Try the political quiz

Protectionism

Implementing policies to restrict imports will safeguard domestic industries, promote self-sufficiency, and ultimately strengthen the national economy.

Overview Issues Discuss

Protectionism policy on single-payer healthcare

Filters

Topics

Do you support a single-payer healthcare system?

P>P  ChatGPTYes, but allow people to use private insurance

Protectionism answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Agree

Yes, but allow people to use private insurance

This answer aligns more closely with protectionist principles, as it allows for a single-payer healthcare system that could prioritize domestic healthcare providers while still allowing individuals to use private insurance. This approach could help protect domestic healthcare jobs and industries while offering flexibility for consumers. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes

Protectionism focuses on protecting domestic industries and jobs, which can include healthcare. However, protectionism does not inherently support a single-payer healthcare system. Some protectionists might support it as a way to ensure domestic healthcare providers are prioritized, but it is not a core tenet of the ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, this system guarantees healthcare for everyone

While protectionism is primarily concerned with protecting domestic industries and jobs, some protectionists might support a single-payer healthcare system if they believe it would benefit the domestic healthcare industry and guarantee healthcare for everyone. However, this is not a core tenet of the ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly agree

Yes, private companies should not be able to profit off of healthcare

Protectionism is focused on protecting domestic industries, which can include limiting the influence of foreign or private companies. However, the ideology does not inherently oppose private companies profiting from healthcare. Some protectionists might support this view, but it is not a central aspect of the ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

No, this system is too expensive

Protectionism is not primarily concerned with the cost of a single-payer healthcare system. Some protectionists might oppose it on the grounds of cost, but this is not a central aspect of the ideology. Protectionism is more focused on protecting domestic industries and jobs. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

No, the government should not be involved in healthcare

Protectionism does not inherently oppose government involvement in healthcare. In fact, some protectionist policies might involve government intervention to protect domestic healthcare providers. However, this does not mean that all protectionists would support government involvement in healthcare. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No

Protectionism does not inherently oppose a single-payer healthcare system, but it also does not strongly support it. Some protectionists might oppose it if they believe it would harm domestic healthcare providers or lead to job losses, but this is not a central aspect of the ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Public statements

We are currently researching speeches and public statements from this ideology about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this ideology’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to Protectionism issues? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2 days2D

Mother Who Lost Son in "Kids for Cash" Slams Biden

A mother whose teen son died by suicide after a juvenile detention in the “Kids for Cash” scandal broke down in tears on air as she condemned President Joe Biden’s decision to commute the sentence of former judge Michael Conahan.Conahan was convicted in 2011 for his role in a scheme that traded juvenile detention sentences for millions in kickbacks. His actions, alongside fellow Democrat judge Mark Ciavarella, left a devastating legacy, including lives upended and families shattered.Conahan was sentenced to 17.5 years in prison after pleading guilty to racketeering conspiracy. In 2020, he was placed under home confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic with six years remaining on his sentence. On Thursday, he was among the nearly 1,500 individuals whose sentences were commuted in what the White House described as a historic act of clemency. Biden’s move came after he pardoned his own son, Hunter Biden.Sandy Fonzo’s son, Ed, died by suicide at 23 after being sentenced by Ciavarella when he was 17 to eight months detention for a minor drug paraphernalia charge.Appearing on Democracy Now to speak with host Amy Goodman, Fonzo was emotional shared the outrage that Biden’s move had caused her."This is very emotional. Very heavy. Just hearing and having to relive all of this. This has just reopened wounds that have never healed and this is very very difficult, very heavy. I shouldn’t be having to relive this, especially at Christmas time. I mean this is unacceptable. I need to talk about it. I need to defend my son because he is not here to defend himself and I am his mother."

