The Case For National Heathcare

Richard Spencer thinks that Trump should choose free healthcare in a surprise move that a good amount of Americans would be for. It would also force the Democrats to choose where they stand (Democrats that oppose it would get attacked by their own party), and he probably could get enough votes. This would be better than being the typical conservative that Trump is not anyway, and may even be more inline​ with what Trump would actually want.

What do you guys think? He could win big support, and turn everything on its head at the same time. Probably save his presidency, and insure another 4 years after. It would be a major story for a long time.

Video related.

I'd love nationalized healthcare, but in a country burdened by opportunistic shitskins that go to emergency rooms for colds and use ambulances as taxis, It'd be a fucking disaster.

white country required, or at least a strong civic identity that allows cultural eugenics and racial segregation by law, or else it is unsustainable… unless you genocide every ethnic group

Yeah it'd probably be a pretty bad deal at first - all those undiagnosed cases of sickle cell, diabeatus, morbid obesity, chronic pregnancy, etc…
But after a while it'd normalize. And the cost saved by not paying the opportunistic insurance companies (who have a record of rejecting valid claims) should do a lot to offset the costs.

The only other option in my opinion would be to make health insurance illegal. That would cause the costs of health care to plummet. Maybe we wouldn't have all the same drugs/treatments, but what we would be left with would be the things that are effective.

You know why America was great? because it didn't have socialist welfare programs which let people leech off the hard work of others, it meant only the best kind of people (those who want to work) would come. It's why shit skin rapefugees all go to the countries in the EU which are the most socialist and flee those where they'd have to work to survive.

Unworkable, and would be a total disaster by the end of his second term, assuming we don't have radical advances in AI that naturally drive the price of healthcare towards zero.

The BEST way forward is to strike at the root of the problem, which no-one has been paying any attention to–government licensing of medical practitioners. This started in the 1910's, and we have had exponential increases in the cost of healthcare ever since, though it only got bad enough for everyone to really start noticing it in the 80's. Back when we had a free market, even the poorest people could afford fucking housecalls. Can you imagine how much it would cost to get a doctor to your house today?

Well for many of us, we would choose nationalized healthcare anyway (you said you would love it), we would just need to work out the rest of the problems you suggest. It would be a move in the right direction, and a big surprise that forces the Democrats into a very awkward situation on their part.

It would make the parallels of national socialism too obvious for Trump. The Jew demands money be the measure of value to promote "fairness" because any other measure would exclude them from power.

Honestly, I'm more and more for socialized health care. Not because I want it, but because I am coming to the conclusion that this country is full of economic illiterates, and that there is no hope to return to the free market.

Everyone is just going to scream and cry based on idiotic metrics like the number of people who have healthcare plans. The idiots in this country don't even realize that we no longer have insurance, and won't have insurance under Obamacare Lite either.

It's inevitable that we are going to get single payer at this point, I'd prefer Trump push it through to hopefully confuse the left and diffuse their temper tantrum. Make it a grand bargain where education is put back completely under individual state control, and basically shut the ATF down, repeal all federal gun control laws, and give us access to all small arms.

I'd trade healthcare, to have freedom regarding education and guns. At least we would have something then. I suppose we could tackle some of the social problems upfront this way too. Such as the concern that the feds would feel that they would be able to regulate unhealthy foods and activities if they could prove they had an interest, which paying for everyone's medical bills would do. Or in other words, say that the feds are going to pay for all medical care, but that individuals will maintain the freedom to live the way they see fit, even if it causes undo strain on the medical system.

It would be a shit system, but it only has to last long enough for the right to fix our demographic problem. If they fail at fixing our demographic problem in that time, we will be fucked anyway, so no loss.

now this is something I can get behind

Yes I thought about that, and I honestly find it quite amusing. Don't you think Democrats wouldn't even mention that? Wouldn't they just be forced into supporting it by their own voters?

