Why I left the Democratic Party

Lash is welcome to define herself as a progressive, and Oral can define himself as a democrat if he wants to. But nobody is forced to believe them.

The way Setanta constantly questions your identity...? Don’t you think that’s a stupid waste of space (and thought) here? Seems paranoid. 😂. But, do what you must.

I had a whole post written out where I explained myself as best I could and somehow I lost it before posting it and can't get it back.

Anyway, on being progressive and getting graded. I think you have it backwards. I have been judged and perhaps rightly as not being progressive enough because I don't think free health and free universities is practical or even particularly needful at this time. I believe free health/universities should be income and/or need based like it is now only fixed to run right.

As for Lash pushing ideas such the Russian not being responsible to the hacking into the DNC data base and the hacking into democrats emails, I don't find pointing that out ugly, it is simply pointing out facts. Bernie Sanders has not nor would he do that. I don't know about those twitter progressives she speaks of. Also on almost any given controversy she sides with the right wing and/or Trump, it is simply a fact. Again not something Bernie does or has done.


More proof that it is the progressives who have been judging who is progressive enough. And it is regular democrats who seem to be trying and failing to be "progressives" because they see it is the way the party is going. Unfortunately.

Lori Lightfoot claims she’s the next progressive darling, Democratic Socialists say otherwise


A disclaimer, I have no idea who she is or anything. Merely left the link because of the last paragraph actually.

Lightfoot seems to be trying to ride to victory on Ocasio's cape, but doesn't espouse enough legitimate Dem Soc views to claim that association.

Of course, beating dirty Emmanuel might be enough to run on, unless she has her own dirty web in place.

If she was committed to a few progressive planks, she'd be an improvement.

We got the NHS back in 1946 when we were still paying for WW2. We di9dn't stop paying for lendlease until Tony Blair was pm.

The point I'm making is there's never a good time, but we see UHC as a human right, and human rights take priority over business interests and national debt.

it's like having a child - there's never really a good time

sometimes you just have to step forward and do things

But why go into debt to pay for someone who is wealthy to have free health care/and or free universities? I just don't get that at all.

Why go into debt, the rich are siphoning money off to tax havens stop that.

Most people weren't worse off when the NHS kicked in, it improved the standards of living of most.

Stop thinking about what you'll pay, and start thinking of it as a rights issue. You don't make this argument about free education. This is no different.

The truth is America spends more per capita on medicare than any other liberal democracy yet you don't have UHC. That's because big pharma and big insurance are making the rules.

Aisling Bea was on The Last Leg, she had a scare while in America, went for a test which she paid through the nose for, US$500, it was a really crappy service and she didn't feel safe until she got back here and had the NHS do a proper professional job.

Why not take the ridiculous amounts of money people in the US are paying for their adequate healthcare (some obviously are paying even more for better care) , invest it in UHC and get good healthcare for everyone?

It really is puzzling that anyone doesn't see the benefits other countries are getting from their UHC. Less money spent per capita and better health outcomes. There is a reason the US is such a source of healthcare tourists. I see some of our former A2k members talking about trips to Mexico and the Caribbean (or home to Canada/India/Europe) to get better care.

Truly puzzling.

Nationality is more clear-cut than political inclinations. Either you got the passport or you don't. This said, Setanta is welcome to think I'm Ugandan, for all I care...

The politics of it doesn't make much sense, but let us count the ways.

Because for some beyond idiotic reason, the average dimwitted American will never see what works well elsewhere in the world and follow suit. No siree, much more likely to crow about how America is the greatest, smartest, bestest dang place what ever done been and we don't need healthcare advisement from those who have gone before and succeeded.

If more democrats/social democrats/progressives/left leaning indendents are elected and we are able to control congress and we elect a democrat president, I could see having UHC then. Just not sure how it would work in a practical way and get it paid for too. I don't see what it would it hurt to have it means tested rather than just free for everybody. Or at least have the richest among us pay more in taxes for it. In the meantime, I wish they would quit sabotaging Obamacare.

We did. That's what Obamacare is.

there are so many good examples for the US to look at and consider following

it's really a bit of a no-brainer

__

so much money is wasted in the US med system. I see it regularly when we audit med/hosp/doc invoices from the US. The thing that's most puzzling is the incredible discounts companies will give us when we point out the actual costs of things. I'm talking 70 - 90% discounts on hospital bills

We have UHC now. That's what Obamacare is.

I am sure you do. I know I sign an awful lot of papers every time I go to about any doctors when it seems like they could look it up...

.

No it is not. UHC is where everyone gets medical care for free, period.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/salim-lamrani/cubas-health-care-system-_b_5649968.html

That is incorrect. UHC is where everyone gets health care. It includes systems where people purchase healthcare off a marketplace exchange.

The health care systems in Germany, Switzerland, and the Netherlands, for instance.