Single payer healthcare is far more likely to work, like it has in first world countries.
this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2024
55 points (96.6% liked)
Health - Resources and discussion for everything health-related
2398 readers
75 users here now
Health: physical and mental, individual and public.
Discussions, issues, resources, news, everything.
See the pinned post for a long list of other communities dedicated to health or specific diagnoses. The list is continuously updated.
Nothing here shall be taken as medical or any other kind of professional advice.
Commercial advertising is considered spam and not allowed. If you're not sure, contact mods to ask beforehand.
Linked videos without original description context by OP to initiate healthy, constructive discussions will be removed.
Regular rules of lemmy.world apply. Be civil.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I like your phrasing.
To fix this, experts propose stronger state-led regulatory agencies to curb spending growth, enforce affordability, and prioritize public welfare over profit.
No, we already tried ACA and it failed us.
Single payer or bust
I guess one dead parasite ain't enough for these clowns to get a clue.
Yea really the article is pretty tone deaf. Like advocating for states rights
I agree but one thing they could do is not allow any one entity to be involved in more than one sector of it. insurance, provider, hospital, pharmacy, manufacturer. you can be in one and only one.
The problem is they bought off both parties...
Even when they donate to people who tried to steal 2020, that didn't stop neoliberals from taking their money in exchange for fighting healthcare reform.
https://www.americandemocracyscorecard.org/unitedhealth-group/
https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/unitedhealth-group/summary?id=D000000348
When the wealthy buy off both options, the "good" option is going to lose because the "bad" option has voters who are used to blindly voting against their best interests.
Dems don't have that luxury and insisting voters change has a terrible fucking track record.
The problem is the people running the DNC would prefer their chosen candidate loses in the general than a progressive becomes president. Because if the party becomes progressive, the wealthy will stop giving them so much money.
But no e of this can change as long as the DNC leadership is made up of campaign bundlers and the only metric for advancement is how much you can bundle. The people with zero standards who will take money from anyone will always rise to the top, and keep only caring about money.
Never forget trump used to give so much to those neoliberals that the Clinton's came to his wedding and pretended to tolerate him.
Those are the quality of people steering the DNC, and have been for decades now.
To fix this, experts propose stronger state-led regulatory agencies to curb spending growth, enforce affordability, and prioritize public welfare over profit.
Well, it’s a good thing sociopathic anti-regulation billionaires are about to take control of all levers of government, then. Surely they’ll prioritise public welfare over profit.
Soooo the next targets would be the leaders of firms that financialize healthcare, monopolize markets, and impose barriers upon collective action to address systemic failures? Seems simple enough.
Sounds like some more CEOs need to be murdered