The US loves war, they have had the war on terror, the war on drugs and now they have the war on immigration and freedom.
But sadly there has never been a war on sickness…
What would that look like, I mean you have the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Space Force, what about setting up a Public Health corps?
I am talking, military uniforms, armored mobile trauma centers, guns (every one in the US loves guns), emergency swat style units to quickly access unhealthy people, Public Health corps facilities where unhealthy or sick people get taken to and treated, tactical gear for doctors and nurses, picatinny rails on syringes, camo scrubs, tactical public vaccination vehicles (thinking like a jeep without a roof, fully loaded with doctors and nurses with air rifles firing vaccines, doing raids in anti vax areas.
Humm, I kinda want to see a movie like that, enforced mandatory public healthcare…
roguetrick@lemmy.world 3 minutes ago
I think it’s bad framing. Deficit spending on war should be called out on its own potential badness compared to tax paid single payer healthcare. It’s easy to dismantle this kind of argument compared to explaining the actual plan in simple language. We will save everybody money and supercharge the economy with single payer healthcare by reducing how much you pay, how much your employer pays, and increasing overall quality. And we will pay for it at the same time. The only people who lose are middlemen and vultures whose income stream are dependent on the current system. And the provision of care will be responsive to what society wants (if folks actually take the responsibility to ensure it, which unfortunately Canada and the UK prove they often don’t). Comparing that, a real plan, to just dumping your money into a pit with a useless war and wasteful governance shows that you’re qualitatively different than the idiots who cannot pour piss out of a boot with the instructions on the bottom.