From what I've seen DSA chapters have pivoted state level healthcare reform where its feasible. That's how national reform historically starts.
The problem with healthcare reform is that state government cannot print its own currency, and has to finance these programs with taxes and selling bonds. So, the program is doomed to fail from the start because that means either people paying higher and higher proportion of their income into the state-run healthcare program, or the government cuts public spending from somewhere else to finance the program (austerity).
It has to be done at the federal level because the federal government can simply print the money needed to pay for all healthcare related expenses at zero cost. Yes, you heard that right, the federal government simply prints the money needed to pay for all of your healthcare bills and related expenses spent by the hospitals, without you having to pay a single cent into it.
I'm familiar with MMT, you don't need to be so condescending when explaining it. The fact is M4A is as dead as Bernie's and AOC's political futures. Every reform in the US started with some state adopting it first so they're falling back to the historically successful methods.
I also don't think you should assume the DSA chapters in those states are unaware of MMT or the limits of state level funding. I don't know how they've negotiated this though. My state is gerrymandered to shit so its a non-issue.
I would not take that as an actual description of MMT just the net outcome. The shortest way to describe it is: The only real limit to printing a fiat currency is inflation and the primary purpose of taxes is to address inflation.
Imagine all government spending comes straight out of the mint and all taxes go into a furnace. Federal debt therefore is an outdated artifice of when currency was backed by gold.
It has a unique consequence: if the gov spends money in such a way that it destroys more wealth than it spent (eg crashing health insurance stocks) then you should lower taxes.
I was more urging you to assume good faith of comrades rather than assuming the other person was being intentionally condescending towards you, as their explanation was helpful to others in the thread
Please tone police me directly instead of indirectly. The description of MMT extremely lacking and it's wording was condescending: "Yes you heard that right".
The problem with healthcare reform is that state government cannot print its own currency, and has to finance these programs with taxes and selling bonds. So, the program is doomed to fail from the start because that means either people paying higher and higher proportion of their income into the state-run healthcare program, or the government cuts public spending from somewhere else to finance the program (austerity).
It has to be done at the federal level because the federal government can simply print the money needed to pay for all healthcare related expenses at zero cost. Yes, you heard that right, the federal government simply prints the money needed to pay for all of your healthcare bills and related expenses spent by the hospitals, without you having to pay a single cent into it.
I'm familiar with MMT, you don't need to be so condescending when explaining it. The fact is M4A is as dead as Bernie's and AOC's political futures. Every reform in the US started with some state adopting it first so they're falling back to the historically successful methods.
I also don't think you should assume the DSA chapters in those states are unaware of MMT or the limits of state level funding. I don't know how they've negotiated this though. My state is gerrymandered to shit so its a non-issue.
I'm also reading this thread and not very familiar with MMT, I thought the above user's description was helpful and did not get a condescending vibe.
I would not take that as an actual description of MMT just the net outcome. The shortest way to describe it is: The only real limit to printing a fiat currency is inflation and the primary purpose of taxes is to address inflation.
Imagine all government spending comes straight out of the mint and all taxes go into a furnace. Federal debt therefore is an outdated artifice of when currency was backed by gold.
It has a unique consequence: if the gov spends money in such a way that it destroys more wealth than it spent (eg crashing health insurance stocks) then you should lower taxes.
I was more urging you to assume good faith of comrades rather than assuming the other person was being intentionally condescending towards you, as their explanation was helpful to others in the thread
Please tone police me directly instead of indirectly. The description of MMT extremely lacking and it's wording was condescending: "Yes you heard that right".