You have to first have a national debate about single payer and form a consensus before advancing it in an election. That hasn't happened yet since only a fraction of Dems alone are advocating for it. Until that happens, its going nowhere.
Healthcare
- Thread starter RDCR07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
This is exactly why nothing gets done in DC as well.
Because centrist libs refuse to fight for things they believe in and create self fulfilling prophecies?
That 10-20% is what, 30-60m people? So if you go for the latter, you're talking about a percentage of the US population that includes nearly as many people as the entire UK. It's morally repugnant that in the world's richest country, the poorest and most vulnerable people are left to die. And correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't the US rank low when compared with other healthcare systems in the world? The last one I read I think Luxembourg was top.
I don't doubt the quality of healthcare may be better than that of the NHS, but I would much rather have a national health service that maybe of little less quality, but one anybody can use, no matter who you are or how much money you have in the bank. The state should not be leaving any of its citizens to die.
I literally don't know anyone who favours a US style healthcare system. But then I'm from the north of England and we all hate the idea privatised healthcare
Healthcare reform needs to start somewhere. The ACA was an awful attempt at getting the ball rolling. Expanding Medicaid to allow for private contributions from individuals and companies is a great was of reducing the under-insured. If taking Medicaid is a legal requirement it would be a viable alternative to private insurance companies. If employers had to contribute when an employee switched to Medicaid it could be the beginning of a genuine single payer system.
Twitter thread, in response to a Democrat anti-M4A push:
This is a debate that needs to happen in the mainstream media. Sadly, it isn't...and its probably down to the fact that many Dem politicians don't want to talk about it since it would mean they have to commit to either being for or against it in the lead up to their own elections.
I don't doubt the quality of healthcare may be better than that of the NHS, but I would much rather have a national health service that maybe of little less quality, but one anybody can use, no matter who you are or how much money you have in the bank. The state should not be leaving any of its citizens to die.
I literally don't know anyone who favours a US style healthcare system. But then I'm from the north of England and we all hate the idea privatised healthcare
Over 10% of the UK population have private healthcare insurance to supplement the NHS. The US needs to fix its healthcare system so everyone has access to good quality care without the threat of bankruptcy hanging over them. It shouldn't mean lowering the quality for everyone though.
The Democratic base widely supports single payer while Democratic politicians and organizations don't. Which says a lot about how out of touch Schumer Pelosi DCCC DNC etc are.
Did you mean anyone there?
We need to expunge the word access from the debate. Either we believe health care is a privilege or a right. If it's the former then access is appropriate. If its the latter then it isn't.
Maybe the Dems don’t want to upset the drug and insurance companies. That is what it always seems to boil down to in the Us.
That's definitely part of it.
No I meant everyone. Probably not quite teh right way of phrasing it. My point was the US should offer the same excellent healthcare people with good insurance have instead of lowing the quality so everyone has access to something like the NHS.
That’s gone a bit worse I think. Are you saying that everyone should have the same healthcare.....good quality healthcare for all regardless of income?
Yes that is what i am saying. As a starting point getting everyone that isn't insured today adequate healthcare is a good starting point. The goal should be getting everyone the level of healthcare working professionals gets today. The fear is that a UHC single payer system will drag the level of care down for the majority for Americans.
Getting the cost of drugs down to a sensible level would help healthcare across the world.
It would help for sure which is why I think billable amounts should be mandated. The largest drag on healthcare costs in the US are administration, operating costs and profit.
Individuals are different from the corporations. Corporations earning over a certain amount can only do so much moving around cause half of them are public and have to release financials. You cant understate your numbers by too much when you are being audited by the big four.
The US already had one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, which is why big companies have been very creative moving assets around. If the economy does OK the next three years I don't think there will be a lot of support for raising corporation taxes again.
Well they arent going to be stupid about just increasing the corporate tax rate to 60% and not give any incentive to the corporations. I am sure they will work out something. This whole incentive thing is stupid from Trump and its bullshit. He should reduce the tax rate for corporations only when they offer proof that they have increased salaries for its workers or something of that sort.
You are consistently making wide ranging claims about what "Americans" want that aren't based in reality.
The bolded part is laughable.
Not if you get rid of deductions and loopholes.
Have you lived in European and America?
Bolded bit is based on what really happens when government expenditure rises. The rich can defer earnings and legally avoid paying some tax. The middle class end up shouldering the burden. Its not uncommon for the percentage of tax revenue raised from the wealthiest to decline as the taxation rates go up.
Nearly 30m Americans voted in the Dem primary alone - it's hardly some small contest only attracting the most committed.
The rich and business owners have lots of legal ways of simply not earning or not paying tax. I am a contractor on a 1099, which means I can put $53,000 of my net earnings into a pension as the employer, plus the $24,000 I can contribute as the employee. If taxation is perceived as punitive people will adjust accordingly.
I think you're looking at the total for both parties. The Dem primaries were under 15 million, so under 4.6% of Americans.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...primary-season-but-just-short-of-2008-record/
Sounds like a loophole to me. Get rid of all loopholes.
Its not a loophole. And there are many more legal ways of simply not earning or paying tax.
He does. If he were the nominee in 2016, he'd have won the rust belt states which would have meant it was impossible for Trump to become president.
Eh? 16m voted for Clinton and around 13m voted for Bernie overall. Even that article had it at 57m people overall for both parties which is hardly a small number but instead a significant portion of the electorate.
Sorry my bad I was looking at the graph and thought it was in millions.
Candidates do not get scrutinized in the same way in a primary. I just think some of Bernie's policies and things he has said in the past will come back to haunt him.
They don't get scrutinised to quite the same extent but they are put in the public eye - most people who're going to vote know who Bernie is now, and will have formed an opinion on him. Anyone who's even remotely anti-Trump will consider voting for him. He'd have his problems but I disagree with this idea he's some minor fringe figure who's not received any attention thus far. He's one of the most well-known and well-liked Senators around.
I'm not the one making vast generalizations.
I don't think there was a single Sanders or anti-Sanders advert on TV in our area. During the POTUS campaign the adverts are non stop for weeks.
Not really a generalization. Americans have a very different attitude to earnings, taxation entitlement, and wealth.
The trouble is there is no major debate about single payer right now in mainstream circles, which is going to be a problem if another candidate tries to advance it in the next Presidential cycle. It will once again be painted as a fringe policy that will soak the public through taxation, and although there will be a younger constituency who are for it, without a proper debate, it could leave the Dems fractured going into 2020. You have to therefore sell the policy off cycle so that there is a vast public consensus as the election period starts, so that politicians instead of running away from it, actually feel more compelled to embrace it.
As an American, I'm quite aware of the attitudes of Americans.
Well you will know they moan about tax a fair amount, despite tax being relatively low in the US. At the end of the day if we want UHC and more social and financial equality the majority of us will be paying a lot more tax. I am fine with rolling back the GOP tax bill and paying a few hundred a month more on top of that but I know plenty that would not be happy at all.
It's not going to cost a few hundred a month more. We already pay more for healthcare than other similar countries, its a matter of redistributing spending.
This article dated April 2017 from Forbes seems to suggest otherwise.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksh...how-litte-companies-already-pay/#41e8338e58aa
I didn't follow your pension scheme example, but a loophole seems to be nothing else than a legal way to avoid taxes. So why can't the government close them?
I am all for it but can you imagine it actually getting done? They can't even vote on a straight budget extension or DACA. A complete revamp of healthcare that involved growing the federal government significantly isn't happening in my life time.