mbj-11
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 2:29 am

Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:41 pm

If you haven't guessed the reason behind the thread yet.........lemme tell you. I watched "Sicko" by the infamous Mr. Moore. I have heard the rants behind the film as being propaganda or anti-American, but from a human and god-fearing perspective.......what was shown is just plain wrong. I mean, profits over people in health care? I don't need to be lectured about the whole system of money for drugs or thats just the way things are........no. That is just plain wrong. What happened to those people and many others could happen to anyone, and yet its propaganda?
There needs to be coverage for every and anyone who is sick. We all walk on the same ground and breathe the same air, so why is a system "paid for " by mostly the poor who have to pay taxes is then denied by silly arguments? Maybe socialism isn't as bad in health care as some purport it to be. Or am I to be added to the list of the "been had" by Michael Moore?
Jesus is the Christ and he alone saves
 
Toast
Posts: 1249
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:04 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:10 pm

The thing is, Americans have a very different use of the word "Socialism" than the rest of the world does. "Socialist" or "Communist" is essentially used to label non-profit and high-cost activities engaged in by the government, except defense. If it's funded with taxes and is free to use by everyone, then it's socialist.

Unfortunately, the fear of Communism being a still-alive remnant of the Cold War, anything that gets labeled with the word is automatically rejected as evil, even if it's obvious it isn't. Of course universal health care stems from the same Marxist ideals as universal suffrage, worker's rights, and trade unions. But while no-one considers those three as Communist foibles anymore, there is still the odd perception in the US that universal health care is some sort of government scam to take from the rich and give to the poor something the poor don't deserve. Many Americans will justify this by saying that the government can't be trusted with managing anything, and that health care for everyone wouldn't give taxpayers a lot of value for their money. They have a point - no-one wastes money as recklessly as a government. However, the US still is the richest country on earth - not by GDP per capita or many other economic indicators, but by the sheer amount of accumulated wealth and by the size of its federal budget. The US could afford good and free health care for its citizens if it wished to, but it's clear that Washington will rather waste money on wars, border fences, and assorted bullshit that pleases the crowds but is completely pointless. Fortunately, many people in the US are beginning to realize that their taxes are already being thrown out of the window on stuff that does absolutely no good for the country. I'm sure the US will eventually wake up and join the evil Commies in Europe and Japan who would rather their governments throw money at things that help people, not corporations...
Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:18 pm

Quoting Toast (Reply 1):
The US could afford good and free health care for its citizens if it wished to, but it's clear that Washington will rather waste money on wars, border fences, and assorted bullshit that pleases the crowds but is completely pointless.

WAY off the mark here Toast.

Between Vietnam and Desert Storm, we could have afforded health care also . . . before a border fence was ever discussed. So this entire line of thought from you is utter  redflag  - just another bash at the DC Gov't . . .

Wanna put it in the proper perspective, how about this: We could afford National Health Care IF the drug companies didn't have so many politicians in their hip pockets, if the profits from health care weren't so high, IF we'd quit sending TRILLIONS of dollars to every piss ant country on the globe that cried foul or help,

To blame the lack of national health care on the war and border fences is disingenuous and - well - inaccurate. Period.

Quoting Toast (Reply 1):
Fortunately, many people in the US are beginning to realize that their taxes are already being thrown out of the window on stuff that does absolutely no good for the country

Some of us figured that out a long time ago Toast . . . lets quit funding all this overseas  redflag  and keep that $$$ here. Lets get our own country in order before we spend TRILLIONS elsewhere trying to help some POS third world nation that won't help themselves . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Toast
Posts: 1249
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:04 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:33 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
Between Vietnam and Desert Storm, we could have afforded health care also . . . before a border fence was ever discussed.

Very true, ANC. Nowhere did I say it couldn't be done before. Nothing at all to do with the current government.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
We could afford National Health Care IF the drug companies didn't have so many politicians in their hip pockets, if the profits from health care weren't so high

True as well.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
IF we'd quit sending TRILLIONS of dollars to every piss ant country on the globe that cried foul or help,

Which "piss ant country" did the US help with trillions of dollars? Does Iraq, Grenada, Nicaragua, Panama, Vietnam, Korea count as aid? If you mean actual foreign aid and charities, I don't know if it can really be measured in trillions... but

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
lets quit funding all this overseas BS and keep that $$$ here.

We may disagree on what constitutes foreign funding, but I agree wholeheartedly that America has overstretched its resources all over the planet for far too long. Spending the money that seeps out of the country on what the country needs itself has to be done asap. And even then lots of funds for true foreign aid would remain. Europe and Japan spend proportionally quite a bit of money on foreign aid, and they can afford universal health care nevertheless.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
To blame the lack of national health care on the war and border fences is disingenuous and - well - inaccurate. Period.



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
just another bash at the DC Gov't . . .

ANC, just because I (and most people in the world) can't stand the current DC government doesn't mean that you should see primitive US-bashing in all my posts. I cited Iraq and the fence as an example of bullshit spending, not as the reason behind America's financial woes. It's quite obvious those are a drop in the ocean of federal waste.
Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 5:04 pm

Quoting Toast (Reply 3):
Very true, ANC. Nowhere did I say it couldn't be done before. Nothing at all to do with the current government.

 checkmark 

Noted.

Quoting Toast (Reply 3):
Which "piss ant country" did the US help with trillions of dollars?

Collective piss ant countries, not a single specific country. Take your pick . . .

