If ISIS kidnapped 44,313 Americans to kill them every year, would America

[Jarqui]

sit on it's hands and do nothing?
No way.

Would it be easy to rescue them?
Probably not. In fact, it might be very difficult and cost a lot of money and very sadly, wonderful American military lives. But I know, as sure as the sun rises, America would fight it's heart out to save every last one of those fellow Americans.

America lost around 3,100 Americans to terrorism on it's soil between 2001 and 2015.

Currently, about 30 million Americans don't have healthcare coverage. Roughly 0.1% of them or 30,000 are going to die in 2016 because they don't have healthcare coverage. That's a fact:
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2009/09/new-study-finds-45000-deaths-annually-linked-to-lack-of-health-coverage/
Here's a good estimation of how many folks died each year since 9/11 because they didn't have healthcare coverage:
2001 41,200
2002 43,600
2003 45,000
2004 45,800
2005 46,600
2006 47,000
2007 45,700
2008 46,300
2009 49,000
2010 49,900
2011 48,600
2012 48,000
2013 42,000
2014 33,000
2015 33,000
==========================================================
Roughly 664,700 Americans have died since 9/11 because they didn't have healthcare coverage.
That works out to 44,313 Americans dying per year on average.

That's a lot more Americans dying than the 3,100 Americans lost on it's soil to terrorism since 2001.

Americans spent trillions to avenge 3,100 lost to terrorism but there's a lot Americans and politicians who wouldn't chip in a dime to save the lives of 664,700 Americans lost to a lack of healthcare coverage. That fact astounds me.

On a side note, nobody talks about jobs related to this. Single payer substantially reduces healthcare costs. That means that after implementing it, Americans will not be as expensive to employ. Americans will take home more pay but the overall cost to do an hour of work will trend towards less over time - attracting employment because Americans improved their cost effectiveness. The only real loser is the health insurance industry.

Obamacare only solved part of the problem saving about 15,000 to 18,000 or so lives per year. It didn't solve the problem for the 30,000 others who will die in 2016 and each year after because they didn't have healthcare coverage.

Getting single payer (or even universal) is really hard - probably as hard as fighting ISIS. Politically, it's even harder than fighting ISIS because politically, America loves going to war to kill it's enemies.

ISIS sympathizers killed 14 in California not long ago. Media coverage was non stop and the country was outraged and collectively wounded by the tragedy as they should. That was minor compared to the media coverage on 9/11 when we lost 3063. But for 15 years, by comparison, we've been collectively pretty silent on the 664,700 lost since 9/11 and the 30,000 that won't be with us by the end of this year because they didn't have healthcare coverage.

To have this going on for so long, it seems over the top for me to say it but it strikes me like political genocide. Because we don't get to see these 664,700 people without healthcare die on the evening news, we kind of overlooked the 664,700 Americans who died on our watch since 9/11. I guess they don't seem to matter as much or something. Somehow jumping out of the burning World Trade center is more meaningful than quietly dying in an alley somewhere. I don't understand why. This haunts me. Both deaths are equally tragic. It really bothers me to the extent, I'm for the first time repeating a post, trying to refine a message that will get through.

Maybe some of it is our fear of terrorists. We don't want that stuff happening to us so yeah, let the US military might take care of them. Those who have healthcare coverage do not have to fear dying because they don't have healthcare coverage. I guess selfishly, those folks don't have to worry about the others who will die without healthcare coverage. I have healthcare coverage. But I simply cannot be one of those who can look the other way - like Hillary.

A lot of us are very, very thankful to the members of the military who did their duty by fighting terrorists to keep Americans safe and in doing so, won our everlasting respect and eternal gratitude for their courage and in some cases their ultimate sacrifice. As citizens, like the members of our military, I think we also have a civic duty to look after each other. I do not see why that duty does not extend to fighting to see the end of Americans dying without healthcare. Heavy odds are, you knew some of the 664,700 who died without healthcare. And maybe you'll know some of the 30,000 who are going to die this year or in future years.

