3 ms·

Sure but I think the thrust of OP is correct. single payer alone is close to 70% now. medicare itself is very very popular in that age group. People are easi

Sure but I think the thrust of OP is correct. single payer alone is close to 70% now. medicare itself is very very popular in that age group. People are easily scared and those that already have good care are afraid of losing it. Look at death panels. but the general idea of healthcare as a fundamental right and a national system of health are very popular.

ch4s3 4y ago
> single payer alone is close to 70% now. Thats only when you don't get into the details of the implementation, and things like the need to pay for it with something like a European style VAT tax. When you dig in to the details in the polls, support plummets. This isn't a critique of the idea, just noting the on the details almost no Americans actually support doing what it would take to implement. > Look at death panels. All healthcare systems have some kind of rationing, in America generally people who don't have employer provided healthcare and are neither especially poor or old get care rationed. This isn't ideal, I agree.
- jquery 4y ago
  "when we fearmonger, support plummets" yeah I'm not surprised.
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    This is IMHO akin to the false consciousness argument and probably wrong. I think when people say they want A but not if they personally have to pay a lot for A, then it seems like we should take them at their word. This isn’t a value judgment or to say that single payer wouldn’t on the whole be for example for a 20% VAT, but Americans by very large margins say they don’t want that. I think it’s really important to be honest about these things when have discussions about public policy. Trying to mislead with survey data, telling white lies, and hiding costs ultimately undermines your position. People will find out, and it negatively influences their opinion of your position.
- dillondoyle 4y ago
  American's just don't like taxes. When explained that the system is cheaper, their net costs would be the same or lower, it still has solid support. the problem again is the 'haves' (who also tend to vote a lot more) are the ones who see themselves as losing and gaining a tax. if it's employer paid for and you don't even know the true value it's hard to see it as comp
  - ch4s3 4y ago
    > When explained that the system is cheaper, their net costs would be the same or lower, it still has solid support. I haven’t seen polling that shows that. Well older people tend to vote more, but there are a lot of lower income folks who vote reliably. I think part of the issue is that proponents of single payer in the US present it as something that can be paid for by further taxing “the rich” alone, and that’s clearly not true. No other country pays for social welfare that way, and it’s trivial to find that out. Being dishonest about how it might be funded undermines the project politically. No one is trying to sell the idea that VAT + healthcare is a better overall deal. Which it may or may not be, depending on the implementation. Nevertheless proponents are lying about how it can be paid for.

ch4s3 4y ago

> single payer alone is close to 70% now. Thats only when you don't get into the details of the implementation, and things like the need to pay for it with something like a European style VAT tax. When you dig in to the details in the polls, support plummets. This isn't a critique of the idea, just noting the on the details almost no Americans actually support doing what it would take to implement. > Look at death panels. All healthcare systems have some kind of rationing, in America generally people who don't have employer provided healthcare and are neither especially poor or old get care rationed. This isn't ideal, I agree.

jquery 4y ago
"when we fearmonger, support plummets" yeah I'm not surprised.
- ch4s3 4y ago
  This is IMHO akin to the false consciousness argument and probably wrong. I think when people say they want A but not if they personally have to pay a lot for A, then it seems like we should take them at their word. This isn’t a value judgment or to say that single payer wouldn’t on the whole be for example for a 20% VAT, but Americans by very large margins say they don’t want that. I think it’s really important to be honest about these things when have discussions about public policy. Trying to mislead with survey data, telling white lies, and hiding costs ultimately undermines your position. People will find out, and it negatively influences their opinion of your position.
dillondoyle 4y ago
American's just don't like taxes. When explained that the system is cheaper, their net costs would be the same or lower, it still has solid support. the problem again is the 'haves' (who also tend to vote a lot more) are the ones who see themselves as losing and gaining a tax. if it's employer paid for and you don't even know the true value it's hard to see it as comp
- ch4s3 4y ago
  > When explained that the system is cheaper, their net costs would be the same or lower, it still has solid support. I haven’t seen polling that shows that. Well older people tend to vote more, but there are a lot of lower income folks who vote reliably. I think part of the issue is that proponents of single payer in the US present it as something that can be paid for by further taxing “the rich” alone, and that’s clearly not true. No other country pays for social welfare that way, and it’s trivial to find that out. Being dishonest about how it might be funded undermines the project politically. No one is trying to sell the idea that VAT + healthcare is a better overall deal. Which it may or may not be, depending on the implementation. Nevertheless proponents are lying about how it can be paid for.