6 ms·

Definitely Aarogyasri in AP saved millions of Lives. Current administration tried to remove the program since its not introduced by them and can't take credit f

by kumarm 9y ago

Definitely Aarogyasri in AP saved millions of Lives. Current administration tried to remove the program since its not introduced by them and can't take credit for. So they are trying to kill it slowly (By removing people from program, cutting benefits etc). I wonder what will happen to this Free Health insurance program when central government changes next time.

horsecaptin 9y ago
Isn't the current government conservative and pro-business? If the are the ones implementing free healthcare, then why should the leftist opposition want to remove it? I bet they'll try to undermine it at every stage well before they ever get power. That will make it easy to kill or fix it when they do get power back.
- IanDrake 9y ago
  According to the article, there already is free healthcare provided by the government. The problem is that model, predictably, sucks. “Although government-run hospitals are theoretically free for everyone, the waits are long, quality is poor and corruption is endemic.” So the left doesn’t want private healthcare providers to show them up.
  - wavefunction 9y ago
    "The left" makes me curious who you're referring to. Billing fraud is of course a problem with private health-care providers as well.
    - IanDrake 9y ago
      Strange that you don’t know “the left” means, but here you go... http://slideplayer.com/slide/726731/2/images/1/The+Political+Spectrum.jpg http://slideplayer.com/slide/726731/2/images/1/The+Political... I didn’t say billing fraud was a problem with government run healthcare, so I fail to understand the “as well” part of your statement.
      - freeflight 9y ago
        That doesn't mean or say anything at all, for a far more useful breakdown try this: https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 If more people would expand their horizon and realize there's more to politics than "left vs right" then all this bipartisan crap flinging might get toned down a bit.
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        There's actually very little empirical evidence that the particular two-axis model offered by political compass (or libertarians in general) is much better at modelling real-world distribution of political ideas that the one-axis left-right model. That's not to say that there aren't other axes of variation than the left-right axis, though.
  - jimjimjim 9y ago
    why did you say 'the left'? why do you see the world as two opposing sides?
    - IanDrake 9y ago
      First, read the parent comment. The parent is asking specifically about “leftist”. Second, why do I see it that way? Because at the end of the day that is a legitimate way to divide people. While some will attempt to divide people based on meaningless physical attributes, I’m dividing people based on what they think. Why on earth would that be unusual or undersireable?
victor106 9y ago
The current state government is pro business and don’t have any money to implement or continue any past programs. Whatever money they have is spent on pet projects and making themselves rich. The previous government even though was corrupt at least did something for the poor. I personally witnessed AROGYASHRI being used by the poor and the amount of stability it bought to their daily lives. I also agree that there was lot of corruption in the program. If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day. After all, the healthcare system in the US is filled with corrupt participants. Let’s us not make the perfect the enemy of the good. P.S:- I am not a citizen of India or don’t have any Indian roots but I lived there for a few years doing volunteer social work to help the poor.
- coliveira 9y ago
  > If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day This is very important. We need to finally realize that corruption is endemic to the system, and when corruption is raised as an issue it is generally to disadvantage the poor (last time I looked Wall Street is still doing fine even under the highest levels of corruption one can imagine).
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- spynxic 9y ago
  > If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day. Corruption inherently makes the system insolvent, and in the worst-case, will result in a major debt if not addressed early on.
  - omegaworks 9y ago
    >Corruption inherently makes the system insolvent False. Profitable private companies have to deal with loss all the time. It's called shrinkage. It can be mitigated, but like everything the costs of mitigation must be weighed against the benefits. http://fortune.com/2015/06/05/walmart-theft/ http://fortune.com/2015/06/05/walmart-theft/ Keep in mind, right-wing governments actively exploit this "corruption exists, therefore the entire social program is worthless" bug in our national consciousness. It's an effective political tool to transfer wealth away from the poor. I agree with parent: > Let’s us not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

by kumarm 9y ago

horsecaptin 9y ago

Isn't the current government conservative and pro-business? If the are the ones implementing free healthcare, then why should the leftist opposition want to remove it? I bet they'll try to undermine it at every stage well before they ever get power. That will make it easy to kill or fix it when they do get power back.

IanDrake 9y ago
According to the article, there already is free healthcare provided by the government. The problem is that model, predictably, sucks. “Although government-run hospitals are theoretically free for everyone, the waits are long, quality is poor and corruption is endemic.” So the left doesn’t want private healthcare providers to show them up.
- wavefunction 9y ago
  "The left" makes me curious who you're referring to. Billing fraud is of course a problem with private health-care providers as well.
  - IanDrake 9y ago
    Strange that you don’t know “the left” means, but here you go... http://slideplayer.com/slide/726731/2/images/1/The+Political+Spectrum.jpg http://slideplayer.com/slide/726731/2/images/1/The+Political... I didn’t say billing fraud was a problem with government run healthcare, so I fail to understand the “as well” part of your statement.
    - freeflight 9y ago
      That doesn't mean or say anything at all, for a far more useful breakdown try this: https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2 If more people would expand their horizon and realize there's more to politics than "left vs right" then all this bipartisan crap flinging might get toned down a bit.
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        There's actually very little empirical evidence that the particular two-axis model offered by political compass (or libertarians in general) is much better at modelling real-world distribution of political ideas that the one-axis left-right model. That's not to say that there aren't other axes of variation than the left-right axis, though.
- jimjimjim 9y ago
  why did you say 'the left'? why do you see the world as two opposing sides?
  - IanDrake 9y ago
    First, read the parent comment. The parent is asking specifically about “leftist”. Second, why do I see it that way? Because at the end of the day that is a legitimate way to divide people. While some will attempt to divide people based on meaningless physical attributes, I’m dividing people based on what they think. Why on earth would that be unusual or undersireable?

victor106 9y ago

The current state government is pro business and don’t have any money to implement or continue any past programs. Whatever money they have is spent on pet projects and making themselves rich. The previous government even though was corrupt at least did something for the poor. I personally witnessed AROGYASHRI being used by the poor and the amount of stability it bought to their daily lives. I also agree that there was lot of corruption in the program. If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day. After all, the healthcare system in the US is filled with corrupt participants. Let’s us not make the perfect the enemy of the good. P.S:- I am not a citizen of India or don’t have any Indian roots but I lived there for a few years doing volunteer social work to help the poor.

coliveira 9y ago
> If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day This is very important. We need to finally realize that corruption is endemic to the system, and when corruption is raised as an issue it is generally to disadvantage the poor (last time I looked Wall Street is still doing fine even under the highest levels of corruption one can imagine).
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
spynxic 9y ago
> If the choice is between saving the lives of the poor with corruption vs letting them die without I would choose the former any day. Corruption inherently makes the system insolvent, and in the worst-case, will result in a major debt if not addressed early on.
- omegaworks 9y ago
  >Corruption inherently makes the system insolvent False. Profitable private companies have to deal with loss all the time. It's called shrinkage. It can be mitigated, but like everything the costs of mitigation must be weighed against the benefits. http://fortune.com/2015/06/05/walmart-theft/ http://fortune.com/2015/06/05/walmart-theft/ Keep in mind, right-wing governments actively exploit this "corruption exists, therefore the entire social program is worthless" bug in our national consciousness. It's an effective political tool to transfer wealth away from the poor. I agree with parent: > Let’s us not make the perfect the enemy of the good.