We’re also the only country in the developed world without socialized medicine.
On top of that Americans pay more healthcare related income taxes that than anyone else! Those could well be used to cover the expenses of a socialized system. It’s absolutely amazing that people think they don’t need it.
the US actually pays about double at $9K per capita.Most of the rest of the cdeveloped countries pay about $3-4K per capita for healthcare.
This sounds way more important than people wearing different clothing than you’d expect reading to children in a library, but you guys know best.
The drag story hour thing (and pretty much all other culture wars) are designed to keep people outraged at the people trying to fix the country so that the few at the top can continue to other the one’s trying to fix the problems. Cause enough outrage to your political rivals trying to end your honey pot. Keeps the ones who fall for it from seeing past the curtain and the ones you target from being trusted/gaining momentum.
It’s funny… I could’ve sworn I remember a guy from Austria doing something really similar sometime around 1937…
Just so it’s very clear how ridiculous the situation truly is.
The US government pays per capita about double what other developed countries do for healthcare AND Americans still need to pay for private insurance over that, which on average is also more than what other countries spend per capita for the same services…
Even with all that money spent, life expectancy in the USA is closer to some Latin American countries than it is to Canada’s and infant mortality is the highest of all Occidental rich countries and is pretty much equal to China’s.
UnitedHealth Group - $88 billion in profit last year.
And yet I’ve seen lower class Americans argue that they don’t want to see USA’s healthcare become public because there needs to be at least one country that provides the option to live in such system… The fact that it went directly against their own interest completely escaped them…
The amount of propaganda US citizens are exposed to would make any totalitarian regime in history proud. And then people will go on about how CNN is somehow “left wing”.
I think hitler might be a centrist in the United States.
Probably left-wing in US too
To explain why you are downvoted:
There are Americans who actually claim hitler/the nazis were socialist. They read the party like this nSdAP (nationalSOCIALISTgermanWORKERS Party).
Which of course makes no sense because politcal names rarely have to do anything with he policies.
They then happily ignore the NsDaP reading which is clearly politically on the right.
Also they ignore that the nazis were literally fascists.
Yeah, calling the Nazis socialist is like calling north Korea democratic just because it’s in their name.
They cannot allow that someone “undeserving” gets help.
Sad to be honest. People are actively demanding the dismantle of welfare state here in the Nordics too. Arbeit macht frei and so on.
In my country, the most popular candidate is a right-winger who announced publically that we wants to eliminate the ministry of Education, the main institute to fund scientific research, public health, the national bank and he wants to make the US dollar the national currency. It’s suicide, but people are celebrating the nonsense.
We do have socialized medicine. We socialize the research and innovations and give it to corporations and insurance companies for them to have profits.
Privatized profit, socialized losses
And the Europeans take advantage of it lol
Why wouldn’t they? And any American who is mad at Europeans for that and not the system their own country made that enables it is a complete moron.
Specifically, those who have an IQ between 0 and 25 are idiots; IQs between 26 and 50 are considered imbeciles; and those who have an IQ between 51 and 70 are considered morons.
These terms were popular in psychology as associated with intelligence on an IQ test until around the 1960s.
Source: THE WORDS MORON, IMBECILE, AND IDIOT MEAN DIFFERENT THINGS
In my opinion all the aforementioned IQ ranges are still far above what is, at times, displayed in the US.
Idk about others, but Singapore doesn’t really have socialized healthcare.
We pay for it with our salaries into an account and the hospitals use that when necessary.
But we have all the luxury to have personal insurance and it doesn’t really cost too much if you have a proper job and all. Coverage is pretty decent too.
Same here. Its called… taxes.
They probably meant universal health care, which can be implemented in a lot of different ways.
That’s not true at all. While Medishield is the basic healthcare insurance solutions and Medisave comes from your CPF, Medifund is an endowment fund that works like a financial safety net to help needy Singaporeans who cannot afford hospital expenses despite Medisave and MediShield.
Which countries have that?
Yep, and given my experience talking with other US citizens about universal healthcare, they’ll argue how it’s some how a bad thing. It’s just a reoccurring thing, people seem to be programmed to hate stuff that’d help them.
Fox News is a helluva propaganda tool
It’s been making our citizens dumber since 1996
Tbf, universal healthcare sucks when it’s done poorly. Does anybody really trust the US government with our healthcare?
More than I trust Aetna.
Do you trust a company that is required to provide profit to their shareholders by providing you the least possible amount of healthcare?
Health insurance in the US is very complicated. It’s a feature, not a bug. They don’t want you to use it.
