The Leftist Myth: Everyone Loves Our Policies!

[SiteWolf]

I def support single payer health insurance in theory. But one thing I can't ignore is how much better our vaccines are at 90% and 95% effect compared to England Oxford was at like 70% or something. I wonder how much innovation comes from america vs other countries.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

there's also differences in these vaccines re distrbution....one would require ultra cold storage and the cost involved to ship/store at those temps, another requires similar but not as cold....Astra Zeneca's doesn't have those requirements plus I believe they said they could produce 200 million doses by the end of December and 1-200milion a month after that

but there's also differences in how they collect data...and not always sure they're not reworking/fudging numbers..........the first one came out saying their efficacy was 90%, then the second said they were 94.5%, in less than 2 days they were both saying 95%

from what Fauci said, tho, 70% or better is 'very good'

[benny01]

I'll try to do better. I'm just getting really irritated with **** right now.

But yeah I probably need to do a better job of proof reading my posts in general, and be more generous with other peoples opinions.

But cost. I mean this is undisputable. Drug costs. The amount we spend in administration. Lawsuits. Doctors Everything.

People here are right (IMO) that a universal healthcare system such as single payer is the better solution here. The free market does not work with healthcare. Competition does not lower cost. In fact it decreases care.

But we spend more everywhere. I saw a study that said that even if you account for inflation we spend 700% more on cost in the medical system sector then we did 50 years ago.

The problem is half the country is still convinced of "competing markets". So unless you can turn the WH/Senate massively blue you probably will have a difficult time making these changes.

My main point for the thread was to get rid of this notion that the far left are the only people that want these changes, and their ideas are massively popular...

They are not the only ones with these ideas. Democrats have been pushing them for decades. It's the red states that are holding back these changes. Not the "establishment Dems".

Obviously I agree with your outlook on a system of universal healthcare. I also think that the polling is right on this issue. I think the vast majority of americans support universal health care in a bubble, as a stand alone issue.

While I'm a supporter of bernie(I'm much closer ideologically to him than to the center), he holds some blame in the party not adopting it as part of the platform, and the parties cowardice prevented them from picking it up. The democrats, as they usually do, allowed the right to set their agenda. They painted them as extreme leftists(bernie helped them do that based on his views, and the dems doubled down for the right), and they BLINDLY ran to the center as a result.

There is nothing radical about universal health care. The center carried the water for the right on an issue that in your opinion they support. That isnt bernie's fault or the fault of his supporters. The center of the party needs to own that and learn from it. Rather than come together and build a strong message around a universal health care system(while standing for their ideals), they spent the primaries telling the american people that it couldnt be done. They used a primary that could have galvanized a strong and clear message to tear apart an issue that would have been a godsend considering what unfolded after the primaries. A candidate like biden, for fear that he'd be labeled a socialist(we are talking about joe biden here), allowed the right to set his agenda and move away from his ideals out of fear. That isnt the fault of the far left or any bernie supporters. That is a lack of faith in his own convictions.

If it's not that, then the folks talking about the center being bought and sold are right. The establishment dems or the corporate center or whatever label you would like to use is a real thing and working against the people. That makes the far left right in their sentiment.

All of that being said, trump's cult of personality would have made it nearly impossible to pull the votes from the right that you'd expect to get. You werent going to, in any circumstance, pull voters who may be friendly or allies over on that issue. It also why I believe that the polls showing overwhelming support for universal health care were right, the want is there on the issue. The number only take a hit when we add questions that hint at a political ideology.


Here is hoping that rambling mess can be made some sense of. Lol

[benny01]

Well its pure math here in the US. A huge portion of our collective health spend goes to "for profit" insurance companies to the tune of over a trillion dollars per year. If we truly had a collective universal risk pool and took the non value add profit out of the risk pool, we would be able to cover every citizen with full coverage for less than the total outlay now. Of course that would mean that 10s of thousands of very highly compensated insurance executives would need to find something else to do.

Bingo. As I've said many times, any kid that bought pot in high school understands the problem. Why do we have such a difficult time with that message?

The message is easy. You and every other person in the country will be covered and you will spend less than you currently do to make that happen. This will happen with zero change to your current level of care, because we are taking a trillion plus dollar industry out of the equation that doesnt affect your actual care in the least. This is before we do anything else regarding the inflated cost of care in this country.

