This one’s a few days old, but I thought it was a good read.
[…] He dismissed the “idea that the American model of private insurance is uniquely evil and engaged in acts of social violence because it denies people too much treatment,” maintaining that all insurance systems, public or private, ration care.
But as I noted in the earlier FAIR article, the Commonwealth Fund (NBC, 9/19/24) found that the US system does, in fact, stand out among other peer nations, ranking “as the worst performer among 10 developed nations in critical areas of healthcare.” Those areas the US falls short in include “preventing deaths, access (mainly because of high cost) and guaranteeing quality treatment for everyone.” The rest of the world is doing better than us on these scores, contrary to Douthat.
Americans see the systems working in the rest of the world and know that the United States could have a better healthcare regime, but that corporate and government leaders simply choose not to.
Visit us @ !fediverse_vs_disinfo@lemmy.dbzer0.com for all the latest news on the topics of astroturfing, propaganda and disinformation.
Are you not paying for it with your labor now? Do you think your employer is covering the cost out of the kindness of their heart? If you stop working, will they still provide coverage?
Or am I getting wooshed on a bad joke?
It was sarcasm but it was provocative and it got people talking
Our labour is the money lol and if there is profit it means, that we are not getting our fair share. Profit ESP in context of health care like insurance IS murder unless all preventable death are avoided and best out comes achievied.
It’s a misunderstanding purposely spread by conservatives, (no clue if this person is just misinformed or what), but they use several lies to make people think they can’t afford to get rid of the current system. They tell them they’ll pay more taxes, without mentioning that their tax increase will be less than their current premiums; which means there’s a savings there. They also tell them their employer pays for a good chunk and if we get rid of the current system that will all be on them, which isn’t true because we can tax the corporations, and the corporations will see the same savings as people do. Finally they always use numbers that include the highest coverage in the current system, to blow the total cost way up. This hides all of the efficiency savings with the government acting as the only payment negotiator for most services and getting rid of the profit motive.
By the time Fox News is done with people they’re sure they would go bankrupt if we tried to switch systems.
Also the money is usually not collected in taxes. Social securities are seperate entities and you just pay an obligatory insurance rate, which as you said would he much lower for the Americans compared to their private insurance system.
