Glad they’re taking off the gloves a little, but it’s always been a non-option to just make our lives significantly and irrevocably better like M4A or the PRO act and although they’re good at trying and failing, they never talk about the consequences as dire as they actually are with few exceptions.
The democrats are more active than that.
look at Harris’ proposal for Medicare for all: co-opting progressive terminology and proposing a system that ultimately keeps our disgustingly fractured system of wasteful and redundant privatized administrative bureaucracy. Only now there would be a two lane system where the rich class have better doctors and care while the poor “technically have insurance”, just with long wait times and shittier doctors and facilities. If you think this wouldn’t be the case literally talk to anyone currently on Medicaid just about finding a provider.
The poor would now technically have Medicare but overall will be bitter about how terrible their experience is, giving ammo to the right to fuel us towards fascism, the democrats get to go on about their “healthcare win”that doesn’t really fix anything of substance for 99% of people, and even more tax dollars are funneled into top donors like Aetna and Cigna. Win win (except for the worker class, once most jobs stop providing insurance to anyone outside of upper management/executives as a perk to cut costs since “you have Medicare now” and material conditions are worsened significantly for 60+% of us).
It’s a more substantial version of the individual mandate from obamacare. Technically everyone gets insurance now, but at increased cost to you, which makes people resentful (especially young people) and accelerates adoption of the right wing politics on a single issue for politically apathetic voters (I never voted but now I’m voting republican bc Obama forced me to buy $200/mo health insurance and then the republicans got rid of that), doesnt actually fix any of the pricing or complexity issues, and funnels tons of cash to key donors (see the “forcing to buy insurance with stuff tax penalties for not doing so” bit). A half baked solution compromised by their inability to do literally anything on behalf of their constituents before their donors
It would be a more accurate depiction if the other cop was like handing the murderer a weapon going “don’t worry, this will help you because then it won’t be as painful, I’m on your side really”
Someone actually talking sense in this sub instead of spouting reactionary tripe. Rare sight.
deleted by creator
Typical to see people unironically advocating against socialized healthcare in this post’s comments. I swear ya’ll Tankies and/or (supposed) Anarchists are just Republicans with extra steps.
Socialized healthcare is absolutely necessary in America. But we have to be honest and we have to be firm: a system that calls itself “socialized medicine” but is ultimately just Obamacare again (Harris’ proposal is basically one step further than the individual mandate, just removes more autonomy) is unacceptable and if anything is poisoning the well against the potential passage of actual socialized healthcare. Words matter and co-opting language to pass along what is basically the current system with an individual mandate that is inescapable will only serve to sour minds on the idea as none of the actual issues with American healthcare will be alleviated and if anything only exacerbated.
You cannot add an individual mandate to subsidize the care of the older population that is significantly more affluent without also reforming the system in such a way that material conditions increase for the younger populations. If healthcare costs went down because they actually addressed the gigantic amounts of waste spending with actual socialized medicine (e.g. removing the option for privatized insurance or highly regulating the system to one coherent standard) then they wouldn’t breed intense resentment that sends young single issue voters straight into the arms of the opposing party.
But they do that because they are either planned opposition at worst, or they are in a position to serve their donors above all else even if it will obviously lead to serving the interests of their opponents in 12-24 months. Malice or apathetic greed is up to you to decide but either way to act like voting for them will save you instead of simply slowing the process of destruction down is foolish
Americans spend 34 percent of medical spending on administrative overhead, in part because there is an excessive of amount of redundancy. Other developed countries spend less than half of this, 10-15%, or less. If we limit the definition to just insurance administration the waste is closer to 10-13% whereas in other countries it is closer to 2-5%.
Our system is overly complex with tens of thousands of billing codes and this complexity is made far worse by a fragmented network of thousands of redundant insurers, all providing the same service, but with different rules and standards. So as a provider I then have to navigate a significant amount of complexity to submit billing and dedicate 20-30% of my time (which could be spent seeing patients) to administrative bullshit because Aetna, Cigna, Oscar, United, Optum (which is United but different), the thousand BC/BS plans, geisinger, Highmark, etc all decided they each have their own verification portal, standards for eft/era, and billing submission practices. Or I can spend that time seeing clients and spend 5-10% of my gross practice income towards staff whose job is solely to deal with this stupid fucking system.
So beyond the inherent unfairness of proposing a two lane system that would once again penalize the poor with substandard care. Doing absolutely nothing to address the real systemic issues of American healthcare, meanwhile expanding privatized Medicare plans by a significant amount and funneling tax dollars into Aetna, Cigna, etc.
A non trivial amount of those tax dollars getting funneled get laundered right back to politicians via lobbying so that any proposal for healthcare reform will be neutered. This way rubes like you will buy it, hook, line, and sinker, keep voting for the party, the insurance industry keeps getting fat stacks, and then 5-10 years later when the insurance situation is still absolutely horrendous because no actual systemic issues were addressed you can then go “how is this the fault of tankies and republicans?? It certainly couldn’t have been my beloved democrats, who would never sell me out for money”.
Removed by mod
typical neolib. Closet conservative that uses hateful, judgmental, and prejudiced language when you encounter debate that frustrates you because deep down you’re a judgmental person. If this were 2006 I bet money you would’ve called me a f*g.
The lack of introspection is why your party consistently loses unless people are truly sick of the republicans too. “Should we stop running the same failing strategies we’ve been playing since 2007? Nah, it’s the voters who are wrong”. Keep eating that shit up and blaming your socioeconomic peers instead of the party leadership that continually utterly fails you, living like modern kings while you slave away for a pittance
You’re literally opposing progressive reform.
You are a conservative.
You are advocating for “progressive reform” that does not progress in any realistic way and only truly serves moneyed interests and eventually reinforcing the conservative movement because of resentment from such a slipshod implementation.
Again, typical neolib. You don’t respond to my many points at all, you resort to name calling when it appears you don’t get your way. It’s no wonder the party can’t capture more young voters with this arrogance and inability to listen. “I will tell you what progressivism is! It is giving lots of money to companies and special treatment to rich people without actually fixing anything of substance! Take it or leave it because the system has created a hostage crisis with your rights and instead of serving you I will exploit that to serve my own interests!”
Saving millions of people from pain suffering, and death isn’t progress to you? I suddenly see where the disconect lies.
Specious reasoning with no rationale. How does her plan do such a thing? I outlined how it won’t: it will give access to Medicare but because of a compartmentalized two lane system people who are uninsured will struggle immensely to find any care providers in network without huge wait times (if they exist). This will mostly limit care to emergency treatment, which is basically how the uninsured handle their care already. There is also handwaving to how the massively increased costs of this will be handled, which will likely be increased tax burden on the middle and lower class because they won’t ever actually meaningfully tax the rich.
The plan is theater to make libs like you say such grandiose things while avoiding actual progress. That is why when actual progressive candidates with heat behind them pop up from the DSA the party can suddenly align like never before to condemn them and sabotage their campaign despite the “blue no matter who” mantra that is used to guilt rubes like you into voting for yet another corporate stooge with a 10 million+ stock portfolio who’s definitely out for your benefit, promise