Why doesn't Hillary just support single-payer and tuition-free college?

[101spotted]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

[Yank2133]

Because she is smart and realizes those things are DOA the minute is raised up in Congress.

[Boston Bread]

Because she is smart and realizes those things are DOA the minute is raised up in Congress.

Why not give up on everything then?

[Matty]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

We are 19 trillion in debt and you think we can afford those things?

[Fight for Trump]

We are 19 trillion in debt and you think we can afford those things?

If paying off the debt was such a big deal, Republicans would deify Jackson, but they don't.

Some form of single-payer healthcare could happen in 20-30 years. Tuition-free college is neither a good idea or realistically going to happen.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hillary is a 3rd way hawk who is sick of pretending to give a  about liberals.

[King of Kensington]

Because she's a progressive who gets things done, understands how real change occurs etc. etc.

[Xing]

She doesn't think they're possible, and with a Republican-controlled congress, she's right. These will only be possible if progressives vote in off-year elections, and don't stop fighting for these proposals after this year.

[Virginiá]

Hillary is a 3rd way hawk who is sick of pretending to give a  about liberals.

Not proposing free everything = not caring about liberals. Gotcha.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Hillary is a 3rd way hawk who is sick of pretending to give a  about liberals.

Not proposing free everything = not caring about liberals. Gotcha.

She's proposing plenty of free wars.

[JerryArkansas]

Hillary is a 3rd way hawk who is sick of pretending to give a  about liberals.

Not proposing free everything = not caring about liberals. Gotcha.

She's proposing plenty of free wars.

Blowing smoke out your ass Jfern.  Sad to see someone so consumed by the hackisness that they sh**tpost on everything they see.

[IceSpear]

Jfern, can you please dial back the insufferable meter to at least a 7 or 8? The 10 you're at right now is a little overboard.

[Pyro]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

Because she (+doners) do not -want- single-payer and tuition-free college.
It's honestly not that complex.

[Yank2133]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

Because she (+doners) do not -want- single-payer and tuition-free college.
It's honestly not that complex.

So we are just going to forget the whole congress thing?

[Frodo]

Because she knows neither of those things will happen even if Democrats took back control of Congress.  

[nicholas.slaydon]

Quite simply because she is a sell out to the private health industry who don't want single-payer and she is a sell out to the big banks who don't want free public tuition because they issue loans to students.

[nicholas.slaydon]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

We are 19 trillion in debt and you think we can afford those things?

How can we afford a military that cost half of all the GDP of this country? How can we afford all of the endless wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria? How can we afford Corporate welfare and corporate subsidies to some of the most profitable corporations in the world? How can we afford to maintain 6,000 nuclear warheads? How can we afford pork barrel spending? How can we afford to keep sending foreign aid to some of the wealthiest countries in the world?

You see when Hillary says we need a no fly zone in Syria (which would cost BILLIONS of dollars and would require 60,000 boots on the ground to operate and enforce) nobody ever asks how are we going to pay for it. But when Bernie says lets give healthcare to all of our people like every other modern nation, they say "How can we afford this". If every other modern nation can afford it then United States surely can too.

[Doimper]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

We are 19 trillion in debt and you think we can afford those things?

Another goober that thinks the national debt works like their mortgage.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

Err

[Bigby]

She's a political who says anything to get elected, since again she is a politician. I'm tired of hearing "I want what Bernie wants, but I'm pragmatic about it." I wonder if she would have the same response if someone like Webb was her opposition in the primaries?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Seriously though, why do so many Americans think that the rest of the developed world has single-payer and no tuition fees?  It's blatently untrue...only eight OECD countries charge no tuition fees and single-payer is not synonymous with 'universal healthcare'.

[Bigby]

Seriously though, why do so many Americans think that the rest of the developed world has single-payer and no tuition fees?  It's blatently untrue...

Because "muh perfect socialist utopia in Europe."

[Clarko95 📚💰📈]

Because she supports expanding Obamacare and Medicaid to achieve universal coverage and wants the federal and state governments to subsidize tuition at public universities (community college would be 100% free IIRC) so students don't have to go into debt.


There's more than one way to accomplish things like universal healthcare and expanding college affordability.

[RaphaelDLG]

Because she doesn't believe in either of those solutions/the Democratic party leadership and donor base doesn't support either of those solutions.  She's fairly neoliberal.

I wish HRC would just say why both of those proposals are undesirable in her mind vis a vis Obamacare and the current student loan system rather than give the completely BS answer of "it won't happen."

No duh it won't happen anytime soon, but if it's the BEST POLICY, you put it in your platform and fight for it, making deals and accepting incremental changes along the way. 

For instance, if she said single payer according to the data is the best but we have to get to it through this drawn-out process of first 1) electing progressive Dems during midterms 2) passing a public option BEFORE changing to SP and I, Hillary, am by far the most capable of doing those things, it'd really give me pause.

However, her current explanation is just code for "I don't actually want this and I'm not going to fight for it."

[Wiz in Wis]

I don't understand why she doesn't, from what I've read the country can afford both and most other developed countries have both so why not this country?

I can't technically speak for Secretary Clinton, but I will say why I think these two things have had a very hard time getting implemented in the US.

For Single Payer, the biggest obstacle is that pretty substantial number of Americans, probably a solid majority of voters, do not want "single payer," as defined by either Canada or the NHS in the UK. For better or worse, most people who vote are comfortable with a private insurer and a private health-care provider, but not comfortable with government run insurance or hospitals, except in a few cases (Medicare and Tri-care come to mind). Given the recent scandals at the VA, and the fact that Medicare is constantly under-paying doctors and seems to be constantly under attack from the GOP, this is a real, and pretty intransigent, obstacle to single payer. Obamacare is actually a pretty good step in the right direction of the ultimate goal - universal coverage. If Medicaid had been expanded in every state, millions more people would be insured. Combine that with a public option, inter-state insurance plans, and allowing the government to set maximum drug and procedure costs, and you'd essentially have a European system. But that's pretty hard to do. Single Payer is way more complicated.

For tuition-free college, I know the UK doesn't have that, and I don't think the US should guarantee it to everyone either. Texas, for all it's warts, has a pretty good compromise. You get in the top 10% of your class, you get into a UT school. combine that with grants and free tuition for lower income kids, and you provide a good balance. I don't want public dollars sending Donald Trump's grandkids to NYU. Plus, the cost of university education needs to be contained, much like in health-care, and the big costs there are actually administrators, most of which are redundant or superfluous feel good bureaucratic nonsense. Cap administrator salary at public universities at 120% of professorial pay and you take care of the problem. Again, just throwing money into the pit is not a great plan.