Quoting Toast (Reply 3):
We may disagree on what constitutes foreign funding, but I agree wholeheartedly that America has overstretched its resources all over the planet for far too long. Spending the money that seeps out of the country on what the country needs itself has to be done asap. And even then lots of funds for true foreign aid would remain. Europe and Japan spend proportionally quite a bit of money on foreign aid, and they can afford universal health care nevertheless.

Agreed.

The whole infrastructure of Japan, IMO, is in far better shape than that of the US. And most of Europe as well. Because time is taken to ensure, IMO, their own back yards get cleaned up before spending money elsewhere.

Quoting Toast (Reply 3):
If you mean actual foreign aid and charities, I don't know if it can really be measured in trillions... but

I would say so . . .

And I'm talking about the whole shooting match . . .

South Korea, Egypt, Israel, Russia, pick one. Now, noting of course, those aren't piss ant countries . . . (thought I'd toss that in there before you did).

I think we probably agree on more things than not on this topic. I just think our roadmap for getting there is way different.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Toast
Posts: 1249
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 4:04 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 5:25 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
The whole infrastructure of Japan, IMO, is in far better shape than that of the US. And most of Europe as well. Because time is taken to ensure, IMO, their own back yards get cleaned up before spending money elsewhere.

I don't know about Japan, but I can't deny that Europe with its huge healthcare and welfare spending isn't a garden of roses, either. I think the ideal way lies somewhere between the USA's economic liberalism and culture of self-reliance and Europe's costly and economically stifling culture of expecting government hand-outs in times of trouble. Some balance must be found, otherwise Europe will be crushed by taxes and the US will face lower life expectancy and lower living standards. As you say, everyone needs to clean their back yards first. What worries me about the US is that there are few signs of that happening as yet.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
I think we probably agree on more things than not on this topic. I just think our roadmap for getting there is way different.

 yes 
Shit Piss Fuck Cunt Cocksucker Motherfucker Tits
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 7:40 pm

If there wasn't a profit potential, why would any private enterprise invest billions of dollars in speculative R&D in order to develop new prescription drugs? The market works because it rewards risk takers. Take away the reward and you take away the incentive to take risk.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8010
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:07 pm

Because look at the biggest problem with socialized health care: rationing. Why do you think a lot of Brits and Canadians are showing up in the USA to get surgery, mostly because they can get the surgery in a far more timely fashion than in the UK and Canada?
 
PSA53
Posts: 2928
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:54 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:20 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
We could afford National Health Care IF the drug companies didn't have so many politicians in their hip pockets, if the profits from health care weren't so high

 checkmark  And lawyers should be included, especially those who prey and encourage inflated auto insurance claims.Their not all innocent either with their own lobbyist groups.

Socialism,to me, is not a bad word when comes to health insurance.When you have 42 million plus americans without insurance coverage this system needs wholesale changes. To these people,living in fear, that if an health issue happens to them or their family,the American dream just became an American nightmare with the possibility becoming financially condemn for the rest of their lives.

I'm paying insurance straight out of my pocket.And each year,it gets raised.I'm wondering when I can't afforded it anymore.So, I'm in favor a partial or full assistance.

Politicians need to stop giving away all of our assets to outside interests and start re-investing into the American taxpayer.

Off-topic: Pope:Thanks for your recomendation on Sling-Box.Works great.
Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
 
CastleIsland
Posts: 3212
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 1:40 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:23 pm

Quoting Pope (Reply 6):
If there wasn't a profit potential, why would any private enterprise invest billions of dollars in speculative R&D in order to develop new prescription drugs? The market works because it rewards risk takers. Take away the reward and you take away the incentive to take risk.

This encompasses part of the rub (a good part). The entrenched Capitalistic forces here in the US love to hear the "S" word, because they can prey upon the uneducated lemmings who don't realize that Capitalism is why we have identity theft, why I got a credit card in the mail last month for which I did not apply, and if delivered to the wrong address, would be in the hands of some other person. Rant over on that.

Socialised medicine might work, but the opponents point toward OTHER countries, who are not based on our system, and say it won't work. Well, if you won't let it try to work in OUR system, how the hell do you know it won't? Or is it that rich people can't accept the fact that wealth in a Capitalistic system will always form a normal distribution (a bell-curve for you challenged on statistics), so no matter how much the poor come up, the pay-scale will adjust to render the next level as poor.

We need equal health care for all legal citizens, and we also need to foster medical research and good pay for physicians and nurses. The two need not be mutually exclusive, even if some of you can't understand that.
"People don't do what they believe in, they just do what's most convenient, then they repent." - Dylan
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 8:31 pm

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 8):
I'm paying insurance straight out of my pocket.And each year,it gets raised.I'm wondering when I can't afforded it anymore.So, I'm in favor a partial or full assistance.

Blame the HMOs and what you and ANC already said.

The U.S. may not have a socialized system, but it has the "government managed" part of that system and it is distorting the market, curtailing competition, and of course, the one who really passes legislations are the corporation's lobbyists and corrupt politicians and they aren't going to lobby something that is "people over profit". Of course they give it a catchy name, sort of like the "Patriot Act," so if you vote against it it makes you look bad.

The solution is to take politician's fingers out of health care. That's the only way to kill the lobbyist and have real competition.
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
767Lover
Posts: 3254
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:32 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 9:42 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
so why is a system "paid for " by mostly the poor who have to pay taxes is then denied by silly arguments?

I don't understand why you say the system is mostly paid for by the poor. Please elaborate.

Quoting PSA53 (Reply 8):
When you have 42 million plus americans without insurance coverage this system needs wholesale changes.

