this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2026
919 points (99.4% liked)

Progressive Politics

4314 readers
1674 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thingAmaBob@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I do not have a full grasp on economics; my expertise lies elsewhere. But with all the money these goons spend, what’s even the point of a monetary system? They just do whatever they want anyway, using whatever resources the other rich goons give them, while everyone else just takes what little they leave for us. There is no way the government is paying the debt.

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 2 points 5 hours ago

The US national debt is $38 trillion, soon to be $39 trillion.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 10 points 9 hours ago

Burning money for no reason other than hate and greed.

[–] RabbitBBQ@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It's too bad they can't just use one of those money guns to shoot money directly

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago

Too bad you can't use the resources that it takes for a multi-trillion dollar weapons industry to uh... no, wait. You totally could.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military%E2%80%93industrial_complex

[–] d3adpaul77@lemmy.org 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

the crazy thing is you could afford both, you spend more to get less, and it's universally popular

it's the most antimemetic idea in American history

[–] CubitOom@infosec.pub 1 points 6 hours ago

They cut cancer research!

[–] Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 10 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Am I crazy or did Trump play this song at a rally and then I had a stroke?

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 2 points 9 hours ago

I mean, those aren't mutually exclusive

[–] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 13 hours ago

So you're either crazy or had a stroke...

[–] bridgeburner@lemmy.world 31 points 18 hours ago (4 children)

The US necessarily wouldn't even need to spend more on healthcare to improve the health of it's citizens; a lot couls be achieved with stricter food regulations, like limiting the usage of corn syrup or sugar content in some groceries. Making food healthier means less obesity means less strain on the healthcare system.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (2 children)

In a Universal healtcare system, there is a monetary incentive for the autorities to make laws and regulations to prevent disease - prevention is a lot cheaper than fixing things after the damage is done.

In a pure for profit healthcare system there is no such incentive for the autorities - in some ways, there might even be the opposite incentive, depending on the levels of Corruption and how much more profit the Healthcare sector can make if people are more sick: after all, when a country spends twice as much as a percentage of the GDP in Healthcare, that means there's a lot more money to be made in Healthcare, and private interests have an incentive to buy politicians and regulators to help them profit as much as possible.

Beyond this there is also the whole "doing what's best for our people" incentive, which is the US is so weak that it doesn't even apply to some obviously bad things (for example, easy availability of guns, which is definitelly bad for people's health) much less to more subtle pathways to damage people's health such as unhealthy food.

[–] Gathorall@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Universal healthcare also allows the state to have enormous negotiation power. Some European countries co-operate to get even better prices on pharmaceuticals, just imagine the state placing on the table that best offer will give you access to a market 340 million people, gouging nada.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

Excellent points!

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago

Also need to subsidize grocery distribution into food deserts. Many people don’t even have access to fresh produce if they wanted it.

[–] MrsVeggies@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Fat people often just get scolded by doctors for being fat and are not offered any actual care. Lots of fat people refuse to go to the doctor unless they're practically dying because it can be humiliating and/or traumatic. Also BMI is anti-science bullshit. Refined sugar is not good for you, but don't blame fat people for straining the system. Blame the system for straining fat people.

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 points 9 hours ago

I don't eat nearly as much food as I used to, and now exercise more regularly by going to the pool every other day. The doctor still thinks I am not doing enough. Here's the thing: my intake of food is about 1/3rd of a close relative.

Between the doctor's skepticism when I tell them that I have done things differently, and the lack of weight loss from a changing lifestyle, I am coming to a conclusion: don't trust this doctor, and genetics is definitely a factor.

It is my hope for AI doctors to become reliable someday. My human doctor doesn't really look at me, and doesn't listen, and I hate talking. I prefer writing, because talking is hard. Being raised in the boonies, conversation in realtime isn't a skill of mine.

[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

We have poor nutritional education in the USA as well. With the addition of blaming addicts for their behavior than those who are addicting them. Looking at you sugar/HFCS in everything. A lot of it is not so obvious. We've literally been led to believe that FAT is bad for us, it's what makes you fat. Not that carbs and sugars are what cause you to be fat.

[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

A lot of people's bodies just want to be larger than other people's. This isn't about willpower and education, it's about recognizing diversity.

Yes we make it worse with our decisions as a society, but some people are gonna be fatter regardless.

