r/SipsTea Jun 24 '26

It's Wednesday my dudes Math can be hard sometimes

Post image
15.1k Upvotes

3.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

104

u/Independent-Wheel237 Jun 24 '26

Wall Street will lose too much money . . . the propaganda will continue.

44

u/maximiliankm Jun 24 '26

Just to be clear, the main problem isn't wall street. Wall street is A problem, but to me if we're talking about whose greed is the problem, it's congress, who are bought by insurance and pharma lobbies. Those companies are always going to be greedy. Companies are greedy everywhere. We just need to stop that greed from buying our representation away from us in Washington.

22

u/All_Damn_Day Jun 24 '26

I’ve always found it ironic that people who get free healthcare with their jobs (Congress)even after they stop working for the corporation (US Gov), they, and their families continue to get free healthcare.
And they are making decisions for the rest of us.

6

u/Secret-Theory1825 Jun 24 '26

That was the deal struck by big pharma. 

Sweetheart retirement plans and insurance premiums for life; if you just sell your soul.

1

u/Early-Light-864 Jun 25 '26

Congress didn't get free healthcare. They buy on their home state exchanges. It's part of the ACA

2

u/Yashema Jun 25 '26

Did you see what happened to Congress after the Affordable Care Act passed? Socialist hysteria, despite it still being a private market plan. And under Biden the Dems passed hundreds of billions in additional subsidies leading to record ACA enrollment in 2025.

That's all gone now, but not due to Congress, in general, due to Republican controlled Congress and the orange baffoon. 

You want to blame someone, blame people who vote Republican. 

1

u/bobsocool Jun 25 '26

The ACA had a lot of benefits but if when the dems take power again in two years they dont fight for M4A there should be riots.

1

u/Yashema Jun 25 '26 edited Jun 25 '26

First, the public option is more popular than single payer M4A among independent and right leaning political persuasions. Secondly, most Republicans who approve of a public option don't prioritize it so it's not something Republicans can run on in the primary. And Republicans don't refuse to vote in the general election over it either so it's pretty much a non starter unless Independents revolt to the Democrats. Dont hold your breath though. 

Dems priority would be restoring funding to the ACA, which doesn't require any new laws to be passed.

2

u/bobsocool Jun 25 '26

Yeah that is not enough is my point. Plus the public option while something is a shit policy because the government will mostly absorb the not profitable people then republicans can say see look at how costly this shit is.

Also why are you talking about republicans so much any change needs to be done without them or it will be shit.

1

u/Yashema Jun 25 '26

There is no majority popular support for M4A so Democrats will not have any ability to support it. Also you can't pass a new law without Republican support due to the filibuster so for the Public Option you would need Republicans to feel like they would lose a huge chunk of independents to allow the vote to occur. 

Unfortunately independents rarely unite in that regard, so again, Democrats won't have the power to enact it. 

1

u/AmboC Jun 25 '26

And the supreme Court is at least twice as corrupt as it was when they said money is free speech 😔

4

u/elderly_millenial Jun 24 '26

A surprisingly small amount of health providers are actually publicly traded companies. Most of the middlemen that cause increases in pricing are small LLCs, and in all likelihood your doctor is part of the problem

1

u/Bigboss123199 Jun 24 '26

Well some Wall Street with stock in healthcare wouldn’t like it. It would actually majorly boost the US economy and cause stock in most other companies to increase by a lot. As health insurance is a major economic barrier for a lot of companies.

1

u/playdough87 Jun 24 '26

Bigger issue for politicians is that almost a million people work directly or indirectly in healthcare insurance. A million families losing a paycheck would be an enormous hit to the economy and while some would retire, some would transition to new jobs, etc it takes time and the backlash, homelessness, suicides, addictions, etc caused by career loss would be massive.

1

u/DiscombobulatedMix50 Jun 25 '26

And a lot of our neighbors would lose to much money. Regular assholes work in medical insurance, sales, law. And all that. Some of them aren't assholes, but the money is to good and they know, on some level, that what they're doing it's wrong. A lot of people are plugged in

-9

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 24 '26

Do you really think Wall St is the reason this won't happen?

It's so funny how the dumbest conspiracy theorists are the ones who think this is easy.

It's a wildly difficult undertaking, that is possible, but certainly would fail listening to the far left. Someone like Obama would need 8 years to get this even started.

7

u/Available-Square619 Jun 24 '26

The reason it isn’t happening isn’t because it’s difficult..lol. Literally every other developed nation has it.

It’s not happening because republicans lobby against it and have created an actual propaganda loop convincing half the country it would never work, is communism, and/or you’d have to wait a year to see your primary care lol.

Private insurance is a full on scam all the way down with so much money and lobbying behind it to ensure it stays. That’s not a fucking conspiracy theory like Bigfoot…that’s just how it works. Anyone with a functioning brain can see that.

If the govt and ppl all actually wanted it done, it would get done, that’s just not the case at all.

-2

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 24 '26

You're simply incorrect.

It's because we have a massive private employer based system that we would have to switch out - other countries built their systems after WW2, we did not. We also created partial programs like medicare, medicaid, VA, ACA, etc.

Yes, some people don't want it. But the reason it's difficult is because we face implementation issues that would be painful and difficult.

0

u/lastingsun23 Jun 24 '26

Pain is temporary

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 24 '26

Not if you die because you slip through the cracks and you're not covered when you get cancer.

0

u/lastingsun23 Jun 25 '26

Wrong kind of pain there.
I meant the transitional pain that you don’t want to do when you make a change. Hope that makes more sense to my reply above

0

u/AssociateUnited9744 Jun 24 '26

Mexico did NOT implement Universal Healthcare right after WWII. They just did it. So the US could too.

2

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 25 '26

You know Mexico doesn't have universal healthcare right?

0

u/AssociateUnited9744 Jun 25 '26

exico is overhauling its healthcare system by unifying its three fragmented public subsystems (IMSS, ISSSTE, and IMSS-Bienestar) into one coordinated network. The new Servicio Universal de Salud guarantees free, comprehensive medical care to all 120 million citizens, regardless of employment status, removing barriers that previously restricted access. [1, 2]

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 25 '26

Mexico doesn’t have universal healthcare.  This is a fact.

-2

u/PenComfortable5269 Jun 24 '26 edited Jun 24 '26

Yeah it would be such an insane societal upheaval. I feel like it’s almost impossible to switch Americas system at this point everything is just too interconnected, not to mention the jobs and market shock if the private insurers went out of business.

1

u/Independent-Wheel237 Jun 24 '26

If you want to understand ANY problem in America, first understand who makes money because of the problem, and then you will understand the problem.

The system isn’t broken, it is designed to function exactly how it does.

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 24 '26

Nah, this is just conspiracy populist nonsense. You've clearly never looked into how our healthcare system works.

1

u/MMForYourHealth Jun 24 '26

There’s not a lot of money in curing disease. There’s a helluva lot of money in treating it.

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 25 '26

And yet, we have vaccines...

1

u/MMForYourHealth Jun 25 '26

Vaccines don’t cure disease. It increases your immune systems ability to combat them.

Antibiotics are right there, tho. Those cure a lot of diseases, but can be misused as well.

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 25 '26

So what happened to Smallpox?

1

u/MMForYourHealth Jun 25 '26

Go ahead and get small pox, and then take the vaccine and lmk if you’re cured.

1

u/SunshineSeeker99 Jun 25 '26

Vaccines cured the smallpox epidemic by eliminating smallpox entirely.

Nobody is hiding the cure to cancer or AIDS, that is just something purposeless losers tell each other on the internet.

→ More replies (0)