These numbers are not qualified. There are millions who are eligible for Medicaid (the US publicly funded system) but have not enrolled. There are a number of reasons for this.

I will say this: If my mother, who is British and has moderate to late-stage Alzheimer's, had remained in the UK, she would probably not be faring as well as she is today being treated in the US Medicare system. The NHS denies many early-stage treatment options for Alzheimer's patients. In addition to not having access to as many drug options, I was also surprised to learn that dementia patients in the UK are all but left in the cold when it comes to continuing care from the NHS. I thought the system took care of those who couldn't take care of themselves?

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
I mean, profits over people in health care? I don't need to be lectured about the whole system of money for drugs or thats just the way things are........no. That is just plain wrong.

And yet, the reason my British mother would have been denied effective Alzheimer's drugs in the UK system in the early stages of her disease is because of "value for money." Yep. It's "not profitable" for NHS to include them in the plan. Kind the same thing, isn't it?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6939950.stm
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:38 pm

Quoting PPVRA (Reply 10):
Of course they give it a catchy name, sort of like the "Patriot Act,"

The next one will be the "Mom and Apple Pie Against Pinko Commies and Terr'rists Act" (regardless of what it actually legislates for)  Smile
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:45 pm

Health Care doesn't work as a socializable system.
The fundamental reason. is that the people and the companies working in it want to be rewarded for their hard efforts.

Doctors want to be rewarded for being more skilled,
Pharmacies want to be rewarded for producing new drugs,
Hospitals want to be rewarded for better care and new treatments that help us all.


The money has to come from somewhere. The biggest problem in US healthcare right now is Insurance and Lawyers.

However at a somewhat sophisticated level it is starting to level out. Companies can no longer afford to fully subsidize employees plans, Minute clinics are being opened at Pharmacies.

The minute clinics are great for people not wanting to sit at a hospital for hours to get eardrops for an ear ache, penicillan for an infection, or some special cold medicine. This will free doctors to help people with more severe and acute issues in hospitals.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:51 pm

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 13):
Health Care doesn't work as a socializable system.

And yet somehow it does. Funny that.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
PAHS200
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:06 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:54 pm

Quoting Toast (Reply 3):
I cited Iraq and the fence as an example of bullshit spending

yeah, because spending money to keep us safe, is bullshit  Yeah sure

Quoting 767Lover (Reply 11):
Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
so why is a system "paid for " by mostly the poor who have to pay taxes is then denied by silly arguments?

I don't understand why you say the system is mostly paid for by the poor. Please elaborate.

yeas, please do.. last time i checked the wealth were the ones being taxed the most
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 10:56 pm

Quoting PAHS200 (Reply 15):
spending money to keep us safe

Safe from what ? Iraqi's ? Fruit pickers ? Geez, you're easily scared.  Smile
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
PAHS200
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 12:06 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:11 pm

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 16):
you're easily scared.

no, your just blind  Wink

illegals from Mexico have really caused problems in the west and south where they create a lot of crime. So yes if you live in those areas you should be scared
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:16 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 7):
Because look at the biggest problem with socialized health care: rationing

Why do people insist on continuing to repeat this ridiculous fallacy? I think I've corrected this in pretty much every single discussion on health care on a.net in the last few years, and with every new discussion, it's brought up YET again.

So I'll repeat it once more (no doubt to no avail, as in the next discussion, it'll be brought up again, likely even by the same people): waiting lists or 'rationing' as you call it, are NOT problems that are inherent to universal or 'socialized' health care. There are some countries that have waiting lists, like the UK and Canada, but there are many more that don't. If those countries have waiting lists, it is because of the way they decided to implement universal healthcare, not because they have u.h. My own country has universal healthcare, and we have no waiting lists. None. We are even one of the countries the Brits come to for surgery they have to wait for at home.

Quoting Pope (Reply 6):
If there wasn't a profit potential, why would any private enterprise invest billions of dollars in speculative R&D in order to develop new prescription drugs? The market works because it rewards risk takers. Take away the reward and you take away the incentive to take risk.

Then explain the rest of the Western world.

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 13):
Health Care doesn't work as a socializable system.
The fundamental reason. is that the people and the companies working in it want to be rewarded for their hard efforts.

Funny, because the rest of the western world disagrees, and even shows it DOES work...
 
n710ps
Posts: 1117
Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:09 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:17 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
Some of us figured that out a long time ago Toast . . . lets quit funding all this overseas and keep that $$$ here. Lets get our own country in order before we spend TRILLIONS elsewhere trying to help some POS third world nation that won't help themselves . . .

You have just spoken my thoughts to the T. Welcome to my respectred users list and I will buy you a beer at hear tonight when I getr to the pub!
There is plenty of room for Gods animals, right next to the mashed potatoes!
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:18 pm

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 14):

And yet somehow it does. Funny that.

If I have a cold,
Socialism is fine, Every dipidy dot that went to nursing school or med school can diagnose it.

if I want cutting edge surgery or a solution to a life threatening illness, I would much rather be in a capitilized system with the best docs and meds.


Socialism suffers from the same problem as Communism, Just good enough for most people, isn't necessarily great for all people.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
mbj-11
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 2:29 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:28 pm

Quoting PAHS200 (Reply 15):
Quoting 767Lover (Reply 11):
Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
so why is a system "paid for " by mostly the poor who have to pay taxes is then denied by silly arguments?

I don't understand why you say the system is mostly paid for by the poor. Please elaborate.

yeas, please do.. last time i checked the wealth were the ones being taxed the most

So the poor in the US do not pay taxes? Is there an exemption? I'm sorry I did not know this, but I thought all Americans paid taxes in some shape or form.

