I don’t quite get who the people are that don’t want single payer healthcare.
Libertarians and the rich?
Libertarians and the rich?
2020 speculation thread
- Thread starter JohnE
- Start date
I would love single payer, but I don't want it to happen overnight. I'd prefer a series of reforms that ease us into it so that I can still get reliable service from good doctors now without destroying the system that we have in place, but making it so the next generation grows up with the understanding that the hospital they work in won't be for-profit.
this is probably the biggest issue with our country's health care/insurance structure
How it’s funded matters to me. I support it fully as a matter or principle but if it’s supported via a new 10% income tax as was suggested here in Colorado then that’s a no go for me.
UK used to be 10% I think which also funded your state pension. Looks like it's 12% now.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rates-and-allowances-national-insurance-contributions/rates-and-allowances-national-insurance-contributions
Agreed. sudden changes cause disruption.
1 Republican candidate, 2 years out.
what 12? Democrat candidates. Diluting all yo' pools. 2 years out.
Rs are focused on rally/winning at any cost.
Ds are not.
That said, ZOMGs the layers of dirt that someone must have over the RNC as a whole....
what 12? Democrat candidates. Diluting all yo' pools. 2 years out.
Rs are focused on rally/winning at any cost.
Ds are not.
That said, ZOMGs the layers of dirt that someone must have over the RNC as a whole....
Some of those words work for Hillary too.
She didn't blow it because she was too centrist or too bland, she lost because she was a perfect punching bag for Dirty-D. He could go with the make fun of Bill angle, the shes a crooked politician angle, the she's just pandering angle. She was too easy a target.
It's frightening to think but Joe Camaro might be our only way out of this. Most of the other candidates have obvious flaws for Donny to dig into or are just too "nice" to go up against him directly.
This will not happen in the next 50 years. Citizens United is firmly entrenched by the supreme court (which may get even more conservative soon). Even if we elect a legislature with the will to pass some legislation to cut back on corporate spending in elections the SCOTUS will just overrule them. We're gonna need a constitutional amendment to get this mess taken care of in your lifetime.
When there are millions of dollars up for grabs from corporations the side that grabs the most $$ will have the best chance of winning... and being indebted to big corporations.
In theory there would be no tax increase.
The US system while it provides the absolute best care on the planet with VERY few exceptions....
Also fails the vast majority of its citizens.
You pay the most in the world for some of the worst care in the developed world.
IF you could wave the magic wand and convert the current system and money involved....
Everybody in the country would have the best heath-care in the world - exceptions like above noted.
...and everybody would have extra money in their pockets.
Your system really is that bloated and wasteful.
Read a meme the other day that I can't find.
Basically a dialogue between Mexico and Canada.
...Build a wall on both sides - then put a lid on it.
The US system while it provides the absolute best care on the planet with VERY few exceptions....
Also fails the vast majority of its citizens.
You pay the most in the world for some of the worst care in the developed world.
IF you could wave the magic wand and convert the current system and money involved....
Everybody in the country would have the best heath-care in the world - exceptions like above noted.
...and everybody would have extra money in their pockets.
Your system really is that bloated and wasteful.
Read a meme the other day that I can't find.
Basically a dialogue between Mexico and Canada.
...Build a wall on both sides - then put a lid on it.
This is not true. Cliffs Notes is that we have a health care access and inequity problem, not a health care performance problem, per se.
For those who have good insurance coverage (as opposed to no coverage or some crap "Bronze" plan from an exchange) then our care here is first rate. We need to have better planning of end of life care, sure, but if you have a condition that modern medicine knows how to treat then being in the US is a good thing.
What the population-wide statistics reflect, however, is that there are lots of people with poor or no coverage, in addition to a shitload of people who just don't take care of themselves. These people then die early of preventable causes: uncontrolled diabetes, uncontrolled hypertension, etc. Same goes for infant and maternal mortality: people who get prenatal care and deliver in a hospital have great outcomes, but those who don't present until 38 weeks with who knows what going on don't do well.
Another way to frame this is to look at life expectancy by county:
https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/08/527103885/life-expectancy-can-vary-by-20-years-depending-on-where-you-live
>>>>>
Health experts have long known that Americans living in different parts of the country tend to have different life spans. But Murray's team decided to take a closer look, analyzing records from every U.S. county between 1980 and 2014.
"What we found is that the gap is enormous," Murray says. In 2014, there was a spread of 20.1 years between the counties with the longest and shortest typical life spans based on life expectancy at birth.
In counties with the longest life spans, people tended to live about 87 years, while people in places with the shortest life spans typically made it to only about 67, the researchers found.
The discrepancy is equivalent to the difference between the low-income parts of the developing world and countries with high incomes, Murray notes.
For example, it's about the same gap as the difference between people living in Japan, which is among countries with the longest life spans, and India, which has one of the shortest, Murray says.
The U.S. counties with the longest life expectancy are places like Marin County, Calif., and Summit County, Colo. — communities that are well-off and more highly educated.
Counties with the shortest life expectancy tend to have communities that are poorer and less educated. The lowest is in Oglala Lakota County, S.D., which includes the Pine Ridge Native American reservation.
super interesting. The first candidate I would consider donating to.
