The Vanishing Phrase

[Flanders]

The misnomer “single-payer healthcare” has been around for as long as I can remember. During the 2016 campaign season the correct term “SOCIALIZED MEDICINE” was cited in numerous articles, and even spoken by the occasionally talking head —— usually in the context of explaining fear emanating from conservative Americans.

Today, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE has been erased from the lexicon of healthcare everywhere talkers and writers ply their trade. Sadly, it has been four or five months since I saw the correct phrase on social media.

Incidentally, repealing Obamacare disappeared down the rabbit hole with the phrase SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. My best guess is that repeal & replace is designed to put SOCIALIZED MEDICINE on life support.

 

[dblack]

The misnomer “single-payer healthcare” has been around for as long as I can remember. During the 2016 campaign season the correct term “SOCIALIZED MEDICINE” was cited in numerous articles, and even spoken by the occasionally talking head —— usually in the context of explaining fear emanating from conservative Americans.

Today, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE has been erased from the lexicon of healthcare everywhere talkers and writers ply their trade. Sadly, it has been four or five months since I saw the correct phrase on social media.

Incidentally, repealing Obamacare disappeared down the rabbit hole with the phrase SOCIALIZED MEDICINE. My best guess is that repeal & replace is designed to put SOCIALIZED MEDICINE on life support.

Sad but true. Half of politics is controlling the ebb and flow of language.

 

[IsaacNewton]

The use of all caps with bright red color for font is also a dying fart form. One used to be able to read posts online that were all caps and all red with exclamation points peppered at strategic places for emphasis. Now it's all black text with small font and few exclamation points.

Single-payer has been around forever and is the accepted term used around the world. Even if it isn't in all caps or angsty red font.

 

[DGS49]

Single payer is the expression that is used to denote the regime where one "global insurance company" (some agency of government) becomes the sole provider of insurance. The government agency assesses a "premium," whether by a payroll tax, a monthly charge, or whatever, and that government agency pays the providers - who remain part of the private sector. Think, Medicare.

Socialized Medicine is the regime where Government itself is the healthcare provider. Government employs the doctors, nurses, and other practitioners; government owns the hospitals, clinics, assisted-care facilities, and so on. Think, the VA Health System.

Most of the countries that have a form of socialized medicine also have private insurance companies and some private-sector providers who provide supplementary services to people who, for some reason, are not content with that is provided by government.

The biggest obstacle to single-payer in the U.S. is the fact that hundreds of thousands of people are employed by the health insurance industry, and these unfortunates would in theory all lose their jobs. Further, turning the finances entirely over to government would likely bring about astronomical amounts of fraud, waste, and abuse - as is always the case with large government programs.

Until someone proposes and passes a giant fucking amendment to the United States Constitution, healthcare is not a "right." But half of the U.S. population fails to understand or accept this concept. Government cannot confer a Right unless Government itself has the resources to provide it (as with the "right to Counsel"). One cannot have a "right" to someone else's services - this would constitution involuntary servitude, which is prohibited by the Thirteenth Amendment.

 

[dblack]

"Socialized Health Insurance" might be more technically correct regarding "single payer". Either way, it establishes a single point of control, funneling taxpayer dollars to private industry. What could go wrong?

 

[Flanders]

One cannot have a "right" to someone else's services - this would constitution involuntary servitude, which is prohibited by the Thirteenth Amendment.

To DGS49: I never applied the 13th to Obamacare, but it works, too:

Oregon Bakers Pay $135K Fine After Refusing to Bake Cake for Lesbian Wedding
Leah Jessen
December 30, 2015

Bakers Pay $135K Fine for Not Making Lesbian Wedding Cake​

XXXXX​

Those all too few lawyers who try to stop abuse by judges make a big mistake when they fight abuse based on the First Amendment. The few cases I linked would be extremely important if just one of them ever gets to the SCOTUS combining the First Amendment with these two:

8th Amendment​

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

13th Amendment​

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.​

Judges & Tea Party Conservatives

What could go wrong?

To dblack: I assume the question is meant to be sarcastic!