Pozzible

You’re right on all of this, of course. It was a rather unserious idea. However, my comment stemmed from a “NATO expert’s” commentary in a television discussion. (I don’t recall who it was, but someone I’ve regarded as very knowledgeable. I know, great documentation I have here, isn’t it?) He did discuss putting pressure on Orban and Erdogan to accept it. Anyway, highly impractical.

I like Jeanne-Pierrre in the briefing room. The one book interview I watched was a fiasco. I didn’t watch the Bernie interview. I think he has a lot of ideas that are discussion-worthy. But not so practical if fully implemented.

My favorite was the one with the “pastor.”

A rare occurrence.

I just shudder looking at the Venezuela situation. I thought we had learned lessons from our adventures in Vietnam and Iraq. (But Trump learning lessons on anything is a losing bet.) Though I agree that the boat situation is a smokescreen, it’s highly illegal. The only war we should be involved with is getting all the financial and weaponry we can to Ukraine. If Trump really wants to win a Nobel 🙄, he would get NATO to fast-track membership for Ukraine.

I guess I first misinterpreted what you meant by being slammed.

I’m just going to bow out of this topic. I love political discussions. But I don’t like to feel like I’m just being obstinate. And I think we’ve reached that point. Cheers, guys!

<sigh>No. Not that easy.</sigh>

I think you should include it as an Easter egg in all your stories. Sorry, I’m out of reactions for today. So for story and comments, here they are: 🐷🍑🍆😈🏆❤️😂🐣

Well, Hillarycare tried in ‘93. And the original proposal for ACA might have essentially achieved - or at least put us well on the path to achieve - full UHC. Even the ACA legislation that was signed into law was pretty terrific. But the Supreme Court got its slimey, little hands on it, so now ACA is just a patchwork, small step. And why shouldn’t the wealthiest not pay anything for it? They’ve essentially exempted themselves from almost all tax requirements. (Watched a remarkable Facebook reel last night from a Boston University legal scholar about all the ways they corrupt the system. Here it is, but be warned that it’s 26 minutes long. Really explains well why we can’t have nice things. [think before following links] https://fb.watch/CYWXJ3QFmW/?fs=e @hntnhole and @tobetrained, sorry I’m out of reactions already today. Thank you both for contributing to respectful, thoughtful discussion.

What a great portmanteau word you’ve coined, “perviously.” (Pervy + previously)! Terrific, HOT story! Eager to read more! Thanks!

That’s an interesting way to view it. So, we should never have banned slavery because to reinstate it would be political suicide. I see how this works! 😉 I think almost everywhere is already a mixed system. And a good first step is for “government to require or provide super basic care with incremental private options.” Which is sorta what ACA along side premium subsidies does.

@tobetrained I responded to some of these ideas in a long response to your DM last night. I didn’t realize that you had already left that conversation and I was takling to myself. Adjusted salaries don’t take into account all the other social benefits that doctors/nurses get by living in their respective countries. Again, such things child care, vacations, crime, culture, happiness, quality of education for their families (and cost of healthcare for their families.) And all of that isn’t taking into account current political turmoil in US. I know things aren’t great in UK; but some of that is due to Brexit. And, of course, there are lots of different models for UHC around the world. I briefly lived in Finland and was incredibly impressed after two visits to the ER. But then other professions there are pretty terrific, too. The education system is remarkable. And teachers are highly respected, valued, and paid. If universal healthcare is such a failure, by now many of the countries would be abandoning it. Has ANY country moved from a UHC model to emulate US system? I asked Chat GPT5…. “Has any country that has had universal healthcare abandoned it for a market-based system?” “Surprisingly, the answer is no country that has fully implemented a universal healthcare system has ever dismantled it and replaced it with a purely market-based model. Once universal healthcare is established: Political legitimacy: Citizens view healthcare as a right, not a commodity; attempts to remove it are politically suicidal. Public dependence: Millions rely on coverage daily — removing it would cause mass instability. Economic inefficiency of private markets: Countries that rely more on private insurance (e.g., U.S.) show higher costs and worse outcomes, deterring others. Entrenched institutions: Hospitals, billing systems, and training pipelines are designed around universal coverage. In contrast The United States remains the only high-income democracy never to have adopted full universal coverage. U.S. reforms (Affordable Care Act, Medicare, Medicaid) expanded access but retained a mixed private/public structure. ✅ Bottom line: No country that has achieved true universal healthcare has ever abandoned it for a market-based system. The political and social costs of reversal are simply too high — and the evidence shows universal systems deliver more efficient and equitable outcomes. So, I remain convinced that almost all other countries have indeed figured out how to make UHC work.