Good for Mexico! Let’s hope USA is past invading their Latin American neighbours when they elect Socialist leaders, though…
Lmao, good one
Mexico already has a constitutionally guaranteed right to healthcare:
Every person has the right to health protection. The law shall determine the bases and terms to access health services and shall establish the competence of the Federation and the Local Governments in regard to sanitation according to the item XVI in Article 73 of this Constitution.
In practice, this has meant a bare minimum level of health care is theoretically available to everyone, but most working people have private insurance on top of that, or see private doctors. For the poorest people it has often been very difficult to get the care they need, even if it’s theoretically available and constitutionally guaranteed. It’s also different from American / Canadian / European hospitals in that family is expected to play a major role doing things that in richer countries are done by nurses or orderlies.
IMO, universal healthcare only really works if the middle class / upper middle class and the poor are all in the same system. If the people can pay more and get better care, they’ll do it, and the system used by the poor will be underfunded. You can’t do much about the truly rich. They’ll always just fly to other countries. If this is just filling the gaps between the various reasons people can use the state system, it’s not going to help that much, even if that kind of fix is necessary.
Yes but if taxes are paying for the system then preventing tax exemption and building a competitive standard of care system heavily disincentivizes use of the private system.
If the private system is allowed to exist, it will always exist. Someone will find something that isn’t done quite as efficiently as the public medical system and charge privately for doing it. Anywhere the private system exists will be better than the public system by definition. Nobody would pay to use the private system if they could get their needs met for free in the public system.
Because of that, if there is a private system, some people will use it. Those same people will vote to try to limit the taxes they pay for the public system, because they’re not using that system. People who can pay for the private system are going to be the richer people, and so their decisions about where their tax money goes has more of an impact. So, eventually, the public system starts to crumble. When that happens, more people use the private system, and the problem gets worse.
Nobody would pay to use the private system if they could get their needs met for free in the public system.
They might, if they thought there was an advantage to it. Like being seen more quickly, or getting a discount for something else.
Sorry if I wasn’t clear, I meant to say that if the public system and private system were equal but you had to pay for the private system, nobody would use it. Sure, if the private system is faster then people will use it even if the public system is free.
In places that allow a mix of private and public, the private system basically finds some flaw in the public system and allows people to pay to bypass that flaw. Things like wait times are one of the main issues. But, it’s sometimes something like certain expensive tests being hard to get in the public system (CAT scans or something). In the public system they might only order those when they’re obviously needed. The private system can let you have one whenever you want, so if your doctor says “well… it could help, but it doesn’t meet the threshold the public system sets” some people will pay for it out of pocket. Or it can be more privacy, or more luxurious hospital rooms. Even if the treatment is otherwise identical, some people will pay for that.
Any public service only works when there’s no privatization or outsourcing.
Public services, by definition, run at a loss; it’s not possible to profit from them monetarily. All benefits are intangible and derived from their social impact.
More innovation, more wealth production, higher productivity, less crime, better quality of life…The moment you start privatizing, they stop working, as the only ways to increase profits from a public service are by lowering salaries and giving worse service.
When a public utility or something is sold off, then yes, as soon as the privatization happens the service has to get shittier.
But, I don’t think it’s true that the moment there’s a private alternative the public version stops working. I think it’s often just that the public version starts to decay because it doesn’t get the investment it needs.
For example, if you sell the postal service to a private company, it’s going to get either more expensive, or not work as well, or both.
But, if you allow a private parcel delivery service to compete with the post office, for a while you can have both working fairly well. The private service might offer much faster delivery that you can track, while the post office offers slower delivery for a much lower price. For a while the two services can coexist, and people can choose which one they want based on their needs. But, over time you’ll get underinvestment in the public postal option. People will demand that it be run as a business and won’t take into account that it acts as a public service and does things that are unprofitable but good for society.
Somebody better put up a big fuckoff wall between the US and Mexico to keep the Americans out.
Maybe Trump was playing 1000D chess by making the US even more of a failed country and this was his plan to get Mexico to pay for the wall
I think i have seen this storyline in a tv show before.
She built a wall and made Americans pay for it! God damn socialists! /s
Can someone tell, is the president actually socialist or more just sain person who want to improve things? Like central-leftist, compared to far left wing socialist
centrist and that’s taking it too far, she is promoting fracking right now
I’d say she is a social democrat.
