4 ms·

The democrats couldn't do it when they had WH and Congress... they had to go with Plan B - "Obamacare". Personally, I believe that Plan B was written to fail.

The democrats couldn't do it when they had WH and Congress... they had to go with Plan B - "Obamacare". Personally, I believe that Plan B was written to fail. Government creates problems. How do you solve the problem? More government. Obamacare, imho, was created as the groundwork for single payer. I just don't think they expected it to fail so hard and so fast. I have no faith in single payer... for example, look at the VA. Months of wait times for those who need the help... while those at the top get lavish bonuses.

ubernostrum 10y ago
Single payer works well in many places other than the US. People on private insurance plans in the US die or suffer while waiting for care their plans allegedly offer, while executives of those private insurance companies get "lavish bonuses".
- AznHisoka 10y ago
  the people who die, i assume are the ones that cant afford that care and need to knoww beforehand its going to be completely covered?
  - ubernostrum 10y ago
    Plenty of things require referrals and authorizations and those can be processed at a glacial pace, yes.
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  The US is the wrong level of government for a healthcare system. If a place like California wanted to offer free healthcare to its residents, that's fine, but the federal government should only be responsible for war, negotiating trade deals, handling immigration, and other external issues. Keep in mind that "many other places" are smaller than a single US state.
  - ubernostrum 10y ago
    Your view went out of fashion with the Articles of Confederation; the ultra-limited "only for a handful of external-facing issues" federal government was an abject failure.
  - pnutjam 10y ago
    Consider that Californian's pay about $290 Billion to the Feds and the state collects about $70 billion. Do other small countries pay most of their taxes to a larger central organization? Much of that Federal money gets shunted to other states.
    - MichaelBurge 10y ago
      For consistency, I also support repealing the 16th amendment and removing the interstate commerce clause. Then California would have more direct control over its citizens' tax money.
      - ubernostrum 10y ago
        Why stop there? You seem to want not a nation of 50 states, but 50 completely independently sovereign nations which will somehow miraculously also agree to cooperate on the handful of things that you personally feel they should. This has been tried, and failed, and was replaced with the Constitution we have now.
        grzm 10y ago
        At one time it was more common to use "These United States of America" and "the United States are …" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Etymology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Etymology
        wernercd 10y ago
        The reality is in the middle. We are ONE Nation AND FIFTY Nations. > which will somehow miraculously also agree to cooperate on the handful of things that you personally feel they should That's what the constitution is for... it states what the Federal Government does... everything else SHOULD be state issues. Those clearly drawn lines have been eroded over the years and is one of the larger points of contentions between the "Constitutionalists" who think that we should have a government actually limited by those rules... and those who think the government has all the answers and should have no limit

ubernostrum 10y ago

Single payer works well in many places other than the US. People on private insurance plans in the US die or suffer while waiting for care their plans allegedly offer, while executives of those private insurance companies get "lavish bonuses".

AznHisoka 10y ago
the people who die, i assume are the ones that cant afford that care and need to knoww beforehand its going to be completely covered?
- ubernostrum 10y ago
  Plenty of things require referrals and authorizations and those can be processed at a glacial pace, yes.
MichaelBurge 10y ago
The US is the wrong level of government for a healthcare system. If a place like California wanted to offer free healthcare to its residents, that's fine, but the federal government should only be responsible for war, negotiating trade deals, handling immigration, and other external issues. Keep in mind that "many other places" are smaller than a single US state.
- ubernostrum 10y ago
  Your view went out of fashion with the Articles of Confederation; the ultra-limited "only for a handful of external-facing issues" federal government was an abject failure.
- pnutjam 10y ago
  Consider that Californian's pay about $290 Billion to the Feds and the state collects about $70 billion. Do other small countries pay most of their taxes to a larger central organization? Much of that Federal money gets shunted to other states.
  - MichaelBurge 10y ago
    For consistency, I also support repealing the 16th amendment and removing the interstate commerce clause. Then California would have more direct control over its citizens' tax money.
    - ubernostrum 10y ago
      Why stop there? You seem to want not a nation of 50 states, but 50 completely independently sovereign nations which will somehow miraculously also agree to cooperate on the handful of things that you personally feel they should. This has been tried, and failed, and was replaced with the Constitution we have now.
      - grzm 10y ago
        At one time it was more common to use "These United States of America" and "the United States are …" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Etymology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States#Etymology
      - wernercd 10y ago
        The reality is in the middle. We are ONE Nation AND FIFTY Nations. > which will somehow miraculously also agree to cooperate on the handful of things that you personally feel they should That's what the constitution is for... it states what the Federal Government does... everything else SHOULD be state issues. Those clearly drawn lines have been eroded over the years and is one of the larger points of contentions between the "Constitutionalists" who think that we should have a government actually limited by those rules... and those who think the government has all the answers and should have no limit