Time to break free of traditional political ideological labeling and divisions. Time to abandon old, divisive sociopolitical labels like “liberal” and “conservative”.

A new political party based on a vastly, commonly held virtures lends itself to embrace over 66% of Americans, and it clearly embraces progressive principled thinking. In the most ideal American sense of unity, a political party should not be able to be defined or placed as “to the left” or “to the right” of where the Democratic or Republican parties currently are. Just let it exist organically based on present-day principled thinking. The American Progressive Majority.


Originally Posted By u/Atlanticbboy At 2025-03-23 04:38:18 AM | Source


    • underwire212@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      19 hours ago

      It’s because the phrase “Medicare for all” has been propagandized. If you instead asked if people wanted “affordable medical treatment and preventative care for themselves and others”, I’m sure that number would be much higher.

      • wisely@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        17 hours ago

        A lot of women, LGBT also don’t trust Medicare to provide healthcare coverage. They already do not cover a lot of their politicized medical care, and are cutting more. There wouldn’t be an alternative either if no private market.

        Things like HRT, surgery, abortion, birth control, surrogacy, IVF, vaccinations, prophylactics, etc could be excluded depending on the politics of who is in charge.

        • Lyrl@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          9 hours ago

          The idea is Medicare for all as baseline, and private market on top of that. Every country with single payer health care also has private market clinics. The idea that private markets would be outlawed is a misunderstanding, and when pushed by those who would make less money under a single baseline payer system, is misinformation.

          • wisely@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            Interesting I did not know that. Would MFA lead to increased private insurance premiums over what they are now? Would less subscribers lead to many providers not being in network?

            Still not an ideal situation if women and LGBT were forced onto even more expensive private plans for coverage.

            At any rate I think most people want universal coverage it’s just our politics and system is so complicated that there is a lack of trust leading to concerns and confusion. Plus I knew people who died being denied coverage by Medicare, so the name itself is tainted for many. It probably should be called something like Healthcare for All.

    • alkbch@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      13 hours ago

      About 70% of Americans are overweight or obese, why should healthy people be penalized more because of them?

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Because of something called the social contract.

        But I guess you think you are so young and healthy that you will never grow old or becoming unhealthy.

        What an egoistic shit take BTW.

        • alkbch@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Of course I will grow old, age is not the point here. It’s about unhealthy life choices.

          • Valmond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            If you think drug users chose it, then you are quite unknowing about how things work. Most people with bad habits would love to not having them, but everyone can’t be some sort of superman and just do everything right.

            • alkbch@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 minutes ago

              We were talking about obesity and unhealthy food habits. Most drug users chose to start doing drugs, and some drugs are fine in small doses with moderation.

              You are right though it can be difficult to break bad habits, the book atomic habits may help with that.

        • alkbch@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          12 hours ago

          That’s not how it always works though, people who smoke have higher premiums for example.

          People who choose to skydive are not eligible for life insurance.

          People who crash their cars yearly pay more than safe drivers.

          • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 hours ago

            People who don’t claim absolutely do subsidise people who do. Where do you think the money goes?

            People who smoke pay more in taxes, because cigarettes are heavily taxed. Similar story for people who drink a lot of alcohol and the like.

            And why apply this mentality to healthcare and not other things? Assuming you’re a high earner, you’ll pay for roads that other don’t, for education, for the military, police, fire brigade, etc. Should all of this stuff only be accessible to people if they pay for it directly? How would that even work?

            • alkbch@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              9 hours ago

              You completely disregarded my point where most insurances price premiums depending on risk; which Medicare does not, besides maybe cigarets.

              Education, police and firefighters should be accessible for all; and obviously abusers should be punished, as in people who burn their house on purpose.

              There’s a strain on healthcare resources that is avoidable if people would just eat a bit healthier and exercise a bit more.

              • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                You completely disregarded my point where most insurances price premiums depending on risk; which Medicare does not, besides maybe cigarets.

                No I didn’t.

                Risk is already somewhat baked into tax-funded healthcare by way of harmful things being taxed more. Like I said.

                Education, police and firefighters should be accessible for all

                Maybe I’m just too NHS-brained, but I think it’s insane that you don’t think the same should be true for healthcare. Like I genuinely cannot get my head around believing healthcare should not be a right, and that some people should suffer. I’m not trying to be a dick when I say that, it’s just truly mind-breaking to me.

                and obviously abusers should be punished, as in people who burn their house on purpose.

                They are. As stated, the “punishment” for people who do things like smoke or drink themselves into poor health is paying more into the system via taxes, just like with insurance premiums being higher in the US.

                There’s a strain on healthcare resources that is avoidable if people would just eat a bit healthier and exercise a bit more.

                Obviously. But there’s a strain on that regardless of being private or public healthcare.

                Again, if you are young and healthy, your insurance contributions pay for others. That money doesn’t go to you, it goes disproportionately to people with unhealthy lifestyles and the elderly. You are already paying for people that make poor health choices.

                • alkbch@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  I don’t think unhealthy food is taxed more than healthy food in the US.

                  With a universal publicly funded healthcare system, it’s only fair to reward people who are healthy and entice people who are not to make healthier choices.

              • bufalo1973@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Maybe if you don’t need to spend so much in healthcare you can spend a little more in better food.

                • alkbch@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  8 hours ago

                  Subsidizing healthier food options and encouraging people to exercise can be a start.

        • alkbch@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          13 hours ago

          How is Medicare funded? Healthcare costs are a lot higher for obese and overweight people.

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Health insurance costs mostly come from profiteering. The cost savings of not having middlemen more than makes up for needing to pay for people with special needs.

            That’s why it’s always always cheaper in countries with public insurance.

            • alkbch@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Sure but we are very far from being able to have a nationwide public insurance system.

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 hours ago

                Okay, but we’re talking about having a nationwide public insurance system.

                The fact is, even if you don’t do anything to encourage healthier lifestyles, public insurance is cheaper. You’re being penalized right now by your private insurance carrier who is profiteering off of you. Abolish those middlemen and you save money, regardless of public obesity.

                • alkbch@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  9 minutes ago

                  If you follow U.S. politics, you know that’s not happening anytime soon.

    • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      There are a lot of special-interest items on the list, and for those things people aren’t going to feel any risk to themselves by saying sure let’s fix this or that. But for healthcare, which directly affects them, they could be more like, “I’m surviving the way it is, don’t monkey with it.”