• Remmock@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Nobody left of center has ever nor will ever assume that Federal Healthcare is “free”. We could fund healthcare for a tenth of what we’re spending on failed DARPA projects and fighter jets that are .00001% faster than their previous generation.

    https://www.citizen.org/news/fact-check-medicare-for-all-would-save-the-u-s-trillions-public-option-would-leave-millions-uninsured-not-garner-savings/

    In fact, the government would save money. To that effect, it would be like instituting “free” healthcare.

    Healthcare for All is the fiscally responsible option.

    • PrincessEli@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      In fact, the government would save money

      And ending Medicare would be a far more effective cost saver

      • Remmock@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s where you’re incorrect. Ending a government program hurts those at the bottom, ultimately removing them from becoming earners. They either become homeless or die. This takes away from their potential contributions to society. This lack of support unravels the social fabric and reduces the taxes to the government.

        In a modern society, a weak government means no negotiating power on the world stage. It means no group alliances, and no benefits from those alliances.

        Social safety nets just make sense.