In defense of Deliverism (this is a critique of the Democrats failing to deliver on their promises)

submitted by RandomCollection from (pluralistic.net)

all 2 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]welshTerrier2 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm opposed to deliverism for two key reasons: 1. it's expensive and 2. the food always arrives cold.

But, all seriousness aside, according to a February, 2020 study by Yale University, 68,000 Americans will die each and every year without Medicare for All. That's more than 1/4-million dead Americans in a four-year Biden term. It's unconscionable. Biden doesn't have a clue and, sadly, RFK Jr. doesn't get this right either.

[–]RandomCollection[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://archive.ph/tTS2P

That's not how it worked out. Prior to ACA's passage, 85% of Americans had health insurance. Today, it's 90%. That's not nothing! 5% of the US is more than 16m people. But what about the 85% – 282m people – who were insured before the ACA? Their insurance costs have doubled – from an average of $15,609 for a family of four in 2009 to $30,260 today. Obama promised that ACA would lower the average family's insurance bill by $2,500/year – but instead, insurance costs increased by some $15,000.

The Democrats deliberately did that because they are owned by the insurance barons.

Deliverism is the idea that if you promise things to the voters, they will vote for you. It's the idea that if you deliver things to the electorate, that they will re-elect you.

Yep - that would require a radically different party. One that wasn't corrupt and owned by the rich.