do the right wing guys think it’s like a draco malfoy thing where they’re a good guy underneath?

like when it’s like a lady and a cop and the lady seems like a normal sorta boring suburban lady

do you know what i mean. this is one of the things where if you try to ask an AI bot it yells at you

  • @jasory
    link
    07 months ago

    Did you miss the part where nearly all insurance people have is subsidised by either the government or their employer? People don’t actually pay these costs there employer does, usually as an employment incentive.

    “But people in the US pay it too”

    Insurance is optional in the US. So no they don’t necessarily pay it, infact it’s not uncommon to skip coverage to save some money. This would not be an option under a taxation system. And yet again, it’s primarily employer-subdised.

    “People from countries with universal healthcare …,”

    There are many different types of universal healthcare, the fact that you are making such a broad statement shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Some countries implement it by forcing people to buy private insurance.

    “All you have to do is allow poor people to have coverage too”

    Okay, so you actually are too stupid to have this conversation. Lookup what Medicaid is, and additionally realise that needs-based programs are by definition not universal. In fact this is one of the biggest criticisms of Medicare for all and UBI, they involve giving money to a large percentage of the population that don’t need it. In fact universal systems literally tax the poor to pay the rich, it’s the epitome of a regressive policy.

    The current US system is inefficient sure, it’s not as inefficient as widely claimed and arguing that universalising it makes it cheaper for the user is simply false.

    • darq
      link
      fedilink
      17 months ago

      People don’t actually pay these costs there employer does, usually as an employment incentive.

      Tying your ability to access healthcare to a private employer who can remove that access on a whim is utterly insane.

      Insurance is optional in the US. So no they don’t necessarily pay it, infact it’s not uncommon to skip coverage to save some money.

      People do not voluntarily go without health coverage. They go without when they cannot afford it. Which is a problem that doesn’t exist in countries with universal coverage.

      And those people without coverage when suffer enormous financial burdens if they fall sick or get hurt.

      Healthcare isn’t optional in life. It’s a matter for time before everyone needs something.

      There are many different types of universal healthcare, the fact that you are making such a broad statement shows that you have no idea what you are talking about.

      Oh shut the hell up.

      I’ve lived in countries with various models, some with private coverage and some without. Some free at point of use, some only subsidised.

      The reason I didn’t enumerate every option is because it’s irrelevant to the point I’m making.

      Okay, so you actually are too stupid to have this conversation. Lookup what Medicaid is, and additionally realise that needs-based programs are by definition not universal. In fact this is one of the biggest criticisms of Medicare for all and UBI, they involve giving money to a large percentage of the population that don’t need it.

      I can’t believe I actually have to explain this, but it’s clear you need someone to walk you through this very basic concept:

      The rich pay higher taxes. So giving them 1000 dollars a month in UBI or healthcare is immediately recovered by the higher taxes. This isn’t difficult.

      And making the rich use the same systems as the everyone else means that the rich are incentivised to improve the quality of the services that everyone uses.

      In fact universal systems literally tax the poor to pay the rich, it’s the epitome of a regressive policy.

      That might be the single stupidest thing I’ve ever read. Congratulations.

      The current US system is inefficient sure, it’s not as inefficient as widely claimed and arguing that universalising it makes it cheaper for the user is simply false.

      It is literally empirical fact. Facts don’t care about your feelings.

      • @jasory
        link
        -27 months ago

        “is utterly insane” Asserting an opinion as objective fact. You have completely failed to argue that this is true. Also not only does an employer terminating coverage violate COBRA, in many cases it is also a violation of your employment contract.

        “The reason I didn’t enunerate every option” You were never asked to enumerate every option, you were asked to not lie about how people don’t know what copays and deductibles are. That was the lie you made.

        “The rich pay higher taxes… it’s immediately recovered”.

        No it’s not. Unless you literally tax 100 percent of all money above a certain limit, the government will not get it back, only maybe 40 percent. You just threw away 60 percent of the funds.

        “And making the rich use the same systems”

        So what do rich people in countries with universal healthcare do? They use privatised services, just like in the US. So what incentive do these all powerful rich people have to improve the universal healthcare system that they don’t even use?

        It’s unfortunate that you are selectively gullible to believe all the propaganda that brain-dead losers like Andrew Yang generate, but not actual factually-based critique.

        “It’s literally an empirical fact” And an insufficient one. The fact that the US system is inefficient, does not mean that the end user pays more than they would in taxation. Private insurance is cheaper than Medicare for many people. I personally know dozens of low-income people who opt for private insurance.

        “Facts don’t care about your feelings”

        I hate Ben Shapiro, I think he has vacuous worthless opinions, the difference is that Ben Shapiro isn’t the one lying to people on this post right now.