General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Democrats say they now know exactly why Clinton lost [View all]PatrickforO
(14,559 posts)I'm actually a baby boomer - tail end of that generation. But why should our success be a 'one-off?'
I'm also an economist, so I can tell you a couple things based on your reply. And, yes, I'm quite aware I'm an idealist. You bet. I've been called a unicorn and lots of other not-so-nice stuff, but I keep plugging. Because you know, every little bit makes some difference.
So, to your statements: for sure single payer won't be perfect. Anything run by humans won't be. But if you look at the Brits, their NHS is structured around regional General Practitioners who control access to the system. So, that's a problem. Most of the wealthy people I know who have lived in UK hate this system because of that. But here's the thing - Brits don't die because they can't afford health care or lifesaving drugs. Oh, I'm sure Joe the Plumber might come up with one or two cases where they did, but those are aberrations in the system, not the norm.
I'm glad your parents have Medicare. $900/mo is cool. I work my ass off, and I pay over $14K per year for shitty, rationed healthcare with financially crippling copays. And it's an HMO so I do not get to choose my doctor. So, yeah, I don't like that much at all. And, if you've ever owned a business, which I have, healthcare is the biggest expense short of the labor itself. It is a huge line item. If all of a sudden we went to single payer, businesses across the USA would immediately have much lower operating costs. The only people who would be affected are the 400,000 people working in the health insurance industry now. And, possibly big pharma. To put this in perspective, the US labor force is just over 200 million people. And we have training programs that can help these people retool and get back to work in a different industry.
As to the free college - I pay tens of thousands in taxes every year - I'm middle class, middle earner. Why, I ask, does this money I pay in have to be routed to 'defense' contracts, or the NSA, when instead it could be used to make my life better? Government is a service, and it costs money to live in a society like this. Not only that, but corporations have this loophole in the tax code that allows them to 'offshore' profits without paying taxes on them. Result? The nominal tax rate all the Repubs say is 'the highest in the world' is, but that isn't the effective tax rate, which is the actual amount paid after deductions. So far, big companies like GE have salted away over $2 trillion offshore that is untaxed. In fact, during a couple years of the last decade, they paid no US income tax on billions in profits. How is that fair?
And, one last question, and it is rhetorical - not aimed at you, just throwing it out there: If the national debt is money we owe ourselves for service we have given ourselves, then why are we paying it back to bankers with interest? The Fed is NOT quasi governmental like they tell you. The companies that have the biggest position in it now are the same ones who had the biggest position back in 1912 - Citibank and JP Morgan Chase.
We always talk scarcity, like there just isn't enough for you and me. But you know what? There's plenty of wealth in the world. It's just concentrated in too few hands.
If you want an interesting read, I recommend Ellen Brown's 'Web of Debt' and check out public banking systems. We'd be SO much better off if we got rid of the Fed and printed our own money. But if you read Brown, you'll find out what the shyster bankers did to Abraham Lincoln in retaliation for him going with government issued greenbacks. (hint, the Secret Service was formed in 1865 not to protect the Prez, but to battle the counterfeiters - over a third of the greenbacks in circulation that year were counterfeit, courtesy of European and American bankers who didn't like getting left out of that loop.
Capitalism sucks, doesn't it?
Anyway, nice talking to you!