The wealthy are taxed the most.......but aren't there more poor in America than the wealthy?
Jesus is the Christ and he alone saves
 
User avatar
casinterest
Posts: 5393
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 5:30 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:35 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 21):
The wealthy are taxed the most.......but aren't there more poor in America than the wealthy?

The top 10% in terns of wealth in the US pay over 80 % of the taxes.


if someone makes 150,000 a year, they will pay quite a bit more than a person that makes 15,000.

To be honest, the US has many more people in the middle class than in the poor class.
Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sat Nov 10, 2007 11:58 pm

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 20):
If I have a cold,
Socialism is fine, Every dipidy dot that went to nursing school or med school can diagnose it.

if I want cutting edge surgery or a solution to a life threatening illness, I would much rather be in a capitilized system with the best docs and meds.

That must be about the biggest BS lots of anti universal healthcare lobbyist use to promote their capitalist system.
Quality ,level of expertise are at least on the same level over here as they are in the US, and available to all, not just those that can pay for it.


UH is far from perfect and needs constant attention to keep it from overspending but as a whole it works far better than fully privatized healthcare and is way cheaper in the end.
[edit post]
 
Arniepie
Posts: 1429
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 11:00 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 12:05 am

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 22):
The top 10% in terns of wealth in the US pay over 80 % of the taxes.


if someone makes 150,000 a year, they will pay quite a bit more than a person that makes 15,000.

To be honest, the US has many more people in the middle class than in the poor class.

Not that I'm doubting your words but its not just as simple as that.
If you talk about your official income (paycheck) than you are right, the rich pay most of the taxes.
But if you take into account all their earnings , the top rich pay far less on all their earnings than the rest of the population.

If you don't believe me , just listen to this man, he knows what it is to be rich and pay taxes.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...iness/money/tax/article1996735.ece
[edit post]
 
767Lover
Posts: 3254
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 6:32 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:55 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 21):
So the poor in the US do not pay taxes? Is there an exemption? I'm sorry I did not know this, but I thought all Americans paid taxes in some shape or form.

Anyone who earns any amount of income in a year is taxed, but there are a lot of exemptions and deductions that can be taken (earned income credit, tax deductions for dependents, etc.) that can reduce the amount substantially.

Re; the Buffett article referenced above:

First, I'm not sure why his secretary making $60K would be taxed at 30%. That doesn't make sense according to the 2007 IRS Tax Schedule. He must be including payroll taxes in that calculation, which is not really fair when it comes to making a comparison, since payroll taxes are withholding that essentially creates an "account" that you are drawing from later in life, and Mr. Buffett's full salary is not taxed the all the withholding (not that I think that is necessarily right, but if he would give the secretary a raise to put her over the payroll tax threshhold, they would be on equal footing.)

So it comes down to capital gains, which are "only" taxed at 15%, a rate consistently applied to anyone who generates investment income. The more you invest -- WHICH MEANS THE MORE YOU RISK -- the more money you make. Mr, Buffett had to risk a hell of a lot to make $46 million. Not only that, his $46 million:

1) enabled countless people to be employed, not only at Berkshire Hathaway but also at companies he invested in; and
2) benefitted beneficiaries of charities that he donated millions to, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

Both of which did far more good for society than giving the government an extra 20% in capital gains taxes, as has been proposed. That would be an extra $9.2 million, which I would bet is far less than the amount given to groups 1 & 2 above. Would you rather the government have an extra $9.2 million in its hands to spend on defense, or would you rather have it go to job creation and charity?

Yes, it is easy for people like Warren Buffett to spout off numbers without providing any context to them.
 
overlander
Posts: 139
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 8:57 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:28 am

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 25):
the rich pay most of the taxes.

I love the irony it goes well with the thread.

All the Best,

Overlander
It is better to travel hopefully.............but, always be prepared for the worst!
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:53 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 21):
So the poor in the US do not pay taxes? Is there an exemption? I'm sorry I did not know this, but I thought all Americans paid taxes in some shape or form.

Do some research. There are local, state, and federal taxes over here. Federal taxes are the ones that would pay for a national healthcare system and the biggest tax overall. While the so-called poor (I really don't want to hear anyone in the US complaining about being poor after visiting 3rd world countries like India) do have payroll deductions they invariably get all that money back and in some case get what are called "refundable credits" where they get money for basically nothing. I've oversimplified it but there are millions of people in the US that in reality don't pay any federal taxes. They still pay sales tax to the state for goods but that's a whole other ball of wax.

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 21):
but aren't there more poor in America than the wealthy?

You really need to do some studying on the US before asking some of the questions you have here. We have plenty of wealthy folks, we have a fair amount of poor folks, and we have a large middle class. Sure the rich get richer and the poor toil on but overall I think we've got a pretty good thing going on.

Quoting Toast (Reply 5):
I think the ideal way lies somewhere between the USA's economic liberalism and culture of self-reliance and Europe's costly and economically stifling culture of expecting government hand-outs in times of trouble

We don't agree on much but that is dead on. Like or not we are going to get some sort of socialized medicine out of either the GOP or the Dems....it's just going to happen. The issue I have with it is our government's ability to eff everything up that they put their hands on and whatever they tell me it's going to cost I might as well resign myself to the fact that it will cost 100 times that.

Quoting Toast (Reply 5):
As you say, everyone needs to clean their back yards first. What worries me about the US is that there are few signs of that happening as yet.

