When a moderator of a forum has no clue, that public infrastructure doesnt fall from the sky, and after an exchange of more than half a dozen messages still fails to realize, that people largely have to use that paygap to buy overpriced insurance in the US. Of course not at the top end of the income spectrum, but our moderator - likely hasnt reached that, hasnt realized what it means, that wealth is concentrating more and more, and social cohesion is getting less and less. But still plays an effing unreflected cheerleader for a model he got spoonfed by GOP party taglines.
Here is the actual deal. ANY country in the world neads public infrastructure to be built. Private businesses arent interested (too long term) to doing any of it on their own risk. So citizens, and corporations have to pay taxes. To get any of it.
Or as per an already defunct US model, you give certain families exclusive development rights for generations, and hope that in the end you are left with a functioning railroad system. Which then doesnt get maintained very well.
In the US historically they only had to pay taxrates that were on par with those of tax heavens, and countries in the developing world. Reason? US companies, pretty much controlled 70% of worldwide GDP. So if you could make them pay a pittens in country - US had everything that was needed.
Thats slipping away currently. Percentage of world wide GDP in the US is falling, because everyone in the international class is developing other nations, with better demographic structures, with known tech, and no new investments in R&D needed.
But, if you keep the US GDP (in PPP after inflation) 'stable', and have a higher percentage of it be earned by a smaller and smaller financial elite. And the rest of your people working in service jobs. While competing against homelessness and crippling sickness, under declining social mobility, you kind of get US populations that voted three times in a row for 'change' but STILL get more of the same as their only option.
The moderator, who doesnt unterstand much, then tells you - yes, but if we only deragulate healthcare, so younger people can get less of it, so they have more disposable income, in exchange for health risks, and higher health costs later in life (treat early, actually saves costs) -- thats all the US needs really.
Issue: US suffers from cartel building in the pharma industry, and ridiculous treatment and medication prices, because the industry basically has decoupled from the bottom half of americans, while charging the remaining half more than double of market pricing. So part of your underclass not getting full health coverage to have more 'disposable income' while they are young - exactly solves NOTHING - in terms of all those US health industry issues.
Yet, because the US really, really has an education problem on top of this, half of their population gets sold on 'public option' on healthcare would take your plan, and your money away. Crafted for utter morons.
-
That said, US GDP is held stable, while the rest of the worlds GDP increases, and while more and more of GDP is created by less and less jobs (service sector jobs get you nowhere). Thats america in decline.
But for politicians - as long as GDP stays roughly the same, they get roughly the same financing - so why change anything? Oh yeah, riots in the steets, and people dying from a virus, yeah - theres that... But really, nothing that the military used internally cant solve..
