• Frank Casa@frank.casa
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    Makes sense. Universal healthcare advocates and insurance CEOs both want a monopoly, one by the government and the other by capitalists. Either way, you have no choice in the matter. They dictate whether you get healthcare or not.

    • Frank Casa@frank.casa
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 days ago

      Context: If you want to give people choice and power in healthcare, you need to decentralize it, not centralize it. Because greedy people like centralization since it gives them money and power.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Kind of a shit take that supports the concentration of power and capital.

        Universal Healthcare is gained when a population as a whole demands that the wealth of others be distributed in a way that benefits the whole instead of the few.

        Decentralizing it, without a central authority, means wealth is not distributed and countless are left to suffer. In fact, how is that any different from the way things are right now?

        • Frank Casa@frank.casa
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          Before the greedy consolidated healthcare into mega-organizations and privatized hospitals, most hospitals were run by charities, religious organizations, and local governments (usually counties). People paid cash for routine healthcare, which kept prices low, and had major medical insurance for major expenses. People had control over their healthcare.

          The system was not perfect, but it was a lot better than what we have today. And we can do a lot of things to make such a system better, such as requiring hospitals to provide indigent care to those who cannot afford to pay (i.e. free or reduced cost healthcare) in exchange for not paying taxes. If they chose not to provide indigent care, then they are taxed, and that tax money is used to fund government-run hospitals and clinics.

          You don’t have to centralize healthcare to provide universal healthcare. There are a number of ways to do it.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            You don’t have to centralize healthcare to provide universal healthcare. There are a number of ways to do it.

            Well let me know when you accomplish that. Technically, there is absolutely nothing stopping you from doing it right now.

            • Frank Casa@frank.casa
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              2 days ago

              Yes, we already have that in many major counties in Texas, and it seems to be working very well. We provide universal healthcare, unlike the rest of the country, and yet taxes are still low, and people have a choice of providers.

              I would still make some recommendations that would make it better. Now we just need to refine and duplicate the model nationwide.

              • yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                2 days ago

                Texas does not have universal healthcare. It does however have the second highest maternal mortality rate in the developed world. Not just the US.

                • Frank Casa@frank.casa
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I never said Texas has universal health care. I said that certain counties in the state have universal health care.

                  • yunxiaoli@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    That’s still incorrect. UHC isn’t just subsidized, it’s free at point of sale. There are no counties in the US that offer this. There are no organizations in the US that offer this.

              • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                I tried searching it and couldn’t find a single thing except for some articles talking about 1332 waivers from the Affordable Care Act, which is very much centralized.

                  • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    They’re funded by Federal, State, and Local government as well as philanthropic donations.

                    Primary and specialty care access must be increased; although Harris Health provides 25% of the primary care for indigent individuals, another 27% do not receive care. The gap must be closed and not allowed to continue to increase.

                    So basically a centralized healthcare solution which turns away more poor or uninsured than they help. A commendable service, but not even close to the effectiveness and mercy of universal healthcare.