As it has been for every administration in the last 50 years. It's not exclusive to just the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:10 am

Quoting Mbj-11 (Thread starter):
We all walk on the same ground and breathe the same air, so why is a system "paid for " by mostly the poor who have to pay taxes is then denied by silly arguments?

Silly argument? How are the poor here funding healthcare? Do you realize who pays the most for medicaid and medicare? Do you know who funds the hospitals?

Quoting Toast (Reply 1):
If it's funded with taxes and is free to use by everyone, then it's socialist.

Wow...go back and re-read what you wrote!

Free to use and funded with taxes......contradictory statement. Taxes take away from the people. Government managed anything is less efficient than private endeavour unless the private endeavour is working a government contract under government supervision.

Stop the insanity.

Quoting ArniePie (Reply 25):
But if you take into account all their earnings , the top rich pay far less on all their earnings than the rest of the population.

Dude.....that's an argument that ignores the basic facts. What do the rich do with their money that is not taken? They either spend it, supporting the economy, or invest it, growing the economy. Government spends it much less efficiently (by design) without really adding much value to the economy

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 18):
My own country has universal healthcare, and we have no waiting lists. None.

Your nation (if it's Belgium as you flag yourself) has 12 million people and spends so much less on defence than anyone else percentage wise that it's incredible. The unscalability of socialized medicine is the chief challenge, and the inability of any economy to sustain such policy (due to government inefficiency and monolithic bureaucracy among other reasons) is fairly clear. The Canadians, French and Germans are all constantly trying to figure out how to pay for their systems along with other socialized medicine nations.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 8:37 am

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 20):
if I want cutting edge surgery or a solution to a life threatening illness, I would much rather be in a capitilized system with the best docs and meds.

Why do you suppose automatically that a socialised system cannot provide the same level of expertise. Contrary to popular opinion, the US does not have the best health care in the world - according to a report by the WHO in 2000, the US came 37th overall.

Rank Country

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
40 Brunei

From the report:

The U. S. health system spends a higher portion of its gross domestic product than any other country but ranks 37 out of 191 countries according to its performance, the report finds. The United Kingdom, which spends just six percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on health services, ranks 18th . Several small countries – San Marino, Andorra, Malta and Singapore are rated close behind second- placed Italy.

The report did rank the US highly in terms of responsiveness though.

So don't automatically assume that because you pay the most, you get the best.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
windshear
Posts: 2261
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2000 4:45 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:23 am

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 30):
34 Denmark

We have a socialized healthcare system, but it is far far far from being perfect. The quality varies hugely depending on where you live, the quality and hygiene is a problem one place and is not in another. We have waiting lists on certain operations, and some cancer patients wait for treatment. Our system lacks in so many ways, that the socialized healthcare system sometimes outsource to privatized hospitals.

We need a reform, and while some in the US thinks that they need to go 100% socialized, I think the middle solution, would be the best overall solution.

Boaz.
"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:27 am

The way I look at it is like this,
Why should I work, and pay taxes so somebody who doesn't want to work and be lazy can have free healthcare?

Why should people who don't work be rewarded?
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
Kieron747
Posts: 2461
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 7:17 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:33 am

Quoting Pope (Reply 6):
The market works because it rewards risk takers.

Indeed. It's a litle known fact as well, that in Europe drug companies can get a 5 year extension on their 20 year patents on drugs if the clinical trial process takes ages. In the US the FDA can award patent extensions too (for example paediatric exclusivities of up to 6 months) if the drug companies research into applications of their drugs for infants.

Australia, Japan, Israel and South Korea all offer extensions to patents.

Why? Because those governments know that producing a drug is no easy thing. A drug company is a business like any other, out to make a profit.

I'd suggest that people stop seeing "drug companies" as evil beings. It's a very ignorant viewpoint.

K
Airliners.Net - The Jam Rag Of The Web.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4797
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:34 am

Quoting DL021 (Reply 29):
Your nation (if it's Belgium as you flag yourself) has 12 million people and spends so much less on defence than anyone else percentage wise that it's incredible. The unscalability of socialized medicine is the chief challenge, and the inability of any economy to sustain such policy (due to government inefficiency and monolithic bureaucracy among other reasons) is fairly clear. The Canadians, French and Germans are all constantly trying to figure out how to pay for their systems along with other socialized medicine nations.

Here's a tiny little hint for you: we spend HALF of what you spend on healthcare per capita. And defence spending has nothing to do with it, what a useless comparison. And we are perfectly able to sustain this system. Does it need to be adjusted every now and then? Sure! Every system does. Is it a challenge? Sure! But we're far more capable of sustaining this system than the US is of sustaining its system that is TWICE as expensive.

It's funny how some Americans rallying against u.h. always seem to assume that it would be something that would COST them an awful lot of money, while in reality every other country with u.h. spends far LESS on healthcare than they do. It would actually save you money.
 
LH423
Posts: 5868
Joined: Sun Jul 11, 1999 6:27 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:49 pm

Quoting 767Lover (Reply 11):
I will say this: If my mother, who is British and has moderate to late-stage Alzheimer's, had remained in the UK, she would probably not be faring as well as she is today being treated in the US Medicare system

You've just showed that public healthcare in the US can work. Yes, Medicare/Medicaid needs an overhaul but it can be effective.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 36):
Explain to me how a person can get the same "pill" - pick a pill of your choice* - in Canada at a substantially reduced price over what they pay in the U.S.?

Because in Canada, we have government set prices. The government caps the prices that the pharmaceutical companies can charge for their drugs.

