General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Radosh: Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez are losing the way home [View all]LiberalLovinLug
(14,169 posts)And because there are different levels, different applications, different interpretations of socialist policies adapted around the world means that Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders platforms must not fit them all, (not one could of course), and by his twisted logic, means they are 'lost'. . And so predicably he finds an example, and organization called the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee started in 1973 by Michael Harrington, who has a slightly less ambitious version of the word. Thus by Radosh's short-sighted, one dimensional thinking, it means they must have made some kind of error. And are now "lost".
If ever there is a socialized medicare system put in place in the US it probably will not look like Sweden's. Hell, Swedens does not look or run exactly like Englands, or Canada's for that matter. There are different mixes of private and public services in all of them.
But the underlining connection between all countries with universal healthcare, no matter what percent is allowed to be administered by private companies, is that there is a basic level of guaranteed healthcare, including having a doctor, which includes being taken care of without any real cost, for traumatic injury or disease. That even if private insurers will not cover treatments, the government, by law, will always step in and provide the service. So in essence, they are all Single Payer, when you get right down to it. The basic principle that health care should be a right, not a privilege. That the pool of taxpayers mandatory payments are used to offset and spread the costs for everyone, is the same principle across the board of anyone calling themselves any kind of socialist. No one is 'lost' on that ideal.
But how the US organizes a Single Payer system would be unique, and difficult. Now that they have not followed the other western democracies when those others were implementing Single Payer, decades ago, means that the private system is much more entrenched, including having an army of lobbyists working 24/7 to stop any kind of government run system. How will the US deal with thousands of private insurance workers losing their jobs. Or with highly profitable doctors and hospitals having to share the wealth? It won't be easy, but it can be done.
But what a ridiculous article. There is no one perfect 'home' to stray from.