Cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/34117495

[OC]

Original still created by @gedogfx (IG). Title source: “Inkl”

Edit: I’m not on any other social media platforms, so feel free to share this elsewhere if you want

  • acargitz@lemmy.ca
    439·
    13 days ago

    Hey, Americans, nothing stops your Democrat-run blue states from improving your healthcare.

    • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      241·
      13 days ago

      massachusetts did it and it works great; not as good as single payer, sure, but better than the alternative.

        • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          18·
          12 days ago

          that’s a bit of a misnomer since it was passed by the overwhelmingly democratic statehouse while romney fought it the entire time

          • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works
            4·
            12 days ago

            Sorry, I italicized it now. Anyone who uses that name, uses it in jest. The funniest part was during the ACA thing and him acting clueless.

    • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.mlEnglish
      222·
      13 days ago

      nothing stops your Democrat-run blue states from improving your healthcare.

      Given the two party system, and the fact that republicans arent in power in these states, that only leaves the Democrats themselves.

      End First Past The Post voting. Introduce competition into the electoral process. FREE voters ability to choose.

      But I guess that isn’t profitable enough for some.

      Nothing lasts forever…

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          3·
          12 days ago

          It’s certainly harder to do on a state level. There is no inter-state border control. Doing single payer on a state level is likely to bring in the worst cases from at least neighboring states.

          California might do it, but they have a few big advantages. First, their population is high enough that they can absorb a little cross state immigration without hitting the balance too hard. Second, the states near them tend to be more sparsely populated, unlike the east coast.

          Basically you’re looking at only California and New York if you want to do it on a state level. And they’re both going to face huge lobbying against it.

          If this is something you want to get done, it’s got to have a lot of public support. And if you’re able to gather that much public support, why not just do it federally? It works better that way anyway.

    • vga@sopuli.xyz
      1·
      12 days ago

      I could be wrong, but it seems to me that decision-makers all over the planet are absolutely horrified at the idea of making any sweeping changes whatsover to health care system, whatever it is. Because they fear the very real possibility that they will cause masses of deaths due to complications during the transition and then that will be their legacy.

      If we take at face value that there exists a change that one can just simply make to the healthcare system, and then it will all be better, there’s still going to be some kind of transition.