• AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem is many Republicans believe the exact opposite. The moment you bring up any form of socialized healthcare they will start rattling off stories of people in Europe having to go to a different country to get treatment. Many citizens of the USA have been conditioned to believe that paying for health insurance gives them priority care compared to an uninsured person and if everyone was the same then they’d lose that priority status. They think that if everyone can get healthcare then they’ll die in a waiting room, and there is no evidence to support that our hospitals will not be able to keep up.

      • CitizenKong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        2 months ago

        Also, countries with socialized healthcare usually also have private health care. But since they have to compete with the public option their prizes are fairly reasonable.

        And that’s not socialism, it’s capitalism.

        • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          You see it the wrong way.

          Because there’s a private option, some procedures are either not available or drastically down-prioritized in a public-private system. Shoulders, knees, foot ops to promote proper mobility get a “well let’s wait a bit … or you can go private?”. And the best docs go private to maximize the filthy lucre, so sometimes I worry it’s gonna be Dr Nick I get. it never happens, but it only has to happen once for the GoP to be right.

          Because there’s a private option, the number of docs in the public system go down. And wait-lists go up. I know we’re doing … okay … but I imagine how much better it could be if doctors were all in the same pool to burn down the queue.

          There’s public health, and then there’s the cancerous taint of mercenary fucking doctors and their macabre lobbyists. It just matters how fucking corrupted a given system is on a scale from Antarctica to America.

          • AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I think it is wrong to assume “all doctors are greedy.” ask any child why they want to be a doctor and they’ll tell you “to help people.”

      • snooggums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        They think that if everyone can get healthcare then they’ll die in a waiting room, and there is no evidence to support that our hospitals will not be able to keep up.

        All of the evidence points to the opposite!

        The examples they love to give are lies or systems after being defunded by conservatives.

        • bassomitron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          2 months ago

          Oh, trust me, everyone that support universal healthcare is very much aware that the US ranks quite poorly when it comes to preventable mortality rates in hospitals. The insurance and medical lobbies have used the bullshit wait times disinformation/propaganda for decades and those against universal healthcare love to bring that up as some sort of reliable defense.

          The other thing they consistently use to defend the current system is it would raise taxes to overwhelmingly burdensome rates. They of course ignore the insane monthly premiums that families have to pay already, not to mention the amount of taxes we already pay for Medicaid/Medicare. We get to pay twice! What a benefit.

          • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 months ago

            Currently Canada pays no premium and no user-fees for stuff that’s covered. Like, my auntie is in for a drastic illness and a series of procedures and she worries only about paid parking. I walked in for a series of tests a few months ago and brought only my ID.

            Our system is eroding fast (thanks, Danielle!) but it’s still amazing for its services and cost.

        • loutr@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 months ago

          systems after being defunded by conservatives

          Like in France, where Macron spent millions to fucking McKinsey for their asshole consultants to “optimize” our healthcare system. Said assholes did what they do best: cut costs and staff.

          Now our hospitals are in shambles, workers are at the rope’s end and they keep on cutting their budget year after year. But it’s all good, we voted for the left so that they turn things around! Oh wait…

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        2 months ago

        In reality: We pay extra for ourselves and our doctors to wade through a parade of forms that insurance companies will use to deny care for mostly technical reasons.

      • irreticent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        They think that if everyone can get healthcare then they’ll die in a waiting room, and there is no evidence to support that our hospitals will not be able to keep up.

        The only time our hospitals weren’t able to keep up is when conservatives refused to wear a mask during a global pandemic.

      • Landless2029@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Cant keep up?

        Idk why the hell late night ER visits (11pm) take fucking HOURS to get seen if you don’t have a life threatening emergency. You could still be in serious pain for hours.

        I’m next to the main entrance. No ambulance has dropped off someone for you to drop everything to treat.

        • BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          The purpose of the ED is to make sure you’re not actively dying and then refer you to a specialist who books three months out.

          There is a huge gap in American medicine between the ED and the doctor’s office. You might spend weeks or months in severe pain or discomfort waiting to be seen by someone who can treat you. The ED docs are just there to stabilize you and send you on your way.

          • Landless2029@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            I agree. But hours wait time to take vitals and then give fluids/meds to provide relief?

            I don’t recall the specifics but it’s usually “severe” chest or stomach pain. I’m the default in my family to grab someone at any hour to run them to the ER.

            Edit: I’m talking 5~7 hours usually for late night ER visits in a major US city.