Oh, but government death panels. Have you ever had to get a pre-authorization for care that would save your life? Or had a claim denied because that one person that was in the operating room while you were under anesthesia was out of network? Yeah, it’s actually corporate death panels.
Removed by mod
What? Are you Scott Adams?
The right are the ones against things that would help us.
I mean, there is no left in America. It’s far right or center at best.
Removed by mod
We’re all neo-liberal on this blessed day!
I wish😔
Where’s the difference between neo-liberalism and liberalism? For me there is none. It’s the same, only the historical context is different.
There are three main types of “liberalism” that generally exist in Western democracies, and each of them is quite distinct.
-
Classical liberalism - emphasizes individual freedom, limited government intervention in the economy, and the protection of natural rights, such as life, liberty, and property.
-
Neoliberalism - emphasizes free markets, deregulation, privatization, and reduced government intervention in the economy.
-
Social Liberalism - combines the values of individual freedom with a belief in the role of government in addressing social and economic inequalities through healthcare, education, and welfare programs.
Typically these days, especially in the US, most people think of #3 when they hear the word “liberal” in a political sense, I’d say.
I’m ok with this. Thx.
#2 is basically corporate dictatorship
-
Americans seem to think that as long as you support LGBT+ issues, it’s leftist to have hospitals, roads, schools, and the rest of society run by corporations for profit.
For fucks sake.
This is why; you.
You and the other clones.
Serving the Republic(ians)
Trying to read in good faith, maybe the user meant to refer to (right wing) Libertarianism or neoliberalism.
Back before “liberal” became the preferred slur the American right could say in public, they would often seek to brand their ideology as liberalism in order to draw legitimacy from the high standing of classic liberalism. Libertarianism has liberal roots, it just blows a single element (freedom from state intervention) completely out of proportions.
Academically, the father of Libertarianism (Robert Nozick) makes for a fun and interesting read, but he was torn to shreds by John Rawls (and, in my opinion and less famously, Michael Otsuka). If I remember correctly he ended up abandoning his own theory. Still it seems to have a particular appeal to Americans and their obsession about the self made man, property rights, and private wealth accumulation.
Liberal means just freedom. BS about freedom only from state intervention was invented by capitalism.
Still oddly doing the lifting for the republicans.
They don’t care for nuance.
They’ll use your hatred for your liberals to hate americas left.
Sucks that EU has the tankie problem, but with all due respect, quit your bitching. I wish that was the form of fascism I had to worry myself with.
The America right is murdering the American left.
We are not the same.
Solidarity forever, am I right?
You know fascism is not the only alternative to liberalism. Liberalism is a center-right ideology in most of the developed world - even the American politicians fascists use as Boogeymen are mostly Social Democrats not liberals.
The liberal parties generally used to be the left wing back in the day, promoting basic human rights and universal suffrage against the capitalists on the right wing seeking to keep up the pace of exploitation.
When the socialists came along they placed themselves on the left of the liberalists, eventually rendering the old school liberal parties somewhere between the centre and the right. In America the two party system kept this from happening, which is why people complain that there’s no true left in the US.
However, the socialists are also split. Social democrats tend to hold Locke in one hand and Marx in the other, embracing both socialist and liberal values. This is often to the disgust of the ideologically pure Communists, as it’s hard to be a Lockean without accepting a degree of property rights that they find unbearable.
If you give up liberalism you generally slide very fast towards authoritarianism, be it on the left or on the right. It’s possible to imagine a non-liberal non-authoritarian society; it’s just very hard to imagine actually getting there.
You’re right, liberalism was left-wing a long time, ago. But this liberalism is gone, long time ago. You won’t find it anymore. That has no connection with socialism at all.
If you read Marx, which indead you didn’t, you would say different things. The socialists didn’t try to fight liberalists, they just tried to explain to them why their views are wrong in some parts. This split the whole movement, but not because the socialists were wrong. It split, because the liberalists were naive and believed their own bullshit.
Sorry, my english is very bad, but I also think it is very wrong to split communism and liberalism with the word authoritarianism. Communists want more freedom than liberalists can imagine. Their view is not focused on money and the system. And if they are stricter in their actions, than it’s only because they’ve learned that words are not enough. You have to fight people, who are against the true freedom of all people.
I’ll give you one point - Communists indeed don’t tend to aim for authoritarianism. Even Marxist-Leninists claim it’s just a necessary step along the way - the final society will be complete freedom.
