I agree with that vague statement but that’s not what Rob is saying. He’s saying rather than fund Ukraine we should heal our people. I agree about healing our people, but we can do it both by amending healthcare laws to not run the industry for profit.
No qualitative service (such as healthcare, housing, education, etc.) should be run with a quantitative strategy, because the focus turns from providing an effective service to being profitable. The correct answer is to end privatized healthcare and pay it out of our taxes like these other nations Rob alludes to in the article. Healthcare and Education are every bit as important as a strong Military, border or travel infrastructure.
If we did that there would be no problem funding Ukraine and keeping our citizens healthy.
If we were to just divert Ukraine funds to Healthcare affordability it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of healthcare debt the American people have.
Americans are $220B in Healthcare debt
We have provided Ukraine with $75B to date.
So Rob’s plan is unsustainable, weakens Ukraine’s stance against Putin’s aggression and still doesn’t solve the root cause of our healthcare problems.
Ukraine is far from a forever war, unless you’re proposing that Russia will keep invading them forever. They’re literally defending against a foreign enemy, you know, that thing that all soldiers swear to do. It is beneficial to Ukraine and to the United States for Ukraine to stand. If Russia expands into Ukraine then we’re back in a pre-WWII situation where a foreign enemy power is expanding across Europe against the will of every other country on the planet, except maybe China and NK.
I get your approach on this but he proposes the absolute worst solution here.
Taking aid from Ukraine and shoveling that money into our dysfunctional profit-focused healthcare system is not going to do anything more than pad the pockets of healthcare corporations. The fact that he thinks we can just buy more healthcare instead of help Ukraine is so ridiculously dumb I can’t believe anyone would agree with him on that.
If you’re fiscally conservative you should be more focused on how to not need to spend more money in the first place. Within healthcare that’s going to require a focus off of profit and onto actually providing healthcare to citizens without the excessive profit margin overhead of today. Literally throwing even more money at the problem is the opposite of fiscal conservatism.
I think paying into a system that most people agree is broken by being profit-focused as a way of fixing that system is dumb, as do most people.
That would be like boycotting a company by buying more of their product.
We should fund healthcare the same way the countries Rob mentioned funds their healthcare, and they don’t do it by simply diverting resources intended for Ukraine. They do it with a different healthcare system entirely.
It’s not a secret to any of us that healthcare and insurance companies artificially inflate the cost of treatment to increase their profits. Without all that overhead healthcare becomes a LOT cheaper.
That’s because it’s my stance. I clarified for you because you didn’t seem to fully get it with my last post.
Or do you mean the profit-focused thing? Because that’s literally what privatized healthcare is. My citation is gestures wildly at the entire system but if you want specifics just ask and I will provide.
You said most people. That’s is something that needs a citation. Otherwise it should read your opinion which is meaningless since it doesn’t back data.
You isn’t give a citation. I’ve noticed in lemmy people don’t understand what a citations is or how to give one.
A citation is not your opinion of something but an actual documented source that says that with a link and the most relevant section pasted in the body.
Now if it’s general topic, the just the link is fine.
No, what he is saying is we should solve our own problems before paying for others wars. 100 billion could do a lot of good here.
I agree with that vague statement but that’s not what Rob is saying. He’s saying rather than fund Ukraine we should heal our people. I agree about healing our people, but we can do it both by amending healthcare laws to not run the industry for profit.
No qualitative service (such as healthcare, housing, education, etc.) should be run with a quantitative strategy, because the focus turns from providing an effective service to being profitable. The correct answer is to end privatized healthcare and pay it out of our taxes like these other nations Rob alludes to in the article. Healthcare and Education are every bit as important as a strong Military, border or travel infrastructure.
If we did that there would be no problem funding Ukraine and keeping our citizens healthy.
If we were to just divert Ukraine funds to Healthcare affordability it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of healthcare debt the American people have.
So Rob’s plan is unsustainable, weakens Ukraine’s stance against Putin’s aggression and still doesn’t solve the root cause of our healthcare problems.
Ukraine is far from a forever war, unless you’re proposing that Russia will keep invading them forever. They’re literally defending against a foreign enemy, you know, that thing that all soldiers swear to do. It is beneficial to Ukraine and to the United States for Ukraine to stand. If Russia expands into Ukraine then we’re back in a pre-WWII situation where a foreign enemy power is expanding across Europe against the will of every other country on the planet, except maybe China and NK.
I don’t mind sending aid to Ukraine. I was only pointing out what Rob said.
I get your approach on this but he proposes the absolute worst solution here.
Taking aid from Ukraine and shoveling that money into our dysfunctional profit-focused healthcare system is not going to do anything more than pad the pockets of healthcare corporations. The fact that he thinks we can just buy more healthcare instead of help Ukraine is so ridiculously dumb I can’t believe anyone would agree with him on that.
If you’re fiscally conservative you should be more focused on how to not need to spend more money in the first place. Within healthcare that’s going to require a focus off of profit and onto actually providing healthcare to citizens without the excessive profit margin overhead of today. Literally throwing even more money at the problem is the opposite of fiscal conservatism.
Umm. It’s weird you think paying for poor medical care is dumb.
I think paying into a system that most people agree is broken by being profit-focused as a way of fixing that system is dumb, as do most people.
That would be like boycotting a company by buying more of their product.
We should fund healthcare the same way the countries Rob mentioned funds their healthcare, and they don’t do it by simply diverting resources intended for Ukraine. They do it with a different healthcare system entirely.
It’s not a secret to any of us that healthcare and insurance companies artificially inflate the cost of treatment to increase their profits. Without all that overhead healthcare becomes a LOT cheaper.
That’s because it’s my stance. I clarified for you because you didn’t seem to fully get it with my last post.
Or do you mean the profit-focused thing? Because that’s literally what privatized healthcare is. My citation is gestures wildly at the entire system but if you want specifics just ask and I will provide.
You said most people. That’s is something that needs a citation. Otherwise it should read your opinion which is meaningless since it doesn’t back data.
You isn’t give a citation. I’ve noticed in lemmy people don’t understand what a citations is or how to give one.
A citation is not your opinion of something but an actual documented source that says that with a link and the most relevant section pasted in the body.
Now if it’s general topic, the just the link is fine.
Right on.