7 ms·
Like Bernie Sanders? Who was then placed in a debate in an “insurance town” where every audience question was some insurance leech complaint that his plan would
by explaininjs 4y ago
Like Bernie Sanders? Who was then placed in a debate in an “insurance town” where every audience question was some insurance leech complaint that his plan would destroy their jobs? Yeah dude. That’s the point, your job is bullshit and you shouldn’t be doing it.
The media also loved to bring on people who “adored their current insurance plan and would hate to lose it”. I’ve never met someone like that in real life, but the MSM would have you believing you
were the only one in all of America who had any ill thoughts about their insurance company.
If voting could change anything it’d be illegal.
- davidw 4y ago> If voting could change anything it’d be illegal. The absolute best way to ensure that nothing changes is to get cynical and try and demotivate anyone else from trying.
- farmaway 4y agoMaybe you're both right.
- explaininjs 4y agoThe only path to substantial change is and has always been violent revolution. I welcome anyone to try that.
- laurex 4y agoThere’s nonviolent revolution, too. But it’s still likely to yield violence in response because these systems are inherently violent and ultimately enforced with violence.
- explaininjs 4y agoWhat would you consider the most substantial change to come about via nonviolent revolution?
- LocalH 4y agoI doubt that will ever happen when the Western world is so conditioned to view overthrowing the government as treason
- explaininjs 4y agoIs there a part of the world that doesn’t view overthrowing the government as treason?
- willcipriano 4y agoThe mainstream media also doesn't mention that Americans already spend, on a per capita basis, the most on socialized medicine on the planet. I wonder if it has anything to do with those drug commercials that they play constantly?
- paledot 4y agoBy my understanding, that's the most on health care. This includes private insurance premiums, which is why the "we like private because it's cheaper" argument doesn't hold water.
- willcipriano 4y agoNope, the US government spends the most on socialized medicine. The "We need to raise taxes to have universal coverage" argument doesn't hold water. https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm
- paledot 4y agoInteresting. In the summary, it's not clear what qualifies as "compulsory health insurance": > Health care is financed through a mix of financing arrangements including government spending and compulsory health insurance (“Government/compulsory”) Digging into the source report[0], we see the following footnote exclusive to the US: > All spending by private health insurance companies reported under compulsory health insurance. Category “Other” refers to financing by NGOs, employers, non-resident schemes and unknown schemes. [0]: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/ae3016b9-en/1/3/7/4/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/ae3016b9-en&_csp_=ca413da5d44587bc56446341952c275e&itemIGO=oecd&itemContentType=book https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/ae3016b9-en/1/3/7/4/inde...
- wolverine876 4y ago> If voting could change anything it’d be illegal. Yet things do change, dramatically.
- explaininjs 4y agoAnd I do wonder what the root of that is.
- wolverine876 4y agoThe root is you. The root is people believing they can change things. The far right believed it and has (unforunately) achieved inconceivable successes based only on utter bullshit and madness.
- explaininjs 4y agoThat’s one way of looking at it certainly. However I’ve never in all my life voted in any election where my vote had any capacity to have any bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the election. This is by design: America is about clumping people together into voting blocks so large that first past the post dynamics prohibit any but the most conventional of viewpoints rising to the surface. What have the “far right” changed? And was it through voting or other means? In a sibling I admit violent revolution as a plausible change causer, and claim it is unique in that regard.