LH423
« On ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux » Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
 
mbj-11
Posts: 331
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2000 2:29 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 2:04 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 31):
The way I look at it is like this,
Why should I work, and pay taxes so somebody who doesn't want to work and be lazy can have free healthcare?

Why should people who don't work be rewarded?

Nobody likes freebie's but isn't this a little harsh? I mean you have some who'll never want to work, but to deny them health care just because they don't doesn't smack as being ...........lets just say , not nice?
Jesus is the Christ and he alone saves
 
deltagator
Posts: 6170
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 9:56 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:01 pm

Quoting Mbj-11 (Reply 34):
I mean you have some who'll never want to work, but to deny them health care just because they don't doesn't smack as being ...........lets just say , not nice?

Let me give you a small bit of info...the world isn't nice.

Seriously though, the US is a country where you can make it or break it on your own decisions. If you decide to be a sponge on society then you should also expect to not get everything that those of us who bust our asses off and make good decisons in life.
"If you can't delight in the misery of others then you don't deserve to be a college football fan."
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 3:58 pm

Quoting Kieron747 (Reply 32):
I'd suggest that people stop seeing "drug companies" as evil beings. It's a very ignorant viewpoint.

Quite the contrary . . . it's not ignorant at all.

Explain to me how a person can get the same "pill" - pick a pill of your choice* - in Canada at a substantially reduced price over what they pay in the U.S.?

It's about the profits - the almighty $$$ - that's the driving force. The Drug Companies, along with the politicians they have in their pockets and the banks of lawyers and lobbyists they pay, keep the prices high. Thinking differently about THIS subject . . . now THAT'S an ignorant point of view.

* I'll choose Lipitor as my example as both Mother and Father take that pill . . . 60% less in Canada than the US.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
ADXMatt
Posts: 513
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 4:07 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:06 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 31):
Why should I work, and pay taxes so somebody who doesn't want to work and be lazy can have free healthcare?

Why should people who don't work be rewarded?

So what you're saying is that if you don't work for ANY reason you should not get healthcare? Healthcare is a REWARD?

Well lets remember that WE are paying for it already. The illegal immigrants who get care in the ER or have babies here in our hospitals and don't pay because they don't have insurance and can't afford it. You also have US Citizens who are poor and working who can't afford insurance because their employer doesn't offer it and those who don't qualify for "socialized" medicaid/medicare, Guess what they don't pay their bill at the ER either and we get stuck paying for it. (through increassed premiums)


We need to get everyone who lives here covered either by a national system or requiring all employers to provide coverage even into retirement.
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:30 pm

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 37):
Well lets remember that WE are paying for it already. The illegal immigrants who get care in the ER or have babies here in our hospitals and don't pay because they don't have insurance and can't afford it. You also have US Citizens who are poor and working who can't afford insurance because their employer doesn't offer it and those who don't qualify for "socialized" medicaid/medicare, Guess what they don't pay their bill at the ER either and we get stuck paying for it. (through increassed premiums)

Then don't serve the illegals. Make them show some sort of proof of citizenship to be served in our hospitals, or make them be able to pay for their treatment up front. If not, they can go back to Mexico or wherever they came from. I'm sure they get treated for free there too.  sarcasm 

Quoting ADXMatt (Reply 37):
We need to get everyone who lives here covered either by a national system or requiring all employers to provide coverage even into retirement

A national system will bankrupt us, and employers being required to offer it will result in lower wages. That seems counterproductive. Also, when has the Government ever run a huge scale program efficiently? I find it ironic that the same people that talk about how evil and horrible the government is are the same people who want that government to control their health care.

I guess I don't see why I should work hard, pay taxes, and have to pay for my healthcare when some schlub gets a free handout from the government. We should require proof of citizenship to be shown ahead of time, or require all payments up front if there is no insurance.
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
User avatar
czbbflier
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:30 pm

Toast, ANCFlier, Mbj-11-- it appears you are all groovin' on the same wavelength... and I'm jumping on with you!

Quoting CasInterest (Reply 20):
if I want cutting edge surgery or a solution to a life threatening illness, I would much rather be in a capitilized system with the best docs and meds.

OMG! I can't take this sort of rubbish. It's interesting to watch people in the United States go through some pretty serious calesthenics to arrive at predictable conclusions that the rest of world got over with decades ago.

Nobody is going to say that their system is perfect. But in the aggregate, the system in the United States is the worst in the G7. Any attempt to squirm out from that point is denying reality. Take the waiting lists in Canada for instance. Canada's system (which is not the same across the country, by the way), rightfully uses a triage system. If you need help now- and I mean RIGHT now... a heart attack, stroke, anything life-threatening- the system is absolutely the best.

If you condition is chronic, that is to say you'll be OK for a few days, you can (and might) wait a few days. You can see any doctor you want- get second opinions and never, ever, have to worry about having to offer up a Visa card for medically necessary procedures.

The biggest critics inside the Canadian system are the doctors. Doctors in Canada, who complain the most about our non-private system, all hold private practices within the public system. That means they 'bill' the government insurance system for their services. They say that they don't make enough: that their fees for services encourage them to work in quantity, rather than quality but they never have to worry about chasing after an insurance company or patient for non-payment... a headache no businessperson needs.

And yet for all their complaining, few actually move to the United States. Why? The lifestyle. The freedom to practice without HMOs breathing down their necks, among other explanations.

Critics outside the system, such as the Fraser Institute, are ideologically driven- and USA-centric. While their studies often provide useful raw data, their analysis is often dismissed as rabid anti-Canadianism- and anybody who uses their analysis in their arguments should be aware of their obvious blind-spots often contradicting their own data.

