undefined | Better HN

0 pointsTsarbomb5y ago0 comments

Not really. Our first attempts at universal healthcare involved general strikes from doctors and the government standing its ground. Some of the most important legislation and infrastructure in Canadian history was done under minority governments have to work with other political parties.

I would say it would it comes down to a much healthier government with more churn and not two different flavours of the same political party. I only found out this year that in certain states the ballots contain options "Vote all Democrat" or "Vote all Republican". Enshrining political parties like that into an electoral process reminds of the Soviet Union.

0 comments

ramraj075y ago

My implication is that the political systems in most nations are becoming more recalcitrant to acts that cause massive overhauls due to deliberate beurecracy. I would be curious if you and others think that Canada would be able to pass any new massive social program today.

So what we have now is that some countries ossified after passing lots of welfare systems while others ossified before. The ones where welfare is present end up serving a higher quality of life for its lowest ladder of folk, ensuring a better scenario for them to not radicalize much (just comparatively, look at France).

HDMI_Cable5y ago

It wouldn't be too hard. Again we don't have the House / Senate split that the US does, and our parties (even the conservatives) are not too against new social programs, so the main reason why we haven't piloted a UBI or affordable housing program is because the parties (especially one in particular) only push legislation if there's already a lot of momentum behind it.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ramraj075y ago

HDMI_Cable5y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse