obamacare

benjs

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

tempo_n_groove said:

More on the Obamacare/Medicaid thing.  There was a town hall in Nebraska and Rep Mike Flood, one of only 3 republicans to do so, asked the question to the people "Should a 28 year old have free medical care even if they are able to work?!?" 

The crowd erupts "YES".

This speaks volumes to how America is thinking.  Our Healthcare system needs an overhaul.  It really does need to be Nationalized.  Don't call it socialized or it will have a negative connotation attached to it.

Yeah the right is really running with that response as an example of the left wanting everything to be "free" when actually it relates more to making sure people are covered if they are between jobs or recently laid off, etc.

The situations are ALWAYS more complicated than the moronic GOP paints it to be.

It makes complete sense to separate employment from health care coverage. 

The right does have a leg to stand on though with that statement.  More people are looking for free things, who wouldn't?  

One thing I am steadfast on is a universal healthcare system.  It boggles my mind that we can't figure out how to make it work.

Universal health care is a long-term benefit, and in the short-term, it will cost a lot of money, which will be weaponized by the opposing party, which all but guarantees a loss of political power. As far as I can see, with the exception of a true altruistic goal of betterment of the nation (or caring about the legacy they leave), there's no incentive for a politician to think about anything beyond their political term. Add in the fact that politicians have split allegiances - their wallets (via lobbyists, bills which prefer their form of wealth generation, etc.), and the nation - and I think it just becomes immensely harder. 

Frame the issue as an investment in you, general you, the American people because a healthy America is a strong America. Focus on the preventative care and benefits of same and explain that you won’t see immediate results but over decades and life times. If you can be heard over the din of “it’s socialism and takes away your freedom to be in poor health!”

Pointing out profits of healthcare corporations and the salaries of their CEOs but then you’re punishing “wealth.” At the expense of health but you know.

I think the bolded part of your response is the thing I'm skeptical can be done. I don't think they would read until the end of your sentence, and stop at "it's socialism!". 

As for the CEOs point - I remember listening to something about how, psychologically, Americans envision themselves as in pursuit of the 'American dream', and therefore see punishing the rich as punishing their future selves (even if they are currently below the poverty line). That make sense to me, and I also think it's probably far less resonant than the "it's socialism" message. 

tempo_n_groove

benjs said:

tempo_n_groove said:

More on the Obamacare/Medicaid thing.  There was a town hall in Nebraska and Rep Mike Flood, one of only 3 republicans to do so, asked the question to the people "Should a 28 year old have free medical care even if they are able to work?!?" 

The crowd erupts "YES".

This speaks volumes to how America is thinking.  Our Healthcare system needs an overhaul.  It really does need to be Nationalized.  Don't call it socialized or it will have a negative connotation attached to it.

The question I have on that is - how do you prevent the Republican party from associating it with socialism and making it a toxic pursuit for a politician? 

Change the name for one like Universal Healthcare.

2nd crunch the numbers so it works.

3rd get the doctors on board so they can make money and still want to save us.

4th have the healthcare providers play ball.