HMOs in the United States are the scourge of the system. Restrictions, denial rates, insufficient coverage and non-coverage, etc.

Canada's problem? Insufficient funding. If we adequately funded the system- say funded the system the same per capita amount that the United States did- we'd be the best in the world- bar none.

Canada's medical system problems are manageable. The American problems require complete re-thinking.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 7):
Why do you think a lot of Brits and Canadians are showing up in the USA to get surgery, mostly because they can get the surgery in a far more timely fashion than in the UK and Canada?

Another fallacy. Yes, there are Canadians (can't speak for the Brits) who go to the United States... but with some research I cannot find any statistics to back this assertion up so unless you can find hard numbers, I suggest this point be taken off the table. There are a handful of high-profile examples, all with gobs and gobs of money. But the vast, vast majority of Canadians (89%+) are happy with their system and do not- or would not- look to the United States for health care, or health care system solutions, at all. Ever.

Indeed, I know personally of five Americans who chose to EMMIGRATE from the United States to Canada for our health care system last year. There's a woman in Washington State with advanced cancer who is looking to meet a gentleman in Canada who will marry her so she can get the health care she needs north of the border. But I'll bet you won't be watching reports on these people and hundreds (if not thousands) like them on Fox News...

It boils down to basic economics (Economics 101). The most basic..... Guns versus Butter. Does your economy buy guns or does it buy other life-sustaining things- like health care?

This is no attack on the United States. It's reality that is hard to hear for many in the United States. You're lucky in the election next year. Health care is going to be a serious issue: If you want change, vote- no better yet- go campaign for somebody who promises (and has shown action) on health care reform.

And change is what you really need unless you truly prefer the status quo- allowing for 1/3 of the population to have no or inadequate coverage and betting that you'll never have two heart-attacks and have to mortgage your house because your insurance company won't cover you for the second one because of the 'prior condition' caused by the first.
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:34 pm

Quoting LH423 (Reply 38):
Because in Canada, we have government set prices. The government caps the prices that the pharmaceutical companies can charge for their drugs.

My point exactly!!

OUR Government could do the same thing, IF - IF - they were serious about reasonably priced health care. They are NOT. Too many profits in it for the politicians . . . lobbyists, yadda, yadda, yadda.

It's bullshit and anyone with any sense knows it.

And our Drug Companies RAPE insurance companies.

My fiance' was paying $16 per pill - thyroid something - when she had insurance. Since changing jobs, and since we're not married yet, she's not covered under new insurance . . . the SAME pill - not the generic version - cost her but $8 paid out of her pocket.

Now does that make any sense to anyone?!
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
User avatar
czbbflier
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:47 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 39):
A national system will bankrupt us, and employers being required to offer it will result in lower wages. That seems counterproductive

No evidence of that in Canada.

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 39):
I find it ironic that the same people that talk about how evil and horrible the government is are the same people who want that government to control their health care

They are not necessarily the same people. Some of those people you refer to, rail against the 'law enforcement' approach taken in so many aspects of American society and global relations, rather than a wholistic, humanistic approach that puts people ahead of profits, sees basic education and health care as a human right, and would like to see fewer resources put into promoting fear and more into promoting a healthier, happier, less commercialized lifestyle.

The others you are referring to, would prefer to see the status quo. And these people have most likely benefitted- and profited- greatly by the current regime. These people are often card-carrying Republicans or their supporters. For example, they generally don't like government some even referring to it as evil and horrible. Not coincidentally, it is also Republicans who, by a large majority, don't want health-care reform.

BTW, the illegal immigrant argument is a total red-herring. Don't use the illegal immigration issue as a crutch to support the reasons why the health care system in the United States is failing.

The American health care system was as corrupt 10 years ago when the illegal immigration issue wasn't a hot-button topic as it is today.
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 9:54 pm

Quoting Czbbflier (Reply 42):
They are not necessarily the same people. Some of those people you refer to, rail against the 'law enforcement' approach taken in so many aspects of American society and global relations, rather than a wholistic, humanistic approach that puts people ahead of profits, sees basic education and health care as a human right, and would like to see fewer resources put into promoting fear and more into promoting a healthier, happier, less commercialized lifestyle.

Health care isn't a right, it's a privilege. Why should I work hard to support some bum who doesn't want to work? If they don't want to work, can't afford the health care, too bad.

Quoting Czbbflier (Reply 42):
BTW, the illegal immigrant argument is a total red-herring. Don't use the illegal immigration issue as a crutch to support the reasons why the health care system in the United States is failing.
I wouldn't have brought it up if someone else hadn't.
The American health care system was as corrupt 10 years ago when the illegal immigration issue wasn't a hot-button topic as it is today.

And there were still tons of illegal immigrants ten years ago just as there are now, it just wasn't as publicized.

Quoting Czbbflier (Reply 42):
No evidence of that in Canada.

I know of companies in states that when the minimum wage was raised, they didn't have to raise it since "they offered health care insurance". They did nothing to subisidize it either, it was still offered at the same rate pre-minimum wage hike.
And while your Socialist health care may work in your country, your country's population is less than that of California.
There's 300 millon people here, not 30 million.
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:00 pm

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 41):
OUR Government could do the same thing, IF - IF - they were serious about reasonably priced health care. They are NOT. Too many profits in it for the politicians . . . lobbyists, yadda, yadda, yadda.

It's bullshit and anyone with any sense knows it.