… but to most Americans that is far left and thus labelled socialism because America is a very right wing country. Even the ‘left’ in America is basically a right wing party in most other western democracies.
This is what I was guessing. Coming from Finland i think even our right wing parties are socialist when looked from US
Morena (Sheinbaum and AMLO’s party) is left to centre-left, much like PSOE.
You know what my ancestors are native origins to Mexico…
Dentures
Shoes
Time to invade these communists /s
Why bother?
Just fund the cartels and tell them the President is after them.
Must be nice to have politicians who are trying to improve the lives of the people.
If only, if only
-the woodpecker sighs.
CIA backed fascist coup in 3…2…
it didn’t happen with Seguro Popular why would it be any different now?
They’ll just pay a drug lord to take her out and leave it be.
I have a feeling you are closer to the truth than you might imagine.
What really makes me chuckle is whenever someone tries to insist to me that Mexican men are chauvinists, and I have to remind them that not only did they elect a woman, but they elected a woman who is doing FDR shit and actually making people’s lives better.
I’m jealous. The closest we got was Bernie and both parties swift-boated him.
What is FDR?
Franklin D. Roosevelt, a US president who in the 1930’s ended the great depression by finally implementing some social welfare programs and reining in corporate power somewhat (like protecting the right to unionize) to avoid a socialist revolution.
God I love the Fediverse.
Feels weird, but I just love that people answer questions and aren’t jerks about it.
Depends on the question.
Lemmy, why is windows so much better than Linux?
Because fuck you that’s why.
Oh look, an extra $20 in my bank account! Thanks…Not Microsoft
Windows 7 has much better compatibility with 2000’s era apps than Linux.
Really? I would have expected wine to be pretty good at them.
¿Por qué no los dos?
The chillness of this place has been pretty awesome, and I very much want to perpetuate that chillness and goodwill as best I can :)
Just don’t admit to using windows or mac LOL
All accurate beyond debate except for the part about his social programs ending the depression. That point is debatable, the debate being that it was actually deficit spending to industrialize for WW2 that did it.
implementing some social welfare programs … to prevent a socialist revolution.
The irony…
TL;DR he was just a pussy who implemented pro worker laws just to deter socialist USSR influence
Flying Death Robots
Flaming dick rubs
They are horribly chauvinistic.
Let’s play a game. The US elected Obama so they are not racist riiight?
Correct, the major reason she won the elections is because she was supported by her predecessor. (There was another female candidate too!)
We can’t ignore that since AMLO was in power he started a daily televised show that acts as state propaganda and one of his missions was to “continue the 4th transformation” as in “you need to vote for my party no matter who it is”.
(US citizens will relate to the propaganda right now with the White House putting up press conferences almost daily to convince people that they are winning while trying to police which press is ‘good’ and which is ‘bad’)
You can see the chauvinism in some of the criticisms coming to Claudia, I don’t agree with any of that misogynist bullshit but a lot of people are angry with her and the only thing they can say is “we won’t have another female president”.
Lol, yeah, like 70% approval rate, but I see your point. 30M people out of 100M voters are angry with her, I guess. I mean, they are a lot.
I see the point you’re getting at, but this is too big of a debate for Saturday morning. :)
Have a great day.
Ladies and gentlemen, white US liberals when confronted with their shitty conservative positions. Saving this- it’s a such a perfect encapsulation.
Landed and gentlemen, the troll who literally never makes a comment on this platform other than to try and demoralize a doomed society of millions of people. Torturing people like this is clearly all you ever think about. It’s pathetic and you desperately need mental help.
Come on, now, be fair, I love dunking on liberals as much as the next leftist, but “Mexican men aren’t chauvinists” is hardly a conservative position, as leftists aren’t we supposed to make the argument that no people are a monolith?
“You cant be a bigot if you have a [POC/LGBTQ/whatever else] friend” is certainly a hallmark of conservative discourse
Men are chauvinists. This is not somehow unique to Mexico.
chauvinism, excessive and unreasonable patriotism, similar to jingoism. The word is derived from the name of Nicolas Chauvin, a French soldier who, satisfied with the reward of military honours and a small pension, retained a simpleminded devotion to Napoleon. Chauvin came to typify the cult of the glorification of all things military that was popular after 1815 among the veterans of Napoleon’s armies. Later, chauvinism came to mean any kind of ultranationalism and was used generally to connote an undue partiality or attachment to a group or place to which one belongs. The term chauvinism also may describe an attitude of superiority toward members of the opposite sex, as in male chauvinism. Some animal-rights advocates have used the term to indicate a similar attitude on the part of human beings toward other species, as in “species chauvinism.”
According to this definition from Britannica, men, women, trans people, etc can also be chauvinist. Men can be male chauvinist, in that they think they are the “superior gender”. But that doesn’t exclude the concept of female chauvinism.
The concept of a “woman chauvinist” is irrelevant. It literally does not matter. What’s going to happen, are women going to take over society and force men into servitude? Stop them from leaving the house without an escort? Make them give up their careers? 🙄
In a society that was built by men, for men, men’s chauvinism is a problem and an unconscious bias they all carry with them from a very young age. There’s a lifetime of unlearning that men need to do to not be chauvinists. Any man who has gone through this process to rid themselves of their chauvinism has no problem with statements like “men are chauvinists” because they know it’s true.
Did more white people voted for Obama too? Because in Mexico, more men voted her than women did, relatively speaking. Also, our first black president was elected like 200 years ago.
Agreed. And with sexism, the link is even weaker.
America is only 15% black so it at least suggests that a good chunk of the other 85% were not too racist to elect Obama.
But humanity is 52% women so in theory, women could elect a woman even if every man in the country was in fact chauvinist.
Obama refused to publicly acknowledge he was black until his last year of his second term.
FREE Healthcare in Mexico???
How will mom cross the US-Mexico line to buy a month of lifesaving medication for 1/10th the price now???
Same as always
<3
70% of US voters want universal healthcare; 90% of Democrats and 50% of Independents.
Only Republican voters disagree, with something like 30% supporting. (all of these numbers are approximations there are many Gallup polls over the years).
I’m not a mathematician, but it appears to my untrained eye that 2/3 of Americans want Universal Healthcare. That’s a very solid majority.
Why can’t Ds and Rs manage to provide what the US voters want? Allow Republicans or anyone else to “opt out” of the system.
That’s a rhetorical question. bOtH pArTiEs aren’t interested in what their voters want.
Somehow, Israel can be financed for DECADES without the same level of voter approval.
50% of voters support Israel= billions of dollars every year
70% of voters support universal healthcare= no universal healthcare.
Kinda weird, ain’t it?
The US working class would have to mobilize serious strike action across the country to win universal healthcare. The capitalists don’t want their private property (companies, businesses) within the field of healthcare socialized. The working class can do it though. When organized and led by a revolutionary program and leadership, the working class can start to call the shots. All workers need to ditch the capitalist parties (dems and republicans) and support class independent parties and mobilize their power outside of the bourgeois political system.
There is no united front among the working class in the west. It’s because working class people who earn a middle income have been brainwashed to think they are “middle class” and thus think they are a separate group from the lower income workers. Like there are even white collar office workers who barely scrape by who think they are middle class and better than a plumber for example just because they don’t do manual labor and work at a big name corpo.
The working class is fractured simply by how the media and the politicians have been using the term middle class. The real middle class is the bourgeoisie. The rich and wealthy who aren’t part of the ruling class. If people don’t realize this they will never mobilize against their masters.
The US working class would have to mobilize serious strike action across the country to win universal healthcare.
Best we offer you is a “No Kings” protest/strike for just one day.
mobilize serious strike action
Ain’t that illegal in most sates of the Land of the F®ee?
The health insurance lobby fights it and also employers don’t want it because then people can quit without worrying about losing their health care.
I doubt this. Most employees are low hourly salary, whether at Walmart or a local restaurant: they don’t offer healthcare so universal healthcare is a free benefit they don’t have to pay.
Even for professional jobs, I don’t see how this can be true. I can see how much my employer pays for my healthcare and I’m sure they’d prefer not to pay it, or be able to match more competitive pay packages
If they can hold your healthcare over you, you will do a lot more to make sure you don’t get fired, giving them more power over you. I guess they all assume that is more valuable than what they currently pay for health insurance.
