▲ | gunian a day ago | |||||||
but people always talk about how insurance is guaranteed in europe something must be working if gunning down a CEO is pro the people wouldn't copying one of the European countries be even more pro the people? what makes senators hate something that is pro the people? wouldn't that give them better ratings? I come from a dictatorship so sorry if this is a dumb question | ||||||||
▲ | hb-robo 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
There is an unlimited amount of potential financial gain from American politics, both in lobbying and campaign financing. It is also widely true that the candidate with the most money spent in a campaign is heavily favored to win the election, with the exception of the presidency which is more contested. Now consider that in the 2020s the richest people now have more money than God. The short of it is that you can get anyone you want in office, to do anything you want even if it directly opposes their constituency, as long as you spend enough money on them to get them in office, buy their vote, and keep their PR afloat. Gilens and Page (2014) found that "average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence" on American government policy: https://www.scienceopen.com/document?vid=e4797592-9d73-4f2b-... Worth noting that this paper saw pushback for many years after the fact but measurably, its conclusion has been true since its release. | ||||||||
▲ | mercutio2 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Murdering people is not pro anything. The answer was already given: it was politically infeasible to pass a single payer variant in the US. And it’s not clear it would have been good even if it had been feasible. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
▲ | selimthegrim 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
Senators have to spend $$$ to get elected |