Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Cleita

(75,480 posts)

21. This is one of the reasons why single payer or Medicare for All was promoted

Reply to cali (Reply #18)

Fri Apr 12, 2013, 07:14 PM

Apr 2013

by the Physicians for a National Health Plan. Their reasoning was that if everyone had the same plan, both rich and poor, it would raise the quality of administration of the plan and the care received by the patients. When there is a plan for those who can afford it and another plan for those who can't, this watering down of the benefits occurs, because those who don't have to be on the same system don't care about the others.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

36 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I am staunchly pro-choice so it pains me to agree with the anti-choicers [View all] cali Apr 2013 OP

The real story here is economic and political. Lack of funding for abortions for poor women: Cali_Democrat Apr 2013 #1

this case doesn't make much of an argument for anti-choicers, though Spider Jerusalem Apr 2013 #2

I think a big piece of the story is the lack of oversight by state agencies cali Apr 2013 #4

It's an important story. Most local dailies aren't likely to pick up ongoing coverage of the trial Brickbat Apr 2013 #3

Huh? This is not about choice or anti-choice. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #5

No, of course it's not a story about choice cali Apr 2013 #6

Yep. redqueen Apr 2013 #9

The media looked the other way because it is about women. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #13

That's what I think too. nt redqueen Apr 2013 #19

The reason the MSM has not covered it is because the victims don't matter. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #11

that clearly is a significant part of my takeaway, genius. cali Apr 2013 #12

Your title and emphasis is still bogus. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #15

No, they're not bogus. and your saying so doesn't make it true. duh. cali Apr 2013 #17

Your OP takes the side of anti-choicers. DURHAM D Apr 2013 #20

ridiculous. gad. cali Apr 2013 #33

I know you have 78K posts but anyone and everyone is still free DURHAM D Apr 2013 #35

this has jackshit to do with the number of posts. duh. cali Apr 2013 #36

The other victims . . . YarnAddict Apr 2013 #25

Tom Ridge ananda Apr 2013 #7

Agreed. Deep down, every pro-choice person LittleBlue Apr 2013 #8

what? No. I don't look at it that way cali Apr 2013 #14

wrong DURHAM D Apr 2013 #16

"Deep down, every anti-choice person knows REP Apr 2013 #31

The poor end up with the least competent medical help it seems. Cleita Apr 2013 #10

yes. and that this guy had a waiting room for white patients cali Apr 2013 #18

This is one of the reasons why single payer or Medicare for All was promoted Cleita Apr 2013 #21

The non-reporting has nothing to do with the choice/anti-choice angle..it has to do with a gag order msanthrope Apr 2013 #22

I think we aren't hearing about it... ljm2002 Apr 2013 #23

Um, I don't think so YarnAddict Apr 2013 #26

Well you could be right... ljm2002 Apr 2013 #29

it is a brutal murder case. Abortion is only tangentially related. IfPalinisAnswerWatsQ Apr 2013 #24

"18-24 inches long with no eyes, or face"? HockeyMom Apr 2013 #27

I am not suprised. Niceguy1 Apr 2013 #28

Go ahead and ban abortion, antis AnnieBW Apr 2013 #30

This is what the Grand Jury had to say about the lack of inspections... nessa Apr 2013 #32

I've heard about this story since 2011. JaneyVee Apr 2013 #34