Not to difficult to agree with that, but how does the failure of the US government in this respect get to be an indicator of how successful other governments are or are not in trying to do these sorts of things. Just because it seems not to be possible in the US, does not mean it is not possible elsewhere.

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
South Korea, Egypt, Israel, Russia, pick one. Now, noting of course, those aren't piss ant countries . . . (thought I'd toss that in there before you did).

Most of those countries are bound by the terms of the aid to spend a high proportion of the "aid" on US goods. In some cases, especially Russia, fund loaned are repayable. Remember that the UK has just finished repaying the US for Lend Lease. Please do not exaggerate US generosity.

Some of the aid to Israel has gone on supporting settlements in the West Bank, thus irritating many Muslims, and most of the rest on supporting the US arms industry. Of course when these arms are used on Palestinians, they immediately become very grateful to the US for having provided those facilities.

A common criticism of many countries aid programs is that they are "make work" programs for their own nationals and companies. I know Aus has been guilty of that, even more so of late, I have not followed the US recently, but I know that in the 80s US aid to Indonesia was spectacularly of this nature.
 
JGPH1A
Posts: 15080
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 4:36 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:09 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 43):
Health care isn't a right, it's a privilege.

I disagree. If doctors are bound by the Hippocratic Oath to treat anyone who needs it, then everyone has the right to expect treatment from a doctor if one is available. The best way to make doctors available is to make universal healthcare part of basic state service provision, like law and order. Medicine is still a vocation, and an admirable one - taking money out of the equation enables doctors to treat those who need treatment regardless of their ability to pay.
Young and beautiful and thin and gorgeous AND BANNED ! Cya at airspaceonline.com, losers
 
User avatar
czbbflier
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:12 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 43):
Health care isn't a right, it's a privilege

Well, at this most basic, ideoloical, and values-based junction, I suppose we'll never agree. I have one question though: Would you feel the same if you had a degenerative disease that kept you from working for, say, 20 years?

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 43):
And there were still tons of illegal immigrants ten years ago just as there are now, it just wasn't as publicized.

My point exactly. Illegal immigration wasn't the undoing of the health care system 10 years ago- as it is often asserted to be today. So don't blame the illegals today because they weren't blamed 10 years ago- that's just a convenient crutch.

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 43):
I know of companies in states that when the minimum wage was raised, they didn't have to raise it since "they offered health care insurance".

If the health care were universally available following Rousseau's principles found in the Social Contract, then it wouldn't be a 'benefit' to be paid in lieu of wages. You'd see wage hikes AND health care!

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 43):
And while your Socialist health care may work in your country, your country's population is less than that of California.

The success of the Canadian system, perhaps is the ability to act as one. Imagine the incredibly powerful and positive force if 300 milliion came together against the pharmaceutical companies. I don't see the larger size to be a negative factor at all....
 
copaair737
Posts: 3571
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2003 5:00 am

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:13 pm

Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 45):
The best way to make doctors available is to make universal healthcare part of basic state service provision, like law and order. Medicine is still a vocation, and an admirable one - taking money out of the equation enables doctors to treat those who need treatment regardless of their ability to pay.

How are doctors going to pay back exorbitant student loans then? And what are you going to do with the huge malpractice insurance premiums? Should doctors have their pay cut down to appease socialist health care, then have their new, smaller check totally disappated by the malpractice premiums and student loan repayments?

That will sure convince the best and brightest to enter the medical field.
Livin' on Reds, Vitamin C, and Cocaine
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:17 pm

Quoting Baroque (Reply 44):
Not to difficult to agree with that, but how does the failure of the US government in this respect get to be an indicator of how successful other governments are or are not in trying to do these sorts of things. Just because it seems not to be possible in the US, does not mean it is not possible elsewhere.

I'm quite sure it is possible here, Baroque. I have no qualms with the successes other countries have had with Socialized Medicine. In fact, the US Gov't oughta take some notes from their neighbor to the North and a few countries in Europe.

I never argued - anywhere - that the fact it isn't working here is an indicator it can't work elsewhere . . . don't know why'd you'd assume that.

My argument is against my own Government's failure to get their heads out of rectal defilade on health care.

Quoting Baroque (Reply 44):
Please do not exaggerate US generosity.

No exaggeration at all . . . we give WAY too much away and disregard our own issues. MY tax dollars go to too many piss ant countries that can't and WILL NOT help themselves. That oughta stop.

We COULD fund healthcare in this country for everyone if we quit sending $$$$ to every Tom, Dick and Harry country that asked for it . . . especially those that'll squander and waste it - or the dictator in charge will use it for himself.

Once we have our own house in order, then we can worry about everyone else.

I mean, if your house needs a new roof and your neighbors house needs a new roof, and you have to pay for them both - which one are you going to get done first? No question in my mind about that one.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
User avatar
czbbflier
Posts: 864
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 1:28 pm

RE: Why Is Socialism A Bad Word In US Health Care?

Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:21 pm

Quoting Copaair737 (Reply 47):
How are doctors going to pay back exorbitant student loans then? And what are you going to do with the huge malpractice insurance premiums?

Here, my friend, we agree. But here is where health care reform is so vital. First get the lawyers out of the operating room. Get their frivolously suing a**es out of the equasion and you've made some huge, huge progress.

As for the exorbitant student loans, doctors in Canada carry a smaller, but proportionately equal debt to income ratio. Part of the health care reforms may be to subsidize medical students- say to provide a training bond- work in the medicaid/medicare system for a time after their residency to help them through the system. Sort of a 'Peace Corps for Doctors' plan....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Revelation and 9 guests