this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2023
79 points (94.4% liked)

Ask Lemmy

33792 readers
1483 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Let's assume we want all people to have health care. What are the steps / methods most likely to get us there?

In the U.S. seems like we're a long way from that goal. I'm curious about chunking down the big goal into smaller steps. Interested to hear perspectives from other countries too.

all 39 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 18 points 2 years ago

Expand Medicare. It is already in place.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (3 children)

People need to vote.

If all the eligible people voted in the US, we could have universal healthcare in a year. Biden needs a super majority in both Houses.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

You're not wrong. At the same time, I'm looking for steps, specifics.

[–] ShadowCatEXE@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

What are the odds people actually vote for it though? I’m of the impression that most Americans would rather to pay for healthcare than have it taken out of their taxes.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I mean with all the republicans competing to defend the most departments, 2024 might be our year. Then again there's a fuckload of people in the United States who still worship Reagan so who the hell knows.

Fuck I hope so this sucks. My mother just fucked up her ankle and refuses to go to the doctor because we can't afford it. I'm afraid it's gonna be something bad that ends up being permanent if she doesn't seek treatment. Makes me feel sick.

[–] olafurp@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Lorindol@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The fastest way, certainly.

[–] angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com 2 points 2 years ago

Not available to non-yuppies though.

[–] the_q@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Removing the 37 middle men between the docs and the patients would be a good start.

[–] Vodik_VDK@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

First you do Universal Pet Health, which you push by just talking about how good it would be for dogs and ranch families.

Then you talk about how silly it is that we have UPH, but not UBH, especially when UBH would help with our nation's combat readiness.

[–] morphballganon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Vodik_VDK@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Basic: we want to ensure everyone drinks pumpkin spice White Claws, has a pH of at least 7.1, or is basically healthy. Their choice.

[–] themusicman@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Nah fuck that. Everyone benefits from universal human healthcare, but free vets overwhelmingly benefit wealthy and rural people.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What are the steps / methods most likely to get us there?

The steps others have already successfully taken in other countries. Even when the contexts are different, there is often something to be learnt by looking at previous battles.

Some starting points:

There are other sources of data in this international comparison but I think ultimately it's about looking at this graph and figuring out what the biggest policy differences are: Health System Comparison OECD life expectancy vs cost

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Thanks for the helpful links! Some of the comparison charts are pretty grim for the U.S.

Are you aware of any sources on the ins and outs of public support for universal care when it was being implemented in other countries, or the political climate? I think knowing the destination is one thing, but getting there is more what I was focused on when talking about a pathway.

[–] fiat_lux@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

I guess that's sort of the problem here, I want to but this is not my area of expertise and it happened in my country too long ago for me to tell you much first or second-hand about specific events. Wikipedia is already a far better source for social context info on the events than most people will ever be, because for most places it was so long ago. That's why I think it's important to directly ask the historians / data analysts of the other countries, and the experts in comparative global health policy exactly the same question.

You have asked a really good question and you need good answers from people who really know the topic well.

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

Some sort of strike. Either a general labor strike, or a debt strike. A general strike of laborers will be hard to organize, and there will always be scabs.

But a debt strike ia easier. Although I should probably say "Bill strike". It goes like this: don't pay four or five figure medical bills. Just put them in the shredder. If a significant portion of the population does this, it will force change. Just like the courts getting backed up because there were too many evictions, they will get backed up by all the wage garnishment cases that I'm sure someone is typing a reply about. If nobody pays, there isn't much of a way to enforce it.

[–] Drusas@kbin.social 6 points 2 years ago

Revolution, probably. We are too oppressed by the ruling class.

[–] angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago

State level systems. Some Canadian provinces had universal healthcare before Canada had it nationwide.

[–] AlmightySnoo@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

Take example from France's social security system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_security_in_France

[–] OpenStars@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago

"All" is an awfully large group - perhaps start with "some", e.g. "all in Maine" (and likely some subset of that even, like those who have lived there for 5+ years already, to avoid someone getting cancer first, then suddenly moving to Maine, then once the expensive treatments are over with go back home, etc.), and then if people enjoy seeing it be done well, expand our from there. I dunno... it's a thought, at least.

[–] Redditgee@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Gotta convince the voters around you. Talk to your coworkers, friends, etc. Be prepared to receive pushback, and a lot of ignorance, but occasionally, people that are trying to zoom out on the problems they're seeing. I used to lean pretty right, but it wasn't the Michael Moore types that brought me around; it was the Bertrand Russell types. People are plenty smart, but often need help connecting the dots. If you are condescending, you'll get resistance. If you show them the right direction, they'll find their own path, naturally.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In the U.S. seems like we're a long way from that

Not just a long way. No visible way at all.

You need to fix your political landscape first, for example have > 2 parties, and have other than these two ultra conservative parties. Only then will you be able to make significant changes in your country.

[–] __@fedia.io 2 points 2 years ago

You're 100% correct on principle. The problem is that given our electoral system, third parties end up taking votes from viable candidates, and we end up with terrifying people running things.

We can't change the electoral system, because we've never actually had an Article V convention (Constitutional Convention) so we don't know what would happen there. We'd get an entirely new constitution, and it would not be a better one. You've probably seen how dysfunctional our republicans are, I'm not about to let them tear up e.g., my right to free speech or a fair trial.

Given the current makeup of the Supreme Court, what would come out of that convention would be provide zero protections for anything.

But yes, we need third parties. I just don't see a plausible way to get them without taking on an amount of risk that most people aren't willing to take.

[–] Max_P@lemmy.max-p.me 2 points 2 years ago

First step would probably be to decouple healthcare from being company, so people realize how expensive their health plans are and how much they pay for stuff most people don't end up needing. Pretty sure for most people it's more expensive than their single yearly checkup would be out of pocket.

Then, make state-wide and state-owned insurance plans that are capped in profits, so the rates have to match the true cost of things.

Let it simmer for a bit, get people to get used to the idea that the government provided service is actually good and cheaper for once.

Then make it mandatory for every state resident to be covered by it.

The big problem with universal healthcare in the US is the strong individualistic mindset, those that go "but I don't want to pay for other people's hospital bills". Ease all those people that think they'll suddenly be paying way more to subsidize other people's health care into realizing it ends up cheaper because the costs are amortized over way more people. It needs to be spun up as a benefit to them, they're getting a better deal on their health insurance. Because they simply don't care about other people's problems.

One thing that struck me living in the US is just how much distrust there is for anything government operated, even though it's usually the companies they love so much that nickel and dime them. Although seeing how the politics are going right now, I kind of understand that sentiment. And pretty much every company does try to squeeze you out of your money, which makes people want to screw the companies over. Land of the fees.

[–] Brkdncr@artemis.camp 1 points 2 years ago

Massive unemployment.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Bipartisan collaboration for a public option that provides everything that the AMA says is necessary.

The biggest step is breaking the taboo on bipartisanism

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago
  1. Train a lot more doctors.

A more lethal pandemic than Covid 19 would be a faster track.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Get all the people you want to have universal health care, to want universal health care. If you want it for them, sell it to them.

The only thing ever stopping any policy from existing is vote counts. Convince others that universal healthcare is in their best interests. If you've tried that and failed, take steps to improve your communication skill and try again.

[–] LesserAbe@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A 57% majority of Americans say the government should ensure health coverage. Of course then 53% say the system should be based on private insurance, which is contradictory.

Another factor to consider here is people don't vote directly for policies. They vote for legislators who then decide which policies are a priority, and can interpret for themselves, right or wrong, what it is their constituents voted them in to do.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago

Great! That means you haven’t reached 43% of Americans. Keep pushing, you can do it!