zlacker

Childcare is a great way to kick this off - it's politically hard to fight against anything "for the children" and it's not a stretch at all to extend coverage gradually, as people see the benefit and want it elsewhere / just one more year / etc.

Just gotta hope it stays funded enough to avoid descending into a bureaucratic death spiral with months of delays for everything.

>>Groxx+(OP)
> months of delays for everything

Private childcare is also filled with months (often years) of delays. Expanding on this a bit: if you have a sudden need to get childcare, in much of the country you are not likely going to be able to find something that is convenient and of any quality that is also available within a week or two. If you are willing to spend 2x+ the local median childcare expense, you may have better results.

>>Groxx+(OP)
Kick what off?

>>dfee+r2
presumably universal care in general, up to and including healthcare.

>>runako+O
If you want a quick response, you need either dedicated quick-responders (how are they paid when not responding) or you need a lot of slack in the system (caregivers are allowed 4 kids, say, but most have two or three).

And that also needs to be paid for.

>>dfee+r2
Universal access to essential services

>>Groxx+(OP)
“This time will be different!” announce the proponents. Watch now, class, as the economic calculation problem works out as predicted in yet another instance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_calculation_problem

>>gbacon+46
1. What's the market economy solution for this?

2. What if not everything in life is about the economy?

>>gbacon+46
The majority of New Mexico is either not employed or only barely employed enough to count towards employment participation. The states employment participation rate is like 58%.

Without making any judgement on whether the economic calculation is "efficient" or not, it's not really something the majority of voters have to worry about as it's essentially entirely OPM to get the votes to get there.

>>oblio+N6
Not everything is about the economy, but someone's gotta pay for it.

>>gbacon+46
markets have criticism too. this is why we have nothing, neither roads nor businesses, and are currently hallucinating this conversation while scratching at the ground with sticks.

do we really need to point to how badly private healthcare has been working?

>>dionia+y8
Well, for the next century we'll keep pretending kids don't matter. We've done it for the past 50 years, already. Let's see how far that gets us as a species.

>>microm+M5
By the time US decides it's a good idea, they would run out of money and the whole world will laugh and point fingers on em.

>>oblio+Qa
I don't think we've necessarily "pretended kids dont matter" for 50 years. But I think we would both agree that we can always do much better!

>>Murome+kd
then the US will use it internally as "see what a stupid idea" and we'll end up with even worse leaders

>>iamthe+63
i’m down but i think there needs to be a recognition that this would require tax increases, not just on the ultra wealthy because there is simply not enough income up there to fund this.

>>Groxx+j9
Private healthcare is barely a market at all - heavily distorted due to government policy.

>>Groxx+(OP)
> it's politically hard to fight against anything "for the children"

The entire incel and tradwife spectrum hates these policies.