Do you support universal healthcare?

J-Man wrote: Oh, and by the way; are you forgetting about what's happening in Canada? People there are getting denied what they need and coming here. What's going to happen to us when WE are denied a surgery or a doctor's visit because the government can't afford it?And believe me. Healthcare doesn't seem like communism at all. It's happened with other countries. The government takes control of one business, and then slowly it will take away all of our freedom, and what makes America what it is.

A couple of problems with this post.

For one thing, Canada, comprehensively, has a better health care system than the US, though neither country is particularly good.

For another thing, the proposed health care reform is the not the same as health care in Canada, so please look up what a bill does before making comparisons.

Thirdly, if you look at the best health care systems in the world (France, Japan, Germany, etc), they are ALL "socialized" systems (though in reality many of them are simply regulated private systems that guarantee everyone coverage).

Let's look at just Japan. Japan imposed cost controls on procedures. The result? An MRI in the US costs $1,500. In Japan, it costs the equivalent of $98, and the labs still make a profit. Japan also has government provided health care. The result? In the US, 20% of medical costs go to paperwork and bureaucracy. In Japan... wait for it... 1.5% (those wasteful French and Canadian systems are at 4% and 6% respectively).

Oh, and wait times? They're pretty damn short.

source

Equality 7-2521 wrote: The T wrote: Equality 7-2521 wrote: I don't even support Medicaid and Medicare.    You basically support death.... (not the band...)     Let the old rot, let the poor die....   Now THAT's the sign of an advanced civilization.....   Or people could willingly give their money to help others which would actually involve some level of compassion rather than the majority rule stealing money from the unwilling to be put in the hands of a doomed to failed government bureaucracy which now has the power to determine based on some abstract "common good" argument who deserves what care and who does not.

Heh. Hah. Hih.
Blargh.

The Antique wrote: J-Man wrote: Oh, and by the way; are you forgetting about what's happening in Canada? People there are getting denied what they need and coming here. What's going to happen to us when WE are denied a surgery or a doctor's visit because the government can't afford it?And believe me. Healthcare doesn't seem like communism at all. It's happened with other countries. The government takes control of one business, and then slowly it will take away all of our freedom, and what makes America what it is. A couple of problems with this post. For one thing, Canada, comprehensively, has a better health care system than the US, though neither country is particularly good. For another thing, the proposed health care reform is the