politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I always figured a great deal of those people would move to government work. They already have the expertise.
The problem is that there are large parts of those companies that are replicated multiple times that would be made redundant.
Each company has an IT department, legal department, marketing department, and claims department, among a lot else. Most of those would be redundant or unnecessary in a single payer system.
Part of the reason single payer is more cost effective is eliminating administrative overhead. And “administrative overhead “ is code for jobs.
Any job that gets between a patient and the care they need is a job that needs to die.
No doubt. I'm an antiwork radical and think nobody should have a job. But the one thing both political parties and the public seem to agree on is "more jobs" so anyone who says "less jobs" isn't going to get elected.
And what will you do with all these unemployed people?
Checkmate, guys. We can't endanger some jobs in order to help everyone. Sorry. Guess we'll just keep doing this failure of a system that keeps a few rich from the rest of us struggling.
No answer huh? I'll send a million beggars to your doorstep. Jesus Christ you people are children. Can we actually talk about how this works?!
I'm sorry, I actually took your message as the typical shutdown response aka "but my jobs" as a reaction to any change. For example when Clinton came to WV coal miners offering a gateway to alternatives and was told coal jobs or nothing. Granted it was campaigning, but the mindset of resistance to change is very strong in an established community or industry.
To answer you more seriously (which was hidden in my first reply), some jobs have to disappear when there are major changes. But others can open up as well, and many of them will have some commonality. I guarantee there is no plan of transition for these same companies when there are mergers or bankruptcies, so what do those people do in those cases? They find a comparable job. I thought our economy was doing great as far as employment and opportunity, this shouldn't be a big deal if all that is true (I think it's a lot of smoke and mirrors, but it doesn't change the point).
Change hurts people, there's no denying that. But so does stagnation, and I think without change more people get hurt while others profit. That does need to change.
Outlining and discussion of what needs to happen is difficult in social media. Few have the time or knowledge to do a proper debate and rebuttal, cite sources, and follow the many chains that develop. But it's interesting that we all do seem to acknowledge that what we have sucks, and something needs to happen.
Nope. Obviously, pointing out the reality of the situation and asking to discuss possible ways to overcome the very real and very difficult barriers the capitalists have erected means you actually secretly agree that those barriers should be in place and therefore think we should do nothing instead.
I say this as a lefty AuDHDer: the amount of neurodivergent black-white thinking in leftist communities is extremely concerning. Kind of comes with the territory, probably, given that authoritarians want us dead, but it can create some serious infighting. It should not be controversial to acknowledge the fact that in our current climate, single payer is almost impossible thanks to the opposition from the capitalists.
Do not question comrade! That's the liberal social media vibe. You have to carefully couch your statements or get burned down for asking.
And that seems logical! But we've talked about combining the local city and county for cost savings. Turns out, it wouldn't be too big a deal.
Not like if we doubled the population we'd need the same amount of people approving construction planning. We'd pretty much need double. And that's one of 1,000 examples.
But you're spot on with admin overhead! That would indeed drop. Not by half, as in my example, but it would certainly drop. The biggest drop would be profit. And we can all agree healthcare shouldn't run like private enterprise.
I'm totally with you. Yes, got single-payer would slash thousands and thousands of jobs, maybe a million or three. And yes, that would fucking hurt. It's like the Obama quotes you posted. We didn't start on a level playing field, we started in a ditch.
Lemmy hates our sort of discourse. "NO! It's all very simple! Why won't you talk simple!"
I’m 100% on board with Medicare for all and have been since 2016. I’m just trying to recognize logistical and political speedbumps
Lemmy: NO! SIMPLE ONLY!
You're fighting an uphill battle.