest prices in the world we are paying for services and medications.

  53. “Brilliant” Medicare-for-all plan? What a JOKE! When Warren’s “pie in the sky” plan for financing this proposal falls through, who do you think will end up with a significant tax increase?…..THE MIDDLE CLASS. A tangible wealth tax on the rich will be nearly impossible to enforce and will tank the stock market. Only 4 countries in Europe still utilize a “wealth tax”, and the degree of taxation is much less than in Warren’s proposal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *