Would America have M4A if it was all white?

[Opo]

People see minorities as other so M4A for them is government taking money from them and giving it to those others that they have nothing to do with. That would just just jack up the price of their payments because minorities are lazy and will pay less taxes. They assume prices of doctors are static. So it is easy to manipulate them to pay 10 times more for them self just so they wouldn't have to pay for those others. 

Would there still be that selfishness if it was all white.

That's how it looks from the outside am i wrong? 

It could be that pharmaceutical and health care companies just have more influence in America. 

Im not from america but this looks like a problem that no one talks about. 

Edited June 6, 2020 by Opo

[Forestluv]

@Opo M4A would be less expensive than the current system.

Yes, health insurance and pharmaceutical companies are pushing a disingenuous anti-M4A campaign to their protect profits. They have powerful lobbyist that fund most politicians and have leverage on policy. At a social level, there are several lines of misinformation pushed:

1. We can’t afford M4A. It will cost $32 trillion dollars!! The part they leave out is the current system costs $34 trillion dollars and they would actually save money with M4A. This has been a highly effective misinformation campaign. The majority of Americans still believe M4A would cost and additional $32 trillion dollars and would bankrupt the country.

2. The government would take control of private healthcare firms. Not true. The government would just be a single payer to private healthcare firms. 

3. You would lose you access to your doctor (not true).

4. Freeloaders. You would be paying the healthcare costs for lazy people and undocumented people in the U.S. (very misleading since out of pocket costs would go down for everyone except the very wealthy.

This is the same strategy lobbyists used in Canada decades ago. 

[Epikur]

3 hours ago, Opo said:

People see minorities as other so M4A for them is government taking money from them and giving it to those others that they have nothing to do with. That would just just jack up the price of their payments because minorities are lazy and will pay less taxes. They assume prices of doctors are static. So it is easy to manipulate them to pay 10 times more for them self just so they wouldn't have to pay for those others. 

Would there still be that selfishness if it was all white.

That's how it looks from the outside am i wrong? 

It could be that pharmaceutical and health care companies just have more influence in America. 

Im not from america but this looks like a problem that no one talks about. 

I am also not from the US. That is how it looks to me as well. If it would be all white they probably would have M4A.

[Leo Gura]

No

It's about the green, not the brown.

[Opo]

Why would blue people still be against it? They like sacrificing for something bigger and they really care and empathize with their people.

Does America have many different cultures that keeps the division instead of just skin color? 

[Parththakkar12]

22 minutes ago, Opo said:

Why would blue people still be against it? They like sacrificing for something bigger and they really care and empathize with their people.

The ones who really care and empathize are Green people, not Blue people. Blue people have been indoctrinated to sacrifice for something bigger and they blindly follow it and defend it.

It actually isn't humanly possible to be selfless. Now you can realize that you have no self, that you're not human. But that doesn't happen at Blue!

[Leo Gura]

Green = $$$

[Opo]

1 hour ago, Parththakkar12 said:

The ones who really care and empathize are Green people, not Blue people. Blue people have been indoctrinated to sacrifice for something bigger and they blindly follow it and defend it.

It actually isn't humanly possible to be selfless. Now you can realize that you have no self, that you're not human. But that doesn't happen at Blue!

I live around blue people they can empathize with their group same as green they just have a limit and cant expand their empathy to different races and cultures. Mother at purple has more empathy for her kid than you at green have for someone across the world. They are not cold emotionless robots. The only reason indoctrination worked is because they had emotional reacton to it whitch wouldnt be there if they were sociopaths. 

Sacrificing your body for your family is a form of selflessness. 

[Parththakkar12]

39 minutes ago, Opo said:

I live around blue people they can empathize with their group same as green they just have a limit and cant expand their empathy to different races and cultures.

With Blue it's actually interesting. Blue people are heavily attached to being 'good people'. So, they will be very sensitive to your potential disapproval and their behavior will be very nice and kind. This can come across as empathy, when actually this is a reaction to their fear of disapproval. They will tend to prioritize being a good person above being an individual, i.e. they will prioritize their moralistic ideology above expressing themselves authentically. The empathy is not real empathy, they don't even know themselves individually!

44 minutes ago, Opo said:

They are not cold emotionless robots.

This is true for all humans. Having emotions though doesn't mean you are empathetic. For example, Orange people have emotions but their rationalism takes away from their ability to be empathetic, in fact their materialistic ideology doesn't believe in empathy!

45 minutes ago, Opo said:

The only reason indoctrination worked is because they had emotional reacton to it whitch wouldnt be there if they were sociopaths.

That is true. The transition from Red to Blue is interesting, in that you manipulate the emotional reactivity of Red to indoctrinate kids. The reason your programming works is emotional reactivity, but you're programming them to be able to prioritize an ideology above their emotions when deciding how to act! The reason it doesn't work for sociopaths isn't that they don't have emotions (they do), it's that they don't have that ability to suppress their emotions.

'Normal people' are also emotionally reactive, but they're able to suppress it so that we can collectively survive in relative safety. Sociopaths also tend to be emotionally reactive, but they can't suppress their emotions, which makes them dangerous.

42 minutes ago, Opo said:

Sacrificing your body for your family is a form of selflessness. 

Maybe it is. It's still done out of an attachment to what they've been indoctrinated with though. The selfish attachment to selflessness! I don't believe you can become completely ego-less as a human being. You can realize that the ego is an illusion, but being ego-less is still an idealization for you. Conscious people try their best to come close though.