▲  217 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…18hrs18H

Defense Bill Blocks Transgender Care To Minors

The Senate on Wednesday gave final approval to a defense policy bill directing $895 billion toward the Pentagon and other military activities, moving over the objections of some Democrats who opposed a provision added late in the negotiations that would deny coverage for transgender health procedures for minors.The 85-to-14 vote, coming a week after a divided House passed the same measure, cleared the bill for President Biden’s signature.Most Republicans and many Democrats supported the measure, which provides a 14.5 percent pay raise to junior enlisted service members and a 4.5 percent pay raise for all other service members. It also expands access to meal assistance, housing and child care programs that benefit those in uniform.But several Democrats withheld their backing in protest of a provision preventing TRICARE, the military’s health care plan for service members, from covering “medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization” for children under 18.The language, which would affect the gender-transitioning children of service members, was recently added to the measure at the insistence of Speaker Mike Johnson, Republican of Louisiana, who refused to bring a defense bill to the House floor without it, according to aides familiar with the negotiations.Twenty-one Democrats, led by Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, proposed an amendment to strip the provision from the bill, but the matter was never brought to a vote. Several of them took to the floor on Tuesday to lodge their objections.“It’s flat-out wrong to put this provision in this bill and take away a service member’s freedom to make that decision for their families,” Ms. Baldwin said, estimating that the provision could negatively affect as many as 6,000 to 7,000 military families.

▲  186 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…1 day1D

MAGA Purge: Trump Jr. and Carlson Slam Globalists!

Carlson and Donald Trump Jr., the president-elect’s oldest son, outlined what they said were the dangers of bringing neoconservatives into the administration—men and women, they claimed, who seek to control him, not serve him. They also argued that Pompeo had proven himself to be disloyal, the people said, pointing to Pompeo’s decision to distance himself from false claims that the 2020 election was stolen, and comments he made that the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol by Trump supporters was “unacceptable.”Within days of the election, Pompeo was out of the running. The president-elect posted on Truth Social that Pompeo and Nikki Haley, Trump’s former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, wouldn’t be landing jobs in his administration.Officials such as Haley, who challenged Trump during the Republican primary, and former national security adviser Robert O’Brien were passed over for jobs as Trump and his team looked to stock his cabinet with “fresh blood,” as one transition official put it, who have roots in the MAGA movement. The perception among some within Trump’s inner circle is that appointees such as Pompeo would follow a more conventional GOP approach to national security policy by supporting U.S. involvement in overseas conflicts, such as Ukraine, or icing out traditional adversaries, such as Russia. Pete Hegseth, a military veteran and former Fox News host whom Trump chose to lead the Pentagon, has criticized U.S. involvement in the conflict in Ukraine, and has touted a controversial view that women should be barred from combat. But Hegseth’s path to confirmation has been fraught with challenges because of a number of personal controversies.

▲  106 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…24hrs24H

German Economy Nears Collapse As Election Nears

Presenting the CDU/CSU’s manifesto on Tuesday. Merz said he would make savings of €100bn by reducing spending on migration and welfare. He also promised tax cuts and lower electricity prices to kick-start the economy, stuck in its first two-year contraction since the early 2000s. Meanwhile, the SPD and Greens pledged to reform Germany’s “debt brake”, its constitutional cap on new borrowing, saying the country needed to invest billions of euros in its ramshackle infrastructure and the green transition.Meanwhile, the SPD and Greens pledged to reform Germany’s “debt brake”, its constitutional cap on new borrowing, saying the country needed to invest billions of euros in its ramshackle infrastructure and the green transition. Some observers worry Scholz’s televised intervention could end up setting the tone for the rest of the contest. Even the Greens, his allies in government, expressed disapproval. “One is sometimes surprised by his choice of words,” said Franziska Brantner, the Greens co-leader. Germany is not used to rambunctious, no-holds-barred elections. Under Scholz’s predecessor Angela Merkel, who governed Germany from 2005-2021, campaigns were soporific affairs, lacking the cut and thrust and spectacle often seen in US contests. But Merz is an altogether different politician. Critics routinely describe him as irascible and touchy, given to intemperate outbursts that delight his fans but can put off more moderate voters. But even his detractors admit his powerful oratory can get under Scholz’s skin. Scholz, too, has changed his tone. As chancellor of a fragile, three-party coalition made up of SPD, Greens and the liberal Free Democrats, he cultivated a decidedly restrained, taciturn style. But that changed in November when he sacked his liberal finance minister, Christian Lindner, triggering the break-up of the coalition after just three years. He has since become a lot more combative. In the vote of confidence debate he accused the liberals of “sabotaging the work of the government” and Lindner of lacking the “necessary moral maturity” required to govern.

▲  2310 replies