He's been trying to sabotage the alt-right from the beginning and this is just another attempt to D&C, while drawing attention to himself. You either pay for the things you buy, including healthcare or you leech of someone else, there is no in between and he knows it. He's a crypto-commie agent provocateur.

This is probably the dumbest thing I've ever read here. Worse than the shilling. While it would be fucking amusing as hell watching leftist trash squirm over the thought that the one thing that gibsmedats want more than anything has to be opposed because Trump supports it now, no fucking way I want the .gov involved anymore than it already is in my healthcare. What we really need is tort reform, ending of frivilous lawsuits so the costs of dr liability insurance drops to the point they don't have to charge $135 for a fucking ace bandage when you sprain your ankle. Man the fuck up and pay for your own fucking healthcare. I don't give two fucking shits if you live or die TBH. Don't ask me to pay for your shit you fucking freeloading cocksuckers.

That's it exactly. He should get the credit for what is bound to happen anyway. I also like how you mention using it to push through others things we want.

I… hate the AltKike that is Spencer but there's a strong case to be made for national healthcare, despite the issues it'd face in the US. We ALREADY spend more on government-subsidized healthcare per capita than anyone else on the planet. Tacking on private costs only makes the figure more absurdly huge.

While a totally market-oriented solution would be preferable, with minor regulations for things like pre-existing conditions and laws to ensure competition, the power of lobbyists in the Swamp is simply too great to get the ideal health care laws passed.

Now, on a long term scale, there is a really interesting idea nestled within this guy's idea

Lobbying groups like the AMA have restricted the HELL out of America's ability to produce a sufficient supply of medical professionals. Moreover, their influence over the legislature and executive agencies like the DEA has led to a system wherein a lot of people who probably SHOULD be able to write prescriptions- can't. All of this drives up cost, at least in some way, by reducing the supply of medical professionals.

There's an interesting possibility to fix demographic problems under a national healthcare regime.
Those three things are potentially huge. They COULD revolutionize how the USA has babies and how our country is peopled.

Imagine this:
Right there, you've cut down on an ungodly number of issues in the future. It's expensive NOW but the cost savings down the road are immense. You aren't engineering shit, you're just choosing the best from thousands of possible children.

Imagine how a procedure like this, if widely available, would impact reproductive choices.
It's possible.

t. in-vitro babby

get this

health care is free, but ONLY if you've paid all of your taxes and you're not a dependent
if you are a dependent, its free if those you depend on pay their taxes

oh, and those above 18 would have to pay taxes in the first place for it to be free

are you fucking kidding me?

Either America is full of niggers, spics, and muds in which case it will help them preferentially which is terrible for us. Or America is an all white nation, and the white population which now exists is thoroughly against nationalized healthcare and doesn't need it anyway.


That's actually not true, we as an economy expend more total GDP on healthcare in total and per capita than any other country. But most of that is high-end medical tourism which charges obscene amounts for treatment to rich foreigners who attend private clinics.


What utility does nationalized healthcare offer? Without the bullshit regulations which restrict the number of doctors and who can accredit them doctors would become a middle class profession and you could set up fraternal insurance organizations again.

Why in an all white America would we want a national healthcare system?

Spencer is right but the Republicans won't agree because muh free market muh freedomz.

I'll concede that there are a couple countries that beat us for public spending on healthcare per capita: Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Norway.

That's it. Those are the only three who beat us for public spending.

https:// data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm

That said, look at those numbers! By the amount we spend per capita on public healthcare, we should have a universal system on a par with that of the Netherlands and a private system of almost Star Trek-like medical care.

Did you ignore population size?

Well finding a way to stop dysgenics is very important (obviously), and if we can somehow combine free healthcare with a means to stop dysgenics from occuring, it would be great progress.

The former is the case and all government wealth redistribution goes from the white middle class to the poor negroid underclass or the ultra rich jewish banksters.

Some Republicans would support their President regardless (they're afraid of losing support from Trump voters), and many Democrats would be forced to support it.

back to leftypol

IT'S ALMOST AS IF THERE'S A CORRELATION BETWEEN WEALTH AND SPENDING ON HEALTHCARE

Precisely. Communist healthcare doesn't get any better just because you call "national" healthcare. All socialized programs are a burden on the productive white middle class for the benefit of unproducive niggers and jews.

...

Debate the ideas proposed, otherwise you will continue to make pointless and wasteful posts. Thanks.

It's per-capita spending…

It'd be lovely and it's perfectly possible.

Yes, but look at GDP per capita compared to spending.

Luxembourg, Switzerland, and Norway are all higher in wealth per capita than the USA by about $20k or more. Their systems, their public systems, provide universal coverage. Switzerland works a little differently- it has an insurance mandate but more protections than the American ACA (Obamacare) outlines.

Are you really trying to argue that the USA isn't getting absolutely jewed on healthcare costs? We're spending more, a lot more, and getting much less than comparable countries. Is that fact really in contention?

I'm arguing that, just on the public side of things, with our programs like Medicare/Medicaid/the VA/state medicaid-like programs, etc. we're spending more per-person than countries with UNIVERSAL systems and that's just on our poor. Something is wrong here.

Ultimately, it comes down to the power of interests like the AMA and health insurers to lobby. Remove that and the major stumbling block to finally getting our money's worth (either under a private or public system) is eliminated.

He said "per capita". Pretty sure Luxemborg doesn't spend more than we do on health care in any other way than per capita.

Not sure if you're just an eternal muh (((libertarianism))) muh (((an-cap))) Burger or a Shlomo. Either way go jerk off to some Ayn Rand pictures.

He's right you know. The only way to crack down on the bloated cost of healthcare in America is to nationalize the whole system. Cut the fat, regulate the insane pricing by Big Pharma.

You are already forced to by insurance. How is that different from single-payer option?

Switzerland and Norway don't have legions of niggers making full use of the gibs train on their type-2 diabeetus.

I hate to tell you this user, but Obamacare is exactly that, and this Ryancare bullshit is as well, just in different window dressing. Nationalized health care would be a good thing at this point instead of highway robbery draped in muh free market lies.

Of course, to make it really work, we'd need to remove shitskin.

Remove nigger and spic too.

Have you been to Zürich or Oslo lately? Yeah, they do.

Being totally fair, Spencer is advocating a national socialist system. However, we burgers know that Germany's version of National Socialism was built for the Grossdeutsches Reich, not the USA.

The USA, if we intend to go that way, will need to adapt things to its own unique situation. Namely, what this guy said:

is a major stumbling block- even assuming our politics change radically.

Now as to

he's right. Our system is heavily burdened by these people but it's done so BY LAW now. The majority of these people use the ER like a walk-in clinic and that costs… far more than visits to a regular doctor. Short of mass deportations or some kind of cleansing, that problem isn't going away. It's ultimately cheaper to handle these cases in normal clinics than as inflated ER costs the taxpayer and hospitals just have to "eat"


Being fair to the guy, I think he's referring to overall numbers. The USA is a rainbow of diversity compared to Norway and Switzerland, despite their poz levels.

In a nation with niggers spics socialized healthcare amounts to nothing more than redistribution to niggers and freeriders and in a white nation it encourages lazyness and bad lifestyle choices. Either way commiecare has to be rejected.

Cutting out big pharma is as easy as getting rid of the FDA and passing laws to protect doctors from frivolous, life-destroying lawsuits if they deviate from the big-pharma controlled AMA guidelines. Socialized medicare only entrenches big pharma and the medical industrial complex, while lowering quality of care.

Wait, Switzerland and Norway are under 70% white now? What the fuck?

Fuck you.

No thanks nigger.

I knew this would come up and you have a point. I was once a Big Pharma intern shill… before I became a Big Pharma scientist.