          • Landless2029@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            I believe I forgot to state my point. Your health plan and its cost doesn’t help your level of care.

            I understand triage. Prioritizing care based on severity. The wait is most likely due to staffing constraints on the graveyard shift.

            Its just frustrating that every experience at the ER amounts to hours of wait time. Especially considering the cost of the appointment.

    • Odigo2020@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      30 Rock, applicable as always. That reminds me, it’s getting on time for my 50th rewatch haha.

  • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Did I miss something? What Republican plan? I’ve always heard that it’s Two Weeks™ away from being released.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      Oh it’s dying of cancer your job gave you because chemo got you fired so now you can’t afford it even if you get a new job because it’s a pre existing condition

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      The concepts of a plan like a vauge idea to scrap all the good parts and replace them with nothing. Vance has talked about removing pre-existing condition protections for instance

    • cogman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Project 2025. But when only the Nazi freaks liked it the Republicans have had to backtrack and pretend like that was never the plan.

  • dumples@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    2 months ago

    The Affordable Care Act was based on the conservative plan for healthcare as a compromise. So they don’t have anything. A real progressive plan would be single payer

    • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      This. Also it passed without Republican support so a few shitty Dems are really to blame for what we got. And Kamala isn’t going to go after it either. I know quite a few people who vote R for gun rights but want single payer healthcare. Both parties are very different, they suck in different ways and represent moneyed interests, not the people.

      • dumples@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 months ago

        Mostly Joe Lieberman if I remember correctly made it his mission to remove a single payer option. It’s hard to change the status quo and I think raising the minimum wage and making single payer health care will do a lot to build to help America and would be a winning Democratic strategy. I doubt it will happen but a man can dream.

        Also I can’t with single issue voters around gun rights.

        • doingthestuff@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          If the Dems would stop trying to disarm the people they’d never lose another election. But they’re pretty bought into global governmental authoritarianism. Not Dem voters. The party. The R voters aren’t all fascists either. It’s just our political landscape is fucked.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 months ago

    Republican voters like none of their policies except for the racism and bigotry. But sadly that seems to be enough for them

  • LEDZeppelin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    They will still vote R because mass deportation of colored people sounds better than republican voters getting healthcare

  • Doomsider@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    For a long time now Republicans will come up with decent solutions but are unwilling to commit to them because they would no longer have the grievances they need to drive their voters.

    The Democratic party picks these ideas up and then passes them as law. This has caused the Republican party to become increasingly desperate for new grievances hence the whole trans thing.

    To put it another way the Democratic party became conservative in their policies and the Republicans went batshit crazy because of it.

  • Okokimup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is an example of why I think it’s important to distinguish between politicians and voters when saying *Republicans want X." Because what they want or believe are often at odds. It would help if we could convince the voters of that.

    • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Politicians are the elected representatives of the voters. If the politicians want something their voters don’t then why are they being elected.

      • Okokimup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Are you serious? Because they lie. And because they demonize the other side so hard, their base will vote for them no matter what. For example, polling shows most republican voters are not in favor of extreme abortion restrictions. They want abortion up to a certain point and for certain reasons. But when they’re told the other side is murdering full-norn babies, they go for what seems to them like the lesser evil.

        • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          polling shows most republican voters are *not* in favor of extreme abortion restrictions. They want abortion up to a certain point and for certain reasons.

          So those polled voters indicate what they want in a poll.

          But when they’re told the other side is murdering full-norn babies, they go for what seems to them like the lesser evil.

          Yet those same voters elect (choose) the politicians (their representatives who speak for them) who want something different.

          Again I ask why a distinction should be made, in regards to voters and politicians, when discussing party. Seems to me like both groups, voters and politicians, say one thing and do another.

          As Maya Angelou once said, “When someone tells you who they are, believe them.”

          • Okokimup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            So those polled voters indicate what they want in a poll. Yet those same voters elect (choose) the politicians (their representatives who speak for them) who want something different.

            By that logic, everyone who votes for Harris supports Israel’s genocide against Palestine. Voters make the choice they feel is best out of what they’re given.

            • LilB0kChoy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              Unless I missed something about how Kamala Harris is running for President of Israel, then no.

              Though it would mean anybody who votes for Harris, should she be elected, shares responsibility for her policies, including any enacted around Israel.

          • Okokimup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Because understanding people’s motivations is valuable in figuring out how to reach them. But I’m obviously fucking up the circle jerk.