I said as much in my comment - I just also pointed out the historical fact that efforts to implement a communist society without liberal ideals tends to slide towards authoritarianism real quick. China and the Soviet Union did not end up characterised by “more freedom than liberals can imagine”.
Brave of you to make assumptions what I’ve read and not.
Even Marxist-Leninists claim is just a necessary step along the way
false
efforts to implement a communist society without liberal ideals tends to slide towards authoritarianism real quick. China and the Soviet Union did not end up characterised by “more freedom than liberals can imagine”.
China is a capitalist hellhole, and the Soviet Union never achieved communism, and using it as an example of what communism is is like using North Kore as an example of what a People’s Republic is.
I second how glaringly obvious it is that you’ve not read much of anything to do with communism at all that’s outside of the realm of mainstream propaganda. You can protest all you like, but your views speak for themselves.
There’s South Korea and Taiwan.
China is pretty much “capitalism with beast grin”
I am sure you didn’t read Marx and if you did, you did not enough.
It’s hard to implement socialism, if it never was tried. You have only one try and if this try fails you have huge problems, cause everything is suddenly gone and than you have slavery, hunger etc. back. And also, if you try to build socialism, suddenly a lot of people are against you. You have to struggle with more problems, than you imagined. And that’s important to understand. You are suddenly enemy with everyone. Look at the russian civil war - they had to fight against several countries, even the USA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War It’s just crazy. And if you have to fight against several countries than people tend to ignore this and instead they’re saying “See, it doesn’t work.”.
So, yeah, you’re right, communists tend to authoritarianism, but not because they want to. They tend to it, because they have to. There is no choice.
Somewhere in the world there is a country with personalistic resource autocracy, where autocrat and his minions are strong pro-corporate, pro-censorship and against pensions, universal healthcare and net neutrality. Far right autocracy not only exists, but even started war.
If you are pro capitalism, you’re on the right, no matter what you call yourself or how much you try and cling to past definitions of words, it’s as simple as that.
Also fuck horseshoe theory and this idea that “extreme left” is authoritarian (when authoritarianism is incompatible with leftist thinking on every level. This means tankies aren’t on the left no matter how hard they protest) - one extreme wants you to be a literal slave to a capitalist dictator, the other wants you to have everything you need and be able to work towards a better society instead of for the benefit of like 10 people.
Try actually learning about liberalism and the harm it causes before you somehow go blaming (actual) socialists (seriously?? The people who have never even been allowed to come close to power???) for the state of politics:
https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/10/14/liberalism-and-fascism-partners-in-crime/
https://blacklikemao.medium.com/how-liberalism-helps-fascism-d4dbdcb199d9
I never said I’m pro capitalism. :)
I don’t know who Scott Adams is, but googled it. I am no racist.
It’s just funny, you say sth. against the stupid and inhuman liberalism in the USA and suddenly some idiot comes and says sth. stupid. That’s what I meant - it’s a mental illness.
And yes, the other people here are right. There is no left in the USA and it shows. It’s just right-wing or more right-wing.
Fuck liberals, but maybe you can get the point across without the ableism?
People choose to be liberal, those of us who are mentally ill didn’t.
Jesus. In so many ways, the USA really is a shithole country, fuck our lives smh.
Our government is corrupt to the core. If you ain’t rich, fuck you.
Why, you ask?
Because the system is corrupt by design. Politicians rely on legal bribes to stay in power and enrich themselves and the people and corporations who oppose treating workers fairly are the ones with the deepest pockets.
Iran and North Korea have maternity leave. Let that sink in for you.
Germany has months of parental leave for both parents, and a month’s vacation written into law. So yeah, there’s that…
Slovenia has 12 months of parental leave.
Nobody knows what happens in North Korea, but that makes sense.
The tankies on lemmy assure me it’s a utopia. 😂
What I mean is North Korea is so closed, that nobody knows if this true, but it is rational because everyone born by current Kim’s minions will be future Kim’s minions, and Kim wants more minions. There are no imkigrants.
Kimmigrants
Mostly because of UN (i.e. US sanctions,) which forbid worker visas to NKs.
Funfact 1: UN can’t forbid any visas
Funfact 2: this is not type of ban that anyone can enforce
Funfact 3: NK is member of UN
Then why doesn’t China take them on? Their allies right?
Let’s see $1 million medical bills, no health insurance, no paid medical leave, no consumer protection laws, trans genocide attempts, corporations are “people,” a minimum wage of $7.25 and much more.
Is it rich for like three people?