Will my taxes go up? No, you already pay a tax to your insurance company to the tune of $600-1200 a month. The governments tax will be more generous. We will be lowering that payment

Will my standard of care be affected? No reason in the world that it should, we provide thaybstandard of care now and pay a trillion dollars a year to an unrelated industry. If anything we can provide you a trillion dollars worth of improved care.

Wont this become another bloated government program? We are eliminating a trillion dollar industry that already does that. Having a gall bladder removed will no longer take six phone conversations in order to determine if it is an elective surgery or not. We will be saving enough money that we can fsirly compensate the best people in the industry to run our system. All the best people in the field with one common goal.

Will I be paying for all the freeloaders? Sure, you do now. They have to be treated by law, so your current insurance rates reflect that. You also pay for their care through your state and federal taxes.

The one legitimate gripe that needs dealt with are the people employed by insurance companies and the hit we will take ecomonically from that. Obviously, you were being a little flippant in your reference to the executives, they will be fine, but there is an issue with what to do with everyone else.

[Crovash]

But...but...what about all those impovershed little stockholders?

[SiteWolf]

As someone who is currently being faced with it, I wonder how many actually even know what the current cost to employers IS for decent health insurance. Do you know your employer is paying between $600 and $1500 a month depending on your age? That's 7-18,000 your employer is paying out in addition to your salary or any other benefits, something I don't think a lot of employees truly appreciate or understand. OK, off soapbox there.

To me, the more pertinent question for YEARS than getting everyone coverage has been....why are health costs so high in the first place?! How many hands are in the pot and who's are being greased that shouldn't be?

Still, one thing we also know from private insurance is that the larger the group, the better the savings...because there's a larger pool of premiums going into the pot. So if we were to go to universal health care, that's one very large pool....in theory reducing the cost per individual to the government. But Medicare isn't free now...so would a universal health care change that? Or require the same tiered payments Medicare ppl pay now.

I don't know that I agree that this would become a bloated gov't program or that we'd be eliminating an industry. We'd still need companies and people to administer the program and who better than companies who already have been? It might reduce their revenue, but it would also reduce some of their costs since they wouldn't have to market health plans....but they'd have other plans to sell.

[MRSpock]

Obviously I agree with your outlook on a system of universal healthcare. I also think that the polling is right on this issue. I think the vast majority of americans support universal health care in a bubble, as a stand alone issue.

While I'm a supporter of bernie(I'm much closer ideologically to him than to the center), he holds some blame in the party not adopting it as part of the platform, and the parties cowardice prevented them from picking it up. The democrats, as they usually do, allowed the right to set their agenda. They painted them as extreme leftists(bernie helped them do that based on his views, and the dems doubled down for the right), and they BLINDLY ran to the center as a result.

There is nothing radical about universal health care. The center carried the water for the right on an issue that in your opinion they support. That isnt bernie's fault or the fault of his supporters. The center of the party needs to own that and learn from it. Rather than come together and build a strong message around a universal health care system(while standing for their ideals), they spent the primaries telling the american people that it couldnt be done. They used a primary that could have galvanized a strong and clear message to tear apart an issue that would have been a godsend considering what unfolded after the primaries. A candidate like biden, for fear that he'd be labeled a socialist(we are talking about joe biden here), allowed the right to set his agenda and move away from his ideals out of fear. That isnt the fault of the far left or any bernie supporters. That is a lack of faith in his own convictions.

If it's not that, then the folks talking about the center being bought and sold are right. The establishment dems or the corporate center or whatever label you would like to use is a real thing and working against the people. That makes the far left right in their sentiment.

All of that being said, trump's cult of personality would have made it nearly impossible to pull the votes from the right that you'd expect to get. You werent going to, in any circumstance, pull voters who may be friendly or allies over on that issue. It also why I believe that the polls showing overwhelming support for universal health care were right, the want is there on the issue. The number only take a hit when we add questions that hint at a political ideology.


Here is hoping that rambling mess can be made some sense of. Lol

You're right about the majority wanting Universal, but that's different than what the far left often infers. That people specifically want Bernies healthcare plan.

And what are they suppose to do in that situation? They literally had to change to the more conservative platform just to get ONE more vote to get a Super Majority.

They had 2 options.

1. Pass the ACA.
2. Push singlepayer and watch it get filibustered, and change nothing. The ACA is still way better than what we had. ANd allows us to adjust it little by little. WIth smaller bills.