Even though it's very tough, Bernie is willing to fight for all 30,000 who are going to die this year because they do not have healthcare coverage. And Hillary isn't - she's going for the easier 'save a few thousand while the rest die because it's too hard for me and the country to save all of them'. Under the life and death circumstances, which Hillary has to be acquainted with, I think that's astounding bullshit - a dereliction of duty. We owe it to our fellow citizens to try to save their lives.

Why do we get so upset about the 14 in California lost to terrorism and not the 664,700 lost to a lack of healthcare? Why is that so hard for Americans to figure out? WHY!!! Because it's not on the news? Maybe civic duty is protesting to get it on the news. Or getting behind Bernie. Or rallying others to get out and vote. The one thing I'm sure of is that we have not done enough collectively and I think that is a national disgrace.

I'm sorry for sounding like a broken record on this as I've chatted some about the above in prior posts. It upsets me. It just doesn't make any sense. I'll never ever understand it or accept it. Please look into your hearts, help however you can and elect people who will solve this.

Thanks for reading.

[global1]

2. Now What The Hell Kind Of Response Was That......

it was uncalled for.

[LuvLoogie]

3. OP uses ISIS mayhem to criticize Hillary on HealthCare. It was a really long-winded set up, too.

I just thought I'd throw Education into the mix. You know as their (Bernie & Hillary) respective policy approaches parallel their healthcare approaches.

[Jarqui]

8. It's much more than merely Hillary criticism

The United States goes to extraordinary measures and financial commitment to protect their people against terrorists

Meanwhile, since 9/11, the United States lets 664,700 die due to a lack of medical care because most of those people could not afford it and the United States could afford it for them or find another way to deliver it (like most developed nations).

That Hillary chooses to carry that on and Bernie does not is a point but not the biggest point. Yet it is a point I note no Hillary supporter credibly refuting because it does expose Hillary's uncaring, shortsightedness in her policy.

The key or much bigger point is to work towards stopping these people from dying. If you ask the American people "could you give a handout to these poor people?", the GOP in particular and others will not support that or do so enthusiastically. But if you frame the pitch for assistance in the way I've tried (or maybe some have a better idea), asking Americans to help other Americans who will otherwise die should help gain more support for the policy because that's really what is at stake. And I believe most Americans would park their political bias to save another American's life. It's a better way to sell the idea.

Hillary thinks single payer is too hard. If you want to be small minded and wrap your mind around the notion that this is all about Hillary, that's your prerogative. Arguing as has been typically done is a key part of the reason the argument hasn't been won. Arguing for it as I did above or maybe some have a better idea, helps get more folks on side to make it easier because it brings home the point that it's a life or death situation for too many Americans. I could care less about Hillary. She's a pimple on the arse of progress. Since 2007 and before, I'm much more concerned with and sick of these people dying needlessly.

As I alluded to above, but more specifically: another way folks can help is by going down the ticket and helping get people elected to help take back the House and Senate so that it can support real universal/single payer. Or maybe at the state level for 2020 census and elimination of some gerrymandering. Maybe they help by educating fellow Americans (which is the primary reason for the thread to pass on that idea or way of thinking about it). It's not all about Hillary. She's only one American life. It's much much bigger than that. It's trying to solve a problem.

[underthematrix]

4. "The Sanders campaign represents a revolution of rising expectations."

from The Case Against Bernie Sanders http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/01/case-against-bernie-sanders.html#

[Gman]

5. LOL!

[yuiyoshida]

6. low hanging fruit (pssst, its rotting)

You might as well take it.

[progree]

7. Is that just people without health insurance? Plenty more died who did have health insurance

but got maxed out or couldn't afford their copays or -- in those years -- were rescinded (their care got too expensive, so the insurance company found some grounds for saying they had not fully disclosed all their pre-existing conditions on their application), or the drug they needed was not on the "formulary" etc.

I'm reminded that only about the first 10 minutes of Michael Moore's film "Sicko" was about the uninsured. The rest of the film was about the insured-but-still-royally-fucked-over.