Can the US actually afford to pay for dramatic expansion in health and child care?

[Hardkill]

No doubt does America's health care and child care systems need to be tremendously improved. I am for progressive ideas such as Medicare for All and major expansions in child tax credit to the levels that Scandanavian countries provide. However, moderate and conservative Democrats as well as Republicans say that our country cannot afford to pay for those kind of radical left bills. 

Yet, progressives such as Ana Kasparian have mentioned that we absolutely can afford to pay for all of these things because the US is still the richest country in the world and all we have to do is just raise taxes on both the rich and corporations.

Are the moderate and conservative Democrats and Republicans the ones lying or are progressives actually being too idealistic?

 

[Roy]

6 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Are the moderate and conservative Democrats and Republicans the ones lying or are progressives actually being too idealistic?

Progressivism is just another word for inevitability, so who do you think is lying?

[DocWatts]

America has the capacity to fund some of the most generous social programs in the world if it were willing and able to tax the immense amount of wealth that's concentrated in the hands of a tiny oligarchic elite, and if it were willing to shift its spending priorities away from maintaining a useless military empire and subsidizing multinational corporations.

Of course all of that would entail America actually operating as a healthy (rather than as a partial and faltering) democracy. It would also require a level of development and social solidarity among the US population that just doesn't exist at this time.

Edited October 14, 2021 by DocWatts

[TrustTheProcess]

Can we afford not to?

[DIDego]

Write same but another words.

'Willingness' to give a bigger share of all taxes back to everyone, indirect same as give back the "power to the people" and allow/enable the "masses" to get a descent choice for free, more conscious and healthy people will probably put much consumerism out of business, if this happens at all or to soon, before they in power are able to re-brand/build another businesses and keep grip at the new direction. It most likely not gonna happen. Change has to come from within and spread up to the "elite".

McDonalds goes "green", claiming doing the "good" thing for society/youngster, then no one else does it, example in some of the commercials nowaday's, subtle put shame on you, but they been mostly the "bad" in almost everything during the development, meanwhile im sure many "awaken people" might have an opinion for that they have been contributed a lot to drag down society instead. 

Edited October 14, 2021 by DIDego

[silene]

If the conservatives are saying that decent healthcare is unaffordable, it implies that poorer people aren't receiving it at the moment under the private system, so do they have a better idea or are they prepared to accept the status quo? 

I'm British not American , but I get the impression that healthcare in the US is overpriced by a profit hungry private industry. Nationalising it would transfer the purchasing power from insurance companies to the government who don't have the incentive to push up prices. 

But we still must consider the need to attract enough qualified staff and innovation. In our system there's a long-term shortage of recruiting local staff and we've relied on immigrant workers for a long time, with Brexit this is becoming more noticeable. 

[DocWatts]

37 minutes ago, silene said:

If the conservatives are saying that decent healthcare is unaffordable, it implies that poorer people aren't receiving it at the moment under the private system, so do they have a better idea or are they prepared to accept the status quo? 

Weird thing is that the US does have a terrible form of pseudo universal health care: Emergency Room visits.

By law hospitals have to treat someone with a medical emergency regardless of their ability to pay. What ends up happening in practice is that the hospital will give a hypothetical uninsured person enough care to leave the hospital without dropping dead in the street, then send them a $50,000 bill that they know full well they'll never be able to pay. The person will either end up negotiating for a lower (but still outrageous) sum, be hounded by collection agencies for years, or end up having to declare bankruptcy. The Hospital will end up writing them off as a Bad Debt, and pass the costs on to people who actually do have Insurance.

Note that this pseudo-system doesn't cover common sense things like preventative care, doctors visits, or any prescription/psychiatric medication that person may require.

Runaway medical costs in the US are a direct and deliberate consequence of for-profit medical businesses (hospitals and pharmaceutical companies) having easy access to vast sums of money from privatized Medical Insurance. The dynamics are somewhat similar to vast sums of Federally backed Student Loans driving up the cost of College Education in the States (of course there are other factors at play as well).

There is no good faith way to defend the current system in the US. The people who do so are either benefitting personally from runaway healthcare inflation, are rich enough to isolate themselves from the problems of the current system, or are ignorant people who have been relentlessly propagandized by decades of misinformation and scare tactics from vested interests.

Edited October 14, 2021 by DocWatts

[Leo Gura]

Of course it can be afforded. The issue is one of misplaced priorities.

[Hardkill]

Yeah, I agree with what you all are saying, but then why hasn't California, which has had veto-proof supermajorities in both chambers of the California State Legislature and centre-left Democratic governor for years now, hasn't passed it's own statewide version of Medicare for All? In fact, when Newsom campaigned for governor he vowed to both enact a single-payer health care in California and target rising prescription drug costs in California. So then, why 3 years later has he still not gotten either of those things done?

Also, why don't center-left Democrats like Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer don't support much needed progressive legislation such as Medicare for All or the Green New Deal, even though all of those Democratic leaders are actually some of the least corrupt politicians we have Washington compared to conservative Democrats and Republicans in Congress?

[Roy]

@Hardkill because you need to appreciate that "Left" and "Democrat" in the United States is still more Right leaning then a lot of Right wing parties in other developed countries.