They said “rich country”, not “a country of rich people”.
deleted by creator
I liked when Biden finally decided to suspend the military budget for the next 5 years, seeing as the U.S. is already operating a behemoth of an army no one dares confront. So the $5 trillion dollars they will now redirect to the public over the next 5 years is going to make a monstrous wave of positivity for the US for decades to come. /s
30 states require minimum wage higher than the federal requirement
4 states plus DC have minimum wage over $15/hr
deleted by creator
This means nothing if Republicans take power again
Not only that. The US is also known as the No Vacation Nation.
And they wonder why millenials don’t have kids…
Plenty of of Generation X, too, don’t want/didn’t have kids.
According to some people who replied a comment I made, this wouldn’t affect the fertility rate. Not sure how they came to that conclusion.
But the thing I mention is that even with this barrier, the US fertility rate is bigger than most other developed countries which have paid parental leave. Of course there are other things, but this is weird for me
Inside america are two americas. One is full of people pretending this place doesn’t suck shit the other is little piggies who roll around in the shit and love it.
This makes a lot of sense since poor non industrialized places tend to have a higher fertility rate. Do you have something for me to read about it?
Thanks
There is a fascinating documentary called Idiocracy that I highly recommend.
deleted by creator
The no vacation nation.
A truly inhuman capitalist nightmare of a country.
Still don’t have a decent healthcare system either. So yeah, that tracks.
Still don’t require paying a living wage either. So yeah, that tracks.
But hey, we’re #1 in school shootings and military spending!
Take the w where you can get en right? Right!?
(cough and a lot of other stuff)
I did a little digging once when I was in an argument with someone. Per capita the US government spends (from memory) like $600 per person on healthcare per year. For only like $50 more per person, per year, Australia provides universal healthcare and enormously subsidised medication - insulin for example is $30/script for high income earners and $6 a script for low income / retirees, and if you spend >$500 a year on medication, everything is free after that.
In addition, the USA spends about 17.5% of GDP on healthcare whereas the UK spends about 9.5%
That’s one thing I’m grateful for here in Australia, our healthcare. It’s not perfect, but it’s pretty good.
Only in terms of cost and insurance, which is obviously a huge deal. The actual medical experience is really good. They’re very fast and very skilled doctors.
Until you need a specialist, then your sol. My wife was in Portland and had to wait three months for an in network dermatologist. It all depends.
The firm I was with about a decade ago or so made a big deal when they rolled out some of their new benefits.
One benefit was parental leave, and they were real proud and happy to offer a whopping TEN DAYS paternal leave for new fathers. Ten lousy days.
And the worst part is they didn’t even have to do that much.
If it’s any consolation it still isn’t much better in the UK. My gift from work to celebrate the birth of my child was two weeks off - one at full pay and one at statutory paternity pay level. Welcome to the world new human, here’s your pay deduction!
deleted by creator
Is the US still considered first world, or has it been recategorize as second world yet?
deleted by creator
Insane comment.
America has big issues but to compare it’s magnitude of issues, and quantity population affected is a slap in the face to those experiencing life in a real “third world” country.
TBH, I’m currently staying in a third world country and I feel safer here than in US. YMMV, there’s a lot of third world country as the main definition of third world country is a country that’s not aligned to any political bloc in the Cold War, the West being First World and the Soviet bloc being Second World, hence nations not being aligned to any of those bloc is a Third World.
That’s why I put third world in quotes.
What people here are describing is places with massive government unrest, or massive poverty, etc.
I know it’s edgy to say “oh are you talking about America” but that’s just not the case
deleted by creator
That’s typical first world problem - oh no, can’t buy a new iPhone this year, I’m so poor…
I recall a time in my youth when a young American could work full time and afford an apartment without splitting it with three roommates.
What an insane always-online opinion.
The Second World would have been the soviet block. There is no second world today. The third world though is real. By definition the US will be always first world as the first world is defined as the pro-wester with heavy industry. No matter how people live in this world.
I don’t think very many people use those definitions for first/ second/ third world anymore. The colloquial definitions of “first world = rich second world = not so rich but not so poor and third world = poor” are more useful anyway due to as you say the Soviet Union not existing anymore so nobody can align with it.
Yeah, back in the cold war that was actually the common perception anyway even while it was initially meant differently. So no harm done using this easy adaption.
At least it’s no democracy. (being forced between 2 evils sponsored by companies is no democracy)
In a way the US will always attract immigrants - qualified or not - and they will make up for lost local fertility. So it kinda makes sense the US does not care for its own people
rich ≠ socially and culturally developed …
