upvote

points

by ianbutler15 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby analog3114 hours ago|
next
[-]
I used to think this too. But the past couple of years have soured my taste for "dismantle and replace" of vital institutions.

I still think healthcare needs to be reformed, and I hope that insurance will someday be a thing of a past, but I've hung up my chain saw for now.

reply
upvoteby squigz13 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
This is because "dismantle and replace" (or perhaps in other words, "defunding") is not a serious, viable solution to many of the societal issues we face.

Things were ruined slowly. They unfortunately will need to be fixed very slowly too.

reply
upvoteby ianbutler12 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I don't think that's going to work. We need broad political change and then that has to work rapidly to legislate this. I don't think slow and steady has done anything but lead to the decay our institutions over the last 70 years.
reply
upvoteby andrekandre5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]

  > They unfortunately will need to be fixed very slowly too.
this can work until you hit a crisis point; i think one issue is we are sliding faster in the wrong direction (increasing bureaucracy, increasing fees, wait times, overwork etc) so "slowly" can work but only if its "fast enough" if you get what i mean (people are really suffering out there)
reply
upvoteby ianbutler12 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
It's increased mine if it works for the repugnant morons in government right now we can use the same playbook for positive change.
reply
upvoteby SauntSolaire9 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's easy to destroy but hard to create. If your goal is to further destroy then I suppose that's achievable, but I have a hard time picturing what positive change is going to come from it.
reply
upvoteby ianbutler6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
No offense, but this comes off as passive indifference and while I've heard people say things like this all my life it has broadly resulted in watching 30 years of societal decay. I can't help but think this is wrong.

We should have stacked the courts ourselves, brandished executive orders etc, had some spine.

Edit: I think I need to make clear my thinking that the right has selectively destroyed institutions and levied them in other areas where it makes sense for their agenda. It's not been wanton. So when I say leverage the playbook it's not a one sided act of destruction.

reply
upvoteby tehjoker12 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
You've witnessed a dismantle and replace effort by the right wing that wishes to squeeze everything to make rich people more money. An effort by the left would destroy the private insurance scheme and build up medicare. Completely different and you'd get something functional.

When the wrong targets get destroyed, everyone suffers. When parasitic forces are destroyed, the system functions better. It's the difference between defense and friendly fire.

reply
upvoteby kortilla4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
We already had an effort by the left. You can “no true scotsmen” if you want, but it represents the reality of what will happen when ideals clash a sector that makes up 18% of the GDP.

What’s going to be different now than in 2010?

reply
upvoteby myko1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Are you referring to the ACA here? That was a compromise bill that props up the current system in the US, primarily created by right leaning centrists.
reply
upvoteby e5844 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
[dead]
reply
upvoteby lpcvoid7 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Why is this downvoted? What the (far) right wing has done to american institutions is incredibly destructive and it will take decades to fix it, if that's even possible. People are hurting because of it.
reply
upvoteby HPsquared3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Replace first, then the old broken one will fade away.
reply
upvoteby eueheu15 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply