view the rest of the comments
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 US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted 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 other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. 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 an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have 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. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News

So, better to have people die in bankruptcy as they are now because we can't ensure some people won't fuddy-duddy?
Oh no it's terrible now. I am for universal healthcare, or at the very least Medicare for all. I'm just very depressed about the way the Wrong Wing ruins everything all the time, decade after decade.
Medicare for all isn't universal health care?
Medicare is more like government -sponsored insurance, see my reply to Spitefire. I still pay a monthly premium but it's about a fifth of my old insurance, and I still get the silly "THIS IS NOT A BILL" paperwork in many languages telling me what they have been charged, what they paid, and what I paid/will get a bill for, just like with a PPO insurance company. Only so far my copays have been much less, so that's nice.
With universal health care, the government would pay doctors and hospitals directly, they'd save paper and processing , and I wouldn't even get involved. If we ever managed to get it here, I'm sure the GOP would insist we'd have some kind of monthly fee separate from other taxes so they could bitch about it and have an ID card so poor or immigrant people could be excluded.
Not my comment, but I think it's more that Medicare fucking sucks. But if everybody has it that would be better than now.
Medicare isn't bad. It's the original version of what we old folks have, there's a fee and copays but it covers a lot including hospitals etc, you can go to any doctor, and you can get a supplement plan to cover the copays for a lot less than ordinary health insurance.
"Medicare Advantage" is a ripoff, it's privatized and has all the limitations (network of doctors, approval /rejection of care bullshit, etc) of an HMO.
Medicaid is for poor people and its main problem is that a lot of doctors won't take Medicare patients because it pays them so much less for the same work. That sucks.
What we need is a cross between the two. Medicaid lacks doctors, but it also lacks copay. For all its inconveniences when I was on it it was easier to get care than some employer provided insurances.
Really what we need is a government owned corporation akin to the NHS, except with standards of care directly pinned to the AMA/APA to prevent meddling in politicized healthcare.
I'd vote for that.
You really think that could happen in today's political sphere? You have voters like these
who elect politicians like this
because they want this
Oh well, since we've got a bunch of evil assholes we should just talk ourselves down real quick instead of expressing a clear plan that would have a wide range of palatability. Of course it'll be a fight, but it's a fight worth having.