Socialized systems are REALLY easy to manipulate.
^This one's actually huge. I saw dossiers on just about every attendee prepared by my company. We knew EXACTLY how to make them do what we wanted. Our analysts are better than any intelligence agency's.


My one takeaway from that chart is that Kaiser Permanente is one of the best healthcare systems possible. Any future US healthcare designs should look to it as a model.

You're right, America is not Germany and the brown leeches are a serious problem. But can it get any worse than the system you have now. Maybe a well designed NatSoc type system would still work better than the current one. (I'm actually German so I'm not an expert on US health care, maybe I'm totally wrong and it's entirely unrealistic).


Here we go.
I was pleasantly surprised to find some actual serious discourse in this thread, I honestly didn't expect it. Were you asleep or something? Time to call a guy a faggot!

Oh you didn't expect to find rational discourse on Holla Forums after coming here from leftypol to shill for "free" healthcare? Stay a while, maybe there's hope for you after all.

meant for

Thanks for sharing, if you look at Sweden, UK & germany it's pretty clear that the big pharmaceutical industries are doing very well in socialized systems. Bayer is making a fortune because they're the only ones who can afford the lobbyists and the drug trials, it's just sad to see healthcare deteriorate because only a few dozen "healthcare" corporations can afford to compete in this rigged system.

and i'm sure those osteoporosis drugs were "treatment" only. After all, what good is a drug if it actually cures people? Big pharma wants lifelong customers.

I don't even know what leftypol is; I'm German and a National Socialist you mulatto burger.

Sozialist vielleicht, aber sicherlich kein deutscher nationalsozialist. Geh zurueck nach linkspol du dummer neger.

Just watching the video on Powell, it's pretty good.

Warum hast du kein ü auf der Tastatur, wer ist hier der Neger?
If you actually knew anything about NatSoc you would be aware that "free health care" is not an exclusively left-wing idea, du seltsamer Vogel.

Speaking realistically, there is no suppressed cure for it. It's a minor miracle that we've been able to do anything about it. Being a "little old lady" was once just part of ageing, along with brittle bones and tons of hip fractures. Now? a monthly injection can reverse it.

Du natürlich. Kein anständiger Nationalsozialist wirbt für kommunistische Sozialprogramme die den volkskörper schwächen. Du weisst noch nicht mal was Linkspol ist aber nennst mich einen Vogel. Krautkanalflüchtling, wie?


It's a myth that only little old ladies are diagnosed with osteoporosis. Manz women are (often falsely) diagnosed with osteoporosis as soon as they hit menopause and there are even cases of pre-menopause women who are (falsely) diagnosed with osteoporosis. It's quite a racket.

And there's no cure. Lower bone density is a sign and that'll kick in right around menopause. My former employer has a whole slew of drugs for menopause. We can treat everything from mood swings to hot flashes to bone density to sex drive!

Embrace better living through pharma! Also, don't call my former profession a racket.

Any behavior you subsidize, will increase. They won't suddenly start to make good decisions just because the bad decisions are being subsidized. You would have to heavily penalize bad health i.e. obesity, which drives up costs aince all the equipment such as beds need to be specially made to handle heavy people.

You're not the only one who works in the healthcare sector.
There is no cure for osteoporosis, because losing bone mass as you age is as natural as losing hair, teeth and eyesight. The injection increases bone mass, but it doesn't actually strengthen bones and there's mounting evidence that it may actually make bones more brittle and the loss in hip fractures is easily explained by the increased paranoia and carefulness of the women after hear horror stories about broken bones from their doctors, but of course you know all this. It's a racket.

Tell that to Hitler, nigger. He had universal health care. Granted he had comparably healthy people with a healthy soul and not the degenerated meat sacks we are today, but still, he had universal health care.

Mentally competent adults don't get "care", they get services.

Why are you saying he's sabotaging the alt-right when it was alt-kike from the start and is full off controlled opposition.