The USA is powerful and a leader in many ways, but not in everything. They had a unique opportunity in history to fill a power vacuum in the world after WW2 and become a global juggernaut because of luck, resources, and some strategic prowess, not because of being visionary leadership that was pushing the limits of humanity through societal innovation and how to run civilization more effectively.

Don't mistake power for consciousness or progress. It's an errand of the foolish ego.

[Opo]

28 minutes ago, Hardkill said:

Also, why don't center-left Democrats like Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer don't support much needed progressive legislation such as Medicare for All or the Green New Deal, even though all of those Democratic leaders are actually some of the least corrupt politicians we have

Why do you assume that they are less corrupt? 

[Hardkill]

10 minutes ago, Opo said:

Why do you assume that they are less corrupt? 

Because they don't lie as much as Republicans and conservative Democratic politicians do. They also are for liberal or progressive legislation unlike the Republicans and conservative Democrats who are either very much for the status quo, or worse, such as repealing good laws. Furthermore, they don't seem to take in as much money from corporate donors or dark money as Republican and conservative Democratic politicians do. They also don't do what corporations donors want them to do as much as the Republicans and conservative Democratic politicians do. Biden in fact is turning out to be much less of a corporate shill then most people thought he would be.

[Shin]

Those people make the assumption than more care equal more money spent.

The truth is that if there is medicare for all, people won't wait to go to the doctor when they have something, instead of waiting until the disease or wound gets to the point where it's life threatening.

This translates by less surgical operations and heavy treatments, therefore less money spent.

The US is one of the country which spends the most money per capita on healtcare, and it covers a fraction of the population properly.

[Rilles]

The US is one the few countries with no free healthcare, I think China and South Korea have insurance systems too. The huge majority of countries in the world have free healthcare so of course the US can too, it has to with their extreme individualist ideology rather than any material issue. 

[roopepa]

13 hours ago, Hardkill said:

the US is still the richest country in the world

Not only that, but also the richest country in the history of mankind.

Of course it can be afforded. The problem is lobbying.

[Opo]

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Because they don't lie as much as Republicans and conservative Democratic politicians do. They also are for liberal or progressive legislation unlike the Republicans and conservative Democrats who are either very much for the status quo, or worse, such as repealing good laws.

Yea. 

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Furthermore, they don't seem to take in as much money from corporate donors or dark money as Republican and conservative Democratic politicians do.

Democrats broke the record for the amount of money received in the last election. 

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

They also don't do what corporations donors want them to do as much as the Republicans and conservative Democratic politicians do.

Of course they do. 

It's just that they represent different corporations. 

9 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Biden in fact is turning out to be much less of a corporate shill then most people thought he would be.

I like what he's doing but he didn't get that money for free. 

[Leo Gura]

15 hours ago, Hardkill said:

Yeah, I agree with what you all are saying, but then why hasn't California, which has had veto-proof supermajorities in both chambers of the California State Legislature and centre-left Democratic governor for years now, hasn't passed it's own statewide version of Medicare for All?

There might not be enough leverage in only doing Medicare For All in one state.

The point is to get economic leverage over the healthcare and insurance industries. It doesn't do much good to create a single payer system unless there are also price caps on healthcare providers. The bottom line is that healthcare providers are way overpriced because they run a cartel and have bought up the politicians.

Quote

In fact, when Newsom campaigned for governor he vowed to both enact a single-payer health care in California and target rising prescription drug costs in California. So then, why 3 years later has he still not gotten either of those things done?

I'm not sure if Newsom is progressive enough to push that through. And even if he did it would not be nearly as effective as a national system.

Quote

Also, why don't center-left Democrats like Biden, Pelosi, and Schumer don't support much needed progressive legislation such as Medicare for All or the Green New Deal, even though all of those Democratic leaders are actually some of the least corrupt politicians we have Washington compared to conservative Democrats and Republicans in Congress?

They are not left-wing enough to do something so drastic. They are corrupted by healthcare lobbying and conflicts of interest.

If you and your family have excellent, overpriced health insurance that gives you access to the best doctors, what incentive do you have to get rid of that by placing yourself and your family on the same playing field as a poor black woman?

Rich people have much to lose with Medicare For All. It would be a huge downgrade to their elite healthcare access. Hence the rich and powerful block Medicare For All from happening. It's like trying to convince a guy with a Rolls Royce to sell it off, give the money to the government, and use the bus instead. He hates this idea.

[mandyjw]

If you provide affordable, reliable, accessible, local, high quality childcare, that's going to pay off enormously in tax revenue and in saving costs later because kids are getting good care early on and are being raised in much less stressed homes. There's a huge part of the most able bodied work force that simply cannot work right now due to the lack of childcare, mostly women. COVID has made this much worse. 

 

Edited October 15, 2021 by mandyjw

[Zega]

What was the cost of the Afghanistan war? 7 Trillion?

4 Billion alone goes to funding Israel bombing Gaza every year.

Funding Healthcare and childcare for our people seems like the real "America first" but what do I know.

[SgtPepper]

could the USA afford NOT to? Think of the implication as we continue on this increasingly complex world. What will happen when we let the poorest behind? Do you think those individuals who don't receive help are going to go away? 

 

23 hours ago, louhad said:

Can we afford not to?

 

Just saw that someone posted this, exactly.