Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Delusional Tea Party Congressmen Think Their Policy Ideas Are Popular" video.
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Amr S, see a specific doctor could very well make your treatment differently. Doctors may change the dosage of a medication, they may give different rehab assignments, different diets, or different counseling. Healthcare is very personalized. There are some generic treatments, but there are also very specific and specialized treatments depending on the person. There are genetic factors to consider, diet, the type of work they do and so on.
If you have a pain or discomfort that turns out to be worse than chances are you have many other issues that play a role. In the study entitled
"The Oregon Experiment-Effects of Medicaid on Clinical Outcomes"
People who received Medicaid did not improve in physical health. Why? Because a lot of it has to do with diet, exercise and genetics. Again, even if you receive care does not mean you will live a significant amount of time. If you receive care and die 3 months later due to another complication, is that a success?
How do you monitor pain and health issue? People aren't doctors. They need to see a doctor to monitor that properly but they can't if the wait times are too long. And again, what they have can be very subjective.
I will suggest that if this issue is so important to you that you read up on it more. I feel you haven't.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@glowaru , local governments are easier to control. Also, local governments can create policies that the people want and if they don't work then the people can easily change it. If you don't like the policies of a local government you can push to change it or move and still remain a US citizen. At the federal level you can't do that.
You say "populist" but what does that really mean? What is good for you isn't for someone else.
You talk about getting money out of politics, people have been saying that for years. This is not a novel idea. That is why the founding fathers pushed to limit government knowing that it can become corrupt and oppressive. To reduce money in politics you need to limit the powers it has. When you do that than government has nothing to sell. The far left pushes for a federally ran universal healthcare system. What is going to prevent healthcare providers from bribing politicians at the federal level into catering to them? You may say "elect the right people" but bear in mind you can only vote for 2 senators and a few members in the house. That's it. Other people in the country may not know of the corruption going on or may support what politicians are passing. Or they may not know what politicians are passing. They may say one thing but leave out a lot. For example, Bernie preaches about Medicare for all but does not say that he will have to raise taxes on everyone and that he will push to ban private insurance.
As for the federal government listening to the people, they only want to listen to their votes. That means the Senators for MO will listen to voters of MO. Senators of FL will listen to voters in FL and so on. What people want in MO is different than what people want in FL. Our nation is way too diverse to have a one size fits all policy. Look at Obamacare, they struggled to get 60 senate democrats to agree on one healthcare bill.
The Constitution sets rights which gives power to the people, not the government. If the federal government were to mandate that every state had to had universal healthcare that is giving power to the government. The Constitution is there to limit government and give power to the people to control government.
As for the programs you you listed you are too vague. I will go point by point
Second New Deal: Considering how the first prolonged the recession I will say no
Universal healthcare: Federally, no. I do support a public option at the state level but it has to be restricted. To give an example I used a publicly run healthcare program to get an STD check up. It was free but only offered on Tuesday and Thursday and I had to wait 4 hours to pee in a cup and get blood drawn. Later I used my insurance to use a private option and in 30 minutes I drove to the clinic, checked in, pee in a cup and got blood drawn, and was at home.
Healthcare is complex and I support a free market system with a local public option. I can write an long comment on that if you want. But universal healthcare I do not support for several reasons.
Drugs: Should be a local issue. Drug abuse is a real thing and there is a desire to outlaw it. Drug addicts can cause major problems for society and cost them a lot of money. If you have a drug addict they will end up being a drain to a universal healthcare system.
Prisons: I agree our prisons need to be reformed to rehabbing our prisoners
Gun control: Define "basic gun control". This is where you get vague. What is "basic" to you is not to me I bet.
Funding college: No. College is a personal investment. That is where the value of college comes from. You are making a personal investment. If after a K-12 education (which is ran locally) you cannot find a way to educate yourself you are beyond help. Publicly funded college is a big mistake.
UBI: Will do nothing but cause inflation.
Now if states were to pass them I would support those states' rights to do that. I just won't support the system.
You should never do a federal ballot initiative. Our country is way too diverse to do that. You can't push for a one size fits all policy. Look at my example of the Community Mental Health Act of 1963. What will work in one state will not work in another. Nothing at the federal level is ever determined by a simple majority and for good reason. I will write another comment on this point but that is how it should remain.
Healthcare and education are not rights. They require someone to provide those things. Rights are things that you have that the government cannot take away without due process. They are not things the government gives. You have a right to bear arms until you commit a crime. You have a right to pursue happiness until you commit a crime. You have a right to property until the government offers you proper value for it. All require due process. I encourage you to learn what a "right" is before you start preaching about "basic rights" .
1
-
1