Ill donate to any republican who primaries The Dotard. I wont vote for them, but ill donate.
my political leaning is more moderate, so if the D candidate is a sanders-type vs a moderate rep, I'd struggle. Still, the government needs a hard lesson in what happens when you ignore and marginalize the majority of people you represent, so we'll see.
I'm envisioning a trump v Warren and Booker/harris ticket, or something like that.
I'm envisioning a trump v Warren and Booker/harris ticket, or something like that.
I guess I was not clear in what I wrote, because you just agreed with me.
You still believe in unicorns?
First to drop out: https://www.facebook.com/RichardOjeda2020/posts/2329884223911515
I think that Mr. Sanders would be an excellent president, not that my thoughts count.
just a old man whose message has been stolen by people younger and better looking than him....no chance in hell of getting nomination.
I don't understand how you can exist as a pro-gun progressive in today's environment. There are plenty of people who encompass the extreme left without the hypocrisy and therefore appeal to more voters.
That’s what happens when you acknowledge that the object isn’t the problem. Until recently VT was extremely loose with gun laws yet has low gun violence rates, just like NH and ME.
His ability to see pass the bullshit narrative is one of the main reasons he’s not in my nope pile. Klobuchar is the other because she’s not blowing unicorns up people’s ass to make them like her.
FTFY
Sure, or you can embrace the bullshit narrative with some of the strictest gun laws in the country and have the lowest rate of gun violence: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/02/21/states-most-and-least-gun-violence-see-where-your-state-stacks-up/359395002/ The flipside is also true: alaska has the weakest gun laws and some of the most violent gun crime.
I think the reality is somewhere in between- a comprehensive study of causes and possible solutions to create a holistic solution to gun violence- one that embraces control of weaponry in addition to making sure that people with prior violence or mental health issues do not have access to weapons. One won't fix the other.
IMO Bernie is simply embracing what kept him in office- local politics that make great sense for the people of vermont. Vermonters like their weaponry. I'm fine with that. I just don't think it's right for the nation.
I generally agree with what you’re saying and have no interest in changing minds on guns at this point. I’m pretty well versed on the topic and encourage you to come to your own conclusions and beliefs (ie I don’t consider suicides to be gun violence, unless it’s a suicide by cop shooting event) based on fbi and cdc stats, rather than pro/anti sources.
Do you have good sources that exclude suicides? I would be happy to read up
LOL
"I don't consider automobile deaths to be accidents if the car was left hand drive"
Me too. I would love to know what government agency doesn't consider in it's stats, suicide to be a violent act. Maybe Trump took all the dictionary's away?
Need to adjust that unicorn up your ass?LOL
"I don't consider automobile deaths to be accidents if the car was left hand drive"
Me too. I would love to know what government agency doesn't consider in it's stats, suicide to be a violent act. Maybe Trump took all the dictionary's away?
Guess that depends on what your definition of the word, "is", is?
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/67/wr/mm6744a3.htm
https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2679556/comparison-rates-firearm-nonfirearm-homicide-suicide-black-white-non-hispanic
https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/supplementary/firearm-availability-suicide.html
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-plan-to-prevent-gun-suicides/
I'm not denying that people commit suicide with guns, or that access to guns makes suicide attempts more successful.
My issue is with using gun suicides, which make up 2/3 of the stats used to invoke pearl clutching, in the argument for laws on the majority.
Suicide is the act of intentionally causing one's own death.
Yet, those numbers are always touted when arguing to make people feel safer through gun control.
People who aren't suicidal, no matter how many guns they own, aren't going to kill themselves.
Conversely, those who are suicidal and choose to use a gun generally don't pose a violent risk to society at large during that act.
That is why I personally discount them when considering restrictions on the masses.
Is suicide by hanging called rope violence?
When my friend hucked himself off the golden gate we didn't call it gravity violence.
The cause of these deaths is suicide, the means is just a footnote.
My issue is with using gun suicides, which make up 2/3 of the stats used to invoke pearl clutching, in the argument for laws on the majority.
Suicide is the act of intentionally causing one's own death.
Yet, those numbers are always touted when arguing to make people feel safer through gun control.
People who aren't suicidal, no matter how many guns they own, aren't going to kill themselves.
Conversely, those who are suicidal and choose to use a gun generally don't pose a violent risk to society at large during that act.
That is why I personally discount them when considering restrictions on the masses.
Is suicide by hanging called rope violence?
When my friend hucked himself off the golden gate we didn't call it gravity violence.
The cause of these deaths is suicide, the means is just a footnote.
Those dont really count, havent you heard?
Do you think those who eat a bullet wouldn't off themselves eventually by other means if a gun weren't available? Driving into traffic, etc.? I see why they aren't as relevant as shooting other people, even if down the road it'd be nice it we could reduce them as well.
That's not at all what the studies and statistics show. The "they were going to do it anyway" argument is demonstrably false. Any of the above links show this. Access to guns not only increases the likelihood of someone attempting suicide, it also greatly increases the mortality rate of a suicide attempt.
I am aware of this. That's why I deliberately put "eventually" in there. And I think we should address the underlying cause of depression/mental illness at some point (if there's any feasible way to do this), but it need not be conflated with gun control to reduce gun violence towards others.