4 ms·

The United States will never have universal healthcare because a subset of the population would rather pay more for worse health outcomes than participate in a

The United States will never have universal healthcare because a subset of the population would rather pay more for worse health outcomes than participate in a system the provides abortions, HRT, or PreP, or any healthcare at all to Black people. See, for example, “Dying of Whiteness: How the Politics of Racial Resentment Is Killing America’s Heartland” by Jonathan Metzl

some_random 7mo ago
[flagged]
- 46493168 7mo ago
  What does this comment mean?
  - mekdoonggi 7mo ago
    I think that some_random is saying sarcastically, "46493168, keep doing libel on people of white blood by stating that they vote against health insurance reform because they are racist, and maybe it will solve the problem."
- buellerbueller 7mo ago
  That's good, love how you're co-opting anti-semitism for your own political ends. "Blood libel" refers to a specifically anti-Jewish trope of alleging that Jews murder Christians, especially children, to use their blood for religious rituals. Grandparent comment is 100% not blood libel.
jkestner 7mo ago
But they’re a subset. It can happen. The more critical, and yet smaller, subset is the people making bank from the current system. Get their money out of politics and watch resistance crumble.
- 46493168 7mo ago
  Yes, precisely. The smaller subset that make bank from the current system directly benefit from us poors (aka non-billionaires) from blaming the person lower on the ladder.
onlyrealcuzzo 7mo ago
> The United States will never have universal healthcare because a subset of the population would rather pay more for worse health outcomes than participate in a system the provides abortions, HRT, or PreP, or any healthcare at all to Black people. This subset does exist, but is smaller than the percentage of people who think the system is broken - and the solution is not to just open up the floodgates and make it even more broken and even more expensive. You FIRST have to fix the system before you open up the floodgates. I am on your side that I think it would actually cost LESS to move all high-cost patients off of the ER and onto Medicaid. But that's not a big enough problem to actually move the needle. In the rosiest scenario, you might save 2% per year. That's still like $20-40B, so nothing to scoff at - but in realistic scenarios, I'm doubtful it would save >$10B. Even if they had Medicaid, they're so conditioned on going to the ER for everything, a lot of them might still go there instead of somewhere cheaper. For one, they might be convinced they get better care there (and maybe they would). There's way bigger fish to fry.
- 46493168 7mo ago
  >You FIRST have to fix the system before you open up the floodgates. I don't see any reason to fix the system on a nationwide level. Let the individual states figure it out. There's things that the top 5 US states for healthcare have in common, and there's things that the bottom 5 US states have in common [0]. They know how to talk to each other if they want to know more. [0]https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/scorecard/2025/jun/2025-scorecard-state-health-system-performance https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/scorecard/2025...
  - onlyrealcuzzo 7mo ago
    > I don't see any reason to fix the system on a nationwide level. Let the individual states figure it out. It's a problem because the nation already ineffectively covers the tail. The state shall not fix what is not a problem for the state.
    - deleted 7mo ago
      [deleted]

some_random 7mo ago

[flagged]

46493168 7mo ago
What does this comment mean?
- mekdoonggi 7mo ago
  I think that some_random is saying sarcastically, "46493168, keep doing libel on people of white blood by stating that they vote against health insurance reform because they are racist, and maybe it will solve the problem."
buellerbueller 7mo ago
That's good, love how you're co-opting anti-semitism for your own political ends. "Blood libel" refers to a specifically anti-Jewish trope of alleging that Jews murder Christians, especially children, to use their blood for religious rituals. Grandparent comment is 100% not blood libel.

jkestner 7mo ago

But they’re a subset. It can happen. The more critical, and yet smaller, subset is the people making bank from the current system. Get their money out of politics and watch resistance crumble.

46493168 7mo ago
Yes, precisely. The smaller subset that make bank from the current system directly benefit from us poors (aka non-billionaires) from blaming the person lower on the ladder.

onlyrealcuzzo 7mo ago

> The United States will never have universal healthcare because a subset of the population would rather pay more for worse health outcomes than participate in a system the provides abortions, HRT, or PreP, or any healthcare at all to Black people. This subset does exist, but is smaller than the percentage of people who think the system is broken - and the solution is not to just open up the floodgates and make it even more broken and even more expensive. You FIRST have to fix the system before you open up the floodgates. I am on your side that I think it would actually cost LESS to move all high-cost patients off of the ER and onto Medicaid. But that's not a big enough problem to actually move the needle. In the rosiest scenario, you might save 2% per year. That's still like $20-40B, so nothing to scoff at - but in realistic scenarios, I'm doubtful it would save >$10B. Even if they had Medicaid, they're so conditioned on going to the ER for everything, a lot of them might still go there instead of somewhere cheaper. For one, they might be convinced they get better care there (and maybe they would). There's way bigger fish to fry.

46493168 7mo ago
>You FIRST have to fix the system before you open up the floodgates. I don't see any reason to fix the system on a nationwide level. Let the individual states figure it out. There's things that the top 5 US states for healthcare have in common, and there's things that the bottom 5 US states have in common [0]. They know how to talk to each other if they want to know more. [0]https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/scorecard/2025/jun/2025-scorecard-state-health-system-performance https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/scorecard/2025...
- onlyrealcuzzo 7mo ago
  > I don't see any reason to fix the system on a nationwide level. Let the individual states figure it out. It's a problem because the nation already ineffectively covers the tail. The state shall not fix what is not a problem for the state.
  - deleted 7mo ago
    [deleted]