It's not all the SocDems of course but there's this huge wave of misinformation that goes on there, and it gets frustrating. Because honestly these people just **** on you when you challenge their ideas. I constantly get called names and people don't engage in my points. THey will just say "LOL looks liek you drink the Neo liberal koolaid". Or "believe the corporate agenda all you want".

I just can't get with Bernie on a lot of his policies. The wealth tax is inefficient. Free college is an overstep. Giving 20% of stock to employees is ridiculous. Rent control doesn't work. Federal minimum wage to 15 dollars would cause massive inflation in flyover states. All his policies seem to be completely over the top. Maybe thats on purpose and he's trying to negotiate.. But it doesn't seem possible in this political climate.

[ManRam]

Haven't been on since this thread was posted so I have not read all the posts yet. Just my $0.02 based on nothing in particular.

Leftists have no real political power. What we've seen recently is a real shift of public opinion with regards to progressive policy. The Overton window is moving. When you don't have the power, or especially the money, you have to win in the court of public opinion. You also have to organize and do the hard work on the streets. We're seeing that. And now we're seeing a few leftists actually gain some real power...be it public popularity or winning office.

I definitely get carried away talking about progressive policy being popular...but it is. And it's also good policy. Do leftists overplay their hands? Of course. It's kind of the point. It IS popular policy. And a lot of their policy wants are things that if you give the people a taste of they will never want to give it up. That's a ****ing win-win if I've ever seen it.

Like, I'm not feeling good about Joe Biden. But I think even his neanderthalic self understands that something like forgiving student loan debt is worthwhile. I mean giving money directly to people is 1) massively helpful for millions of struggling people as well as the economy as a whole and 2) great politics!

But Democrats lag. Often decades behind where they should be. Especially on social issues, public opinion has to be on their side for a lot of them to act. Even simple things like gay marriage. Hell, FDR was pushing for socialized medicine a century ago Social change feels attainable. Economic change feels impossible with the current Democratic leadership.

Anyways...Is it all as popular as it's touted? I don't know.

I certainly don't care. Because each day that something like m4a, single payer, student debt relief, criminal justice reform, anti-imperialism sentiment, etc. gains more popularity, well, we're all winning. We're getting closer to better things. To a country that doesn't light all it's wealth on fire to wage endless wars, overpolice our communities, insure that Billionaires can make an absolute killing during a recession/pandemic, and a million other things that keep so many people in the supposed greatest country in the world down.

So yeah. Everyone does love our policies. Don't care!

[spliff(TONE)]

Well it's a blurry line between influence and control.

Mainstream American media by and large has an anti right wing bias to it. Whether that bias is justified or not is a (slightly) diff topic, as my point has more to do with methods of propaganda.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

....says the guy that thinks CGTN is an excellent source of news and superior to any American news options.

[nastynice]

....says the guy that thinks CGTN is an excellent source of news and superior to any American news options. [emoji23]

Oh, you must not be familiar with american propaganda...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[spliff(TONE)]

Oh, you must not be familiar with reality...



I love that you can't even deny the claims I made.

[MRSpock]

Super secret good news station.

CNN... WOrld

[benny01]

You're right about the majority wanting Universal, but that's different than what the far left often infers. That people specifically want Bernies healthcare plan.

And what are they suppose to do in that situation? They literally had to change to the more conservative platform just to get ONE more vote to get a Super Majority.

They had 2 options.

1. Pass the ACA.
2. Push singlepayer and watch it get filibustered, and change nothing. The ACA is still way better than what we had. ANd allows us to adjust it little by little. WIth smaller bills.

It's not all the SocDems of course but there's this huge wave of misinformation that goes on there, and it gets frustrating. Because honestly these people just **** on you when you challenge their ideas. I constantly get called names and people don't engage in my points. THey will just say "LOL looks liek you drink the Neo liberal koolaid". Or "believe the corporate agenda all you want".

I just can't get with Bernie on a lot of his policies. The wealth tax is inefficient. Free college is an overstep. Giving 20% of stock to employees is ridiculous. Rent control doesn't work. Federal minimum wage to 15 dollars would cause massive inflation in flyover states. All his policies seem to be completely over the top. Maybe thats on purpose and he's trying to negotiate.. But it doesn't seem possible in this political climate.