[–] BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

There's diversity in BUILDS of people. Some will be thicker than others but that doesn't mean they're obese. I'm obese and I suffer health effects from it and have been obese most of my life. This entire obesity acceptance thought is backwards. We should get rid of the stigma but it is not healthy.

[–] eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 hours ago

Yeah I've had health problems from being overweight too.

Shaming me for being overweight never made a difference at all, and probably made things worse.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 2 points 17 hours ago

I imagine the price will be a factor too. Why pay money to be berated with no actual help?

[–] Spacehooks@reddthat.com 4 points 18 hours ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mrmanager@lemmy.today 1 points 10 hours ago
[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 140 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (5 children)

Conceptually, I'm not opposed to having a powerful military for defense of your own borders and those of allies. It's a scary world and there are some bad people in positions of power out there.

I am highly opposed to defunding cancer research so we can blow up schools full of small children without any real cause or reason.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Trump wanted to fuck children but he couldn't go there to do it in person so he remotelly had them fucked in bulk.

If you don't think that's important enough to beat cancer research in getting funds then you're one of those people who doesn't want to make America great again.

/s

[–] Chev@lemmy.world 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

The world is scary because of the US lol.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

Sure, but there is a tendency in any powerful nation to eventually be co-opted by expansionist or corrupt forces that profit from war. Russia comes to mind but they're not the only country with weapons eyeing their neighbors, and we do have (or had) obligations to help allies.

[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

But there is clearly a reason; deflection from the fact that our president is a pedophile.

[–] kilgore_trout@feddit.it 9 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

But a peaceful military does not exist. Once you increase spending for it to a relevant portion of the national budget, you need to use it to make the economy happy.

You're right, but again we don't live in an anarchist like state here we don't need to worry about bad actor nations or actors in general. I would love there to be a situation where borders and countries disappear and we come together as a species. That does not meet well with the reality of our situation. Even then, I would still think some defensive force necessary because well, I'm not too optimistic on the galaxy at large.

[–] redlemace@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago

without any real cause or reason

Sure there is : Trump had the feeling they might be a threat (and plenty of minors to ask how good he is at feeling)

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 101 points 1 day ago (9 children)

Universal healthcare would cost the government an additinal $0.00 because Medicare and Medicaid are stupid expensive already.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

America only ever has one healthcare bill. It is the total amount spent on healthcare, including harm done to people who don't seek healthcare because it is too expensive, plus all the costs of people going to the emergency room when they have no other option, plus all the people who go into bankruptcy from medical debt. It's all one total bill, no matter how you spread the math around, and the only question is how much of that money is being wasted on inefficiency and lost to corporate profits. We might as well all keep paying that bill, but figure out ways to reclaim those corporate profits for the people.

[–] UnspecificGravity@piefed.social 82 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The US already spends more per-person than most states with socialized medical care. The difference is that in America that money goes to insurance companies and billionaires sitting at home while in socialized medical schemes it goes to doctors and nurses and for medications and facilities.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 12 points 19 hours ago

The US already spends more per-person than most states with socialized medical care.

The US spends more than twice as much per capita on healthcare than every other nation on Earth. You don't have to water this down with "most".

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

I think merelly "spends more per-person" is nowhere strong enough to really illustrate how bad things are.

For example, the United States spends more than TWICE per-person in Healthcare than the United Kingdom.

In fact judging by this it spends almost twice as much as the European country which has a 69% higher GDP per-capita - Luxembourg.

And even with such much higher spending levels, based on this healthcare outcomes are actually worse.

Healthcare in the US is world-beating by a large marge in how spectacularly inneficient it is.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 10 points 23 hours ago

Universal healthcare would actually be an investment in the people of this nation and has the potential to increase the GDP

It would make them cheaper likely because economies of scale. Add in it'd be actual healthcare and not insurance that works to deny coverage.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 day ago

US spends more on government healthcare than Canada ($9195/capita vs $5000), which has universal healthcare for all. As % of GDP, for total healthcare, US is 17%, Canada is 12%

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] psycho_driver@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

And generations of people who hate us.

[–] einfach_orangensaft@sh.itjust.works 22 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Ah yes, who dosent know what american tax dollars are also paying for those at least 2x russian weapon systemes that did sneak into the compilation......

That doesn't make it not relevant, if anything it shows it's a multinational issue of just arms build up to sabre rattle at the best of times.

[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

yeah at least two of the cwis and I think that ripple rocket launch at 0:14 are russian.

I think the point is valid tho.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›