this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2024
643 points (98.8% liked)

politics

18883 readers
3689 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Other places to discuss US News and Politics that don't endorse a political science charlatan's attempt to shift the overton window to the right:

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Good luck getting it past all the industry ~~bribery~~ lobbying.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

This is what I hate about this country it is crony capitalism from the top down

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago

Can't let our health care get in the way of corporate profits.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Republicans don't want this, because while they like to claim "blah blah spending this, spending that", it's not actually about reducing spending, it's about punishing the poor(and a wide range of minorities, obviously). So the fact that giving MORE people access to healthcare would cost much LESS money in the end, means fuck all to them. Their only goal is maximizing the suffering of anyone who ain't them, and convincing their base that someone else is the cause of all of their troubles.

Democrats meanwhile, have no interest in doing this either, since most of them aren't even remotely progressives(whether they pretend to be or not), and like the Republicans, it doesn't do much to line their pockets. As long as they can keep everyone just fucked over enough, while pretending to support progressive policies, the can keep pointing at the Republicans as boogeymen, saying "look, see what the right wants to keep from you? Better vote for us, or you'll get trump again. ThIs iS THe mOSt imPOrTAnt elEcTIon oF yOUr lIfe." But as soon as you vote them in, where does all of that support for those progressive policies go? POOF Never to be spoken of again, until next election, because they didn't ever really support such policies in the first place.

So sure, I'm not going to go so far as to say that both sides are the same. Because clearly one side at least isn't trying to bring back literal Nazis. But make no mistake, even if you have to vote Democrat to desperately keep MAGA out of power, the Democrats are not your friend. Democrats are not leftists. The are center right, at best. It's just the Republicans have completely lost the plot, and ran so far to the right, that everyone else looks to be left by comparison.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Is there a study that shows how much potential profit the medical industrial complex may not realize if we made the switch? (Of course in reality, they'd still find a way to get most of "their piece").

Because that's the thing holding it up. Not data-based proof points, or public opinion that universal healthcare would work, we have that and have had that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

About 5.1 trillion?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I'm pretty sure most corporations are holding this up, actually. They want us to be beholden to them for healthcare so it's harder to quit. And they want us to not have easy access to Healthcare so we can't sue them in class actions for shitty products. I am convinced the class action piece would represent trillions in losses for corporations here.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Very good point. Military as well, need this and for-profit colleges to make the "benefits" of military service shine.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Problem being, I'm sure politicians of all stripes have invested heavily in private insurance companies. And those so called administrative fees make it all the more lucrative.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Oh, but what about those poor middlemen that do so much working keeping prices inflated? What will they do for a living?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Have heard folks unironically make this argument. "The insurance industry! Massive unemployment! My 401k is invested in them! I'll be ruined!".

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That’s not an invalid concern, but those jobs will just transition. Probably not a bad idea for a politician to address this concern since there are probably hundreds of thousands of jobs in insurance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

No doubt. Some folks seem to believe everything has to happen in a vacuum.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

Be glad they weren't executed in public for being traitors to their fellow citizens.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Won't someone think of the shareholders!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Think about how many yacht building jobs will be lost!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

Medicare is a giant subsidy to private insurance companies because it removes the disabled and elderly from their rolls. And it's also created a back-end for coding claims that the industry adopts. And even with the more expensive patients, and the burden of designing the whole system, Medicare constantly delivers more care per dollar than the private guys.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 1 month ago (1 children)

*$5.1 Trillion will not go to big businesses and corporations

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Which is why they'll fight to the death to not allow us to have a good thing.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

Government for the people who own corporations, by the the people owned by the corporations. That's the quote, right?

[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 month ago (3 children)

But how am I supposed to keep my employees if they aren't reliant on me for access to healthcare? What am I supposed to do, pay them more? Treat them like human beings?!

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

Why don't you read the article? The proposed system still has employer payments, but promises reduction of these payments which should give a good boost for businesses.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I literally work with at least 3 people that are ONLY working at my job for the healthcare... One dude is 68 and gets covered in aluminum dust all day just for the fucking healthcare.

You're goddamn right people would not be working those absolute shit jobs if it weren't for healthcare being tied to work.

Bootlickers: "WeLl ThEn HoW aRe ThOsE bUsInEsSeS sUpPoSeD tO sUrViVe AfTeR!?"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

68?

Am I missing something? Shouldn't he already be eligible for Medicare?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

More than likely. I'm just going by what he told me when I asked why he wasn't retired or planning on it. He was given a hefty inheritance so it's not like he needs to work.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Sounds to me like the people who turn down extra pay because it will put them in a higher tax bracket and they think they'll make less after taxes.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

The US government spends the most per capita for healthcare and that money is used to cover only a minority of citizens.

People are then paying extra for private insurance over that.

Having a governmental monopoly for healthcare is the best because the government can decide how much medications and services cost, the providers don't have a choice since they only have one client and that client's goal isn't to make profit or to make sure others are making profit, its goal is to pay as little as possible.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

A minority? Howso? Does that mean most people are uninsured? Or just that the majority of insurance payments go to less than 50% of people? Or...?

Just hadn't heard that one before, so curious about details.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ah, I assumed you meant the US in general spends the most, including for public and private.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Let me repeat what I said.

The US Government spends the most PER TOTAL CAPITA (that is $/330 million citizens) and that money only insures a monitory of citizens, a big chunk of the population ALSO spends money for private coverage OVER the share of their taxes that goes to pay for public coverage.

The US government spends 12k * 330 million citizens for public health coverage to cover about a third of those citizens, in Canada it's about 6k * 40 million citizens that we spend to cover everyone!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Public healthcare insurance covers about a third of the population, the rest are either uninsured or covered by private insurance.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Medicare only exists to cover the most expensive patients who require the most care, so that we can support a massive private insurance industry, and to ensure that industry remains profitable.

Anyone who denies that this system exists to explicitly elevate one class of people over another whom are exploited is living in a fantasy world

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Norway has universal healthcare for everyone. Going to the ER is free. Ambulance is free. Surgery is free. Checkups and tests are heavily subsidised where we only pay a small fee (like $20). If you spend more than x-amount on fees annually, you get the fees waived for the remainder of the year.

We have health insurances, but that will only allow you to go to private clinics with less wait times. These insurances are normally paid by employers with highly skilled workers. It's not considered to be a necessity.

The Norwegian healthcare isn't cheap, and we pay around 35-40% income tax, and 25% VAT, but our income doesn't dictate what type of services we're allowed to get. Poverty is low, and crime rates are low.

Socialism works.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

We do not really pay 35-40% income tax in practice, it's a progressive tax system

For example, I pay about 25% in tax on my income, which is roughly the median salary

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Reading "ambulance is free" is still crazy for my European mind. ===> "Of course it is... If the driver asks you for money, we'd put them in jail for years."

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

It's crazy to my American mind too.

load more comments
view more: next ›