Public support fractures if the questions are broken down into more detail. People have unfounded fears of new “death panels”, and founded fears of the government screwing up implementation (Canada has crazy wait times for many medical services - it’s an outlier among developed countries, but demonstrates the screw-up opportunity). People support new services if they are funded magically, but aren’t willing to support tax raises, even though the tax increases would be less than the savings from not paying for private health insurance.
The complexity - and partisan politicians being more than willing to weaponize confusion over details to divide us against each other - is the barrier.
I’m not an economist, but I bet if we cut the military budget to match that of ANY OTHER developed nation we could manage the healthcare costs.
We don’t require 8x the military budget of anywhere else on Earth
Want a compromise? Sure, let’s restrict our budget to the combined top competing THREE NATIONS.
(on checking a couple sources, the math even checks out, and we’d STILL have the most powerful military in the world)
It’s not that complex. One old-fashioned fireside chat will do it, it’s pretty obvious. We have DECADES of universal healthcare data and results, it’s not some new, radical, alien thing.
Just provide Americans with real data. Presidents don’t HAVE to be babbling idiots, there’s another way!
What’s stopping individual states from doing it? Blue states like California and New York are bigger than some European countries that have it.
bOtH pArTiEs aren’t interested in what their voters want.
Profit based health insurance is not only immoral, it’s fucking infuriating.
Public opinion has “near-zero” impact on U.S. law
Your source is absolutely biased and wrong… we all know that public opinion has ZERO impact, this is madness!
Trump must have bribed these ivory-tower hipsters. I loathe them, with their soul patches and asses sticking out of their jeans and jaunty sideways baseball caps. Revolting
It’s never been more evident either.
I’m not a mathematician, but it appears to my untrained eye that 2/3 of Americans want Universal Healthcare
What does that look like in implementation?
Medicare For All is generally unpopular among senior citizens. Medicare buy in is more appealing, but does little to curb price gouging in provision of care. State ownership/management of care facilities is easily subjected to scandals that cost political advocate their jobs (the VA being a classic modern example).
So what’s the plan?
Just a reminder that her predecessor removed this universal access when it was called “Seguro Popular” to create the INSABI that was later renamed “IMSS-Bienestar” and was ultimately integrated into the regular IMSS due to them cutting funds for it in 2025 (she was in charge at this point).
In any case, this barely helps anyone because even if we have ‘universal healthcare’ its quality is going down every year. There are no drugs (medicines) and not enough medical professionals to cover the demand and that has been a reality of anyone visiting an IMSS clinic.
As usual, be critical of any head of state.
I should move to Mexico.
Please don’t, we are already gentrified enough
Mexico is hardly gentrified. There are some areas where there are a lot of immigrants, but the population is about 130 million, and less than 1% are foreign born. That’s significantly lower than both USA and Canada.
You obviously haven’t been to mexico city or any of the other tourist destinations in mexico. Its really bad, there are far too many “nomads” pricing out the locals.
I’ve been to Mexico City. It’s absolutely huge. There are probably neighbourhoods where “nomads” are pricing out the locals, but the vast majority of the city isn’t affected. What’s driving up rents in Mexico City is that it’s Mexico City. Most of the people moving there are Mexican.
As for other tourist destinations, yes in tourist destinations there are tourists! Wow. But, there’s a lot of places in Mexico that aren’t tourist destinations, or are destinations only for Mexican tourists. There are entire cities with millions of inhabitants where you’re very unlikely to ever see an American / nomad.
My brother in christ there are right now people moving into any city with working infrastructure here in México no matter the state: Tijuana, Hermosillo, Mexicali, Monterrey, Leon, Mochis, Mexicali, etc
It’s not exclusive to México City, they will move any place where rent is ‘cheap’. They have been outpriced by the US and will look for any place where they can live.
They are not going to show up in any population stats because they don’t even bother changing their residency status and even then being less than 1% doesn’t excuse their gentrification.
Wow, I’m impressed, you actually managed to mention one city that isn’t either in the far north or on the beach. (And it’s not Mexicali, even though you mentioned it twice). It’s almost like you’ve actually visited Mexico before!
This made me think about it. Seriously. If I could get about $2k for gas I could get to TJ.
I would cease to exist were I that far from Trader Joe’s.
TJ is short for Toe Job, a kinky sexual practice done by foot fetishist.