Sure, you have bernie sycophants same as you have trump sycophants, same as every politician before them. We are weird culture.

There is a third option, pass the ACA and walk to the bully pulpit and argue that we need to go further. Explain to the American people while the ACA is a step in the right direction, but that it doesn't address the fundamental issues with health care in this country. In other words, make concessions where you need to, but continue the fight to get to where we need to be. Maybe take five minutes, pat yourself on the back, and get back to work.

Sure, refer to the first paragraph.

Yeah, bernie wanted to take a lot of big bites. That being said, had he been the president elect right now, I have no doubt that we would be hearing about progressive policies every single day regardless of how those issues were polling or how likely or not we were to pass them. Many of these ideas that seem radical will have been flushed out publicly for an entire term and on many issues the nature of those debates would be changed greatly. The old overton window, as manram suggests.

[TylerSL]

When you look at things like Medicare 4 All and Green New Deal at the surface of course they are going to be more popular than when you really dive into their intricacies, but that applies to almost everything. People want politicians who will govern to make their lives better, and progressives are a much better alternative to the establishment in Washington who only serves their donors.

Republicans love to make George Soros the boogeyman and Democrats do the same with the Koch Brothers and Sheldon Adelson, but really it's the entire donor class that makes Washington corrupt. They shell out hundreds of millions of dollars to lawmakers so they can avoid taxes, suppress wages, and not worry about oversight or regulations. Defense contractors shell out hundreds of millions of dollars to lawmakers to promote endless wars so they can continue raking in billions selling weapons to both the United States and foreign countries. The money machine that flows through Washington because of both parties is the reason things are as bad as they are. At the end of the day, progressives are the alternative to that.

Do people want Medicare for All specifically? I'm sure there are other alternatives that would be acceptable, but the fact is the United States pays more on healthcare per person than every other nation on earth, but we're the only ones who don't guarantee healthcare to every citizen. We are literally paying more for less, all to increase the stock prices for the heath insurance and pharmaceutical companies. If the U.S. had an up and down vote between M4A and the current system, we all know what would win.

Progressives are the alternative to the Washington swamp, and they are finally accumulating power. There will be 10 Justice Democrats in Congress. That's obviously not enough to force votes on the House floor, but they have the support of the base and Democrats are supporting more and more progressive policies. Bernie Sanders really did start a revolution, it's just taking years to break through the swamp of Washington.

[TylerSL]

Read your OP, it's not the "far left" that makes the ACA out to be this super unpopular legislation, that would be the far right. What progressives do say is that the ACA doesn't address rising healthcare costs and it's really the best version of a broken system. Medicare can't negotiate drug prices, the government doesn't cap what the pharmaceutical companies can charge for prescription drugs, and we don't even have a public option. Compared to what Bernie Sanders proposed, the ACA is clearly inferior legislation. You say that ACA became more popular after it was implemented, which is true, but don't you think that would also apply to Medicare for All? Not only would people no longer have to shell out hundreds of dollars a month for insurance, but employers would no longer be burdened with providing insurance for their workers. People could get used to that.

[MRSpock]

Sure, you have bernie sycophants same as you have trump sycophants, same as every politician before them. We are weird culture.

There is a third option, pass the ACA and walk to the bully pulpit and argue that we need to go further. Explain to the American people while the ACA is a step in the right direction, but that it doesn't address the fundamental issues with health care in this country. In other words, make concessions where you need to, but continue the fight to get to where we need to be. Maybe take five minutes, pat yourself on the back, and get back to work.

Sure, refer to the first paragraph.

Yeah, bernie wanted to take a lot of big bites. That being said, had he been the president elect right now, I have no doubt that we would be hearing about progressive policies every single day regardless of how those issues were polling or how likely or not we were to pass them. Many of these ideas that seem radical will have been flushed out publicly for an entire term and on many issues the nature of those debates would be changed greatly. The old overton window, as manram suggests.

This is a lot different than before. We use to argue and what would be better. Now we argue reality.

At this point healthcare is nothing more than a political platform. It gets votes. Everyone in politics knows there won't be any major reform. We have to fix what we got.

The Overton window is bull. I'm sorry. It's an unproven political theory made by a libertarian.

I have never seen a single study that in anyways proves that going further to another side of the spectrum actually does anything. I never had much faith in the theory in general, but people should stop using it to support radicalization.