Calm down, little man.
What is the line which AOC crosses to lose your support?
Insurance is like the most obvious possible example of the need for strong regulation.
You have to have strong, government-enforced rules mandating that insurance companies hold enough money to pay out claims, even in a terrible economic / claims environment.
You also have to have strong, government-enforced rules mandating that they actually fucking pay claims, and furthermore that there is a strong disincentive to stalling or worse, not paying at all. This is where we fail completely as a country.
3 Likes
Any sort of āThereās no path to M4A without incremental changeā argument ignores the fact that thereās no path to incremental change. Going off of obamas presidency, we know that to get that incremental change, you need the presidency and at least 59 senators, which isnāt happening. We also know that that incremental change can be undone in all or in parts by a minority party. I really donāt understand the point of arguing for small changes that are nearly impossible to implement, when you could argue for large changes that are also nearly impossible to implement.
1 Like
Being pro-Warren isnāt pro-incremental change. Everything about Warrenās political history shows her as a fighter with big ideas.
What it is is an acknowledgment that the left lost the primary, but we should continue fighting for what we can achieve. Not take our ball and go home.
1 Like
The main issue with this story is the reputable media was correct to be cautious about this for whatever reason they decided to and right and left wing figures who were drumming up a social media crusade and accusing the DNC/media of a cover up were just using Reade as an instrument to obtain a result they wanted. They didnāt really care or think about the basic level of fact checking that every reporter should do with every new source talking about 20 year old events that nobody can confirm.
5 Likes
Like give us M4A if you want our vote or stop complaining when we donāt.
Because 20 million people with insurance is better than 20 million without it. Even if the coverage is not what you would want under UHC.
According to posters here because Warren didnāt get M4A we should do absolutely nothing until we get m4A and Warren is a flip flopping snake for trying to improve healthcare rather than holdout for M4A?
1 Like
Nailed it.
In aggregate, purely in economic terms anyway, people are better off without insurance. I know I have been worse off because of it. And I have it, but I still wonāt go to the doctor because it costs just as much if not more. For most of the care weāve received, certainly for anything not completely routine, weād have been better off not using our insurance and just paying cash - despite paying >$1000/mo in premiums. Insurance sucks.
Come on really. That is where we are? If we canāt have UHC might as well have no insurance. Really?
Insurance sucks. I would not have it if I didnāt have children.
You donāt seem to get the whole point of insurance. Yeah, if you donāt have any catastrophic illnesses, health insurance is a huge ripoff.
In other news, who thought it was a good idea to put Joe on The Breakfast Club? JFC, his staffers must have known ahead of time that would be a disaster.
You really donāt think I get the point of insurance?
A catastrophic illness is going to bankrupt most people even if they have insurance, unless they have āgoodā employer sponsored plans. Itās kinda like what benefit are you getting from the monthly premium if youāre just going to end up in the same place. I really donāt think you guys understand how bad insurance can be, and how you literally just pay the same as you would without insurance for most things.
This all stems from the problem that healthcare costs more here than anywhere else and thatās probably not going to change unless the public option can dictate prices or is heavily tax-payer subsidized.
All of that is true. It changes nothing. If we assume we canāt magically have UHC. Is it better if 20 million people have some healthcare rather than none?
Itās not none. We have laws about not being able to refuse emergency care and we provide public health care at county hospitals (at least around here). Perhaps an incrementalist should be working to expand on that and also make it easier to get out from medical debt instead of incrementally getting more money to insurance companies.
1 Like
Sounds good to me. Most of the people itt will laugh at that though as itās clearly not UHC which is the only acceptable ācompromiseā.
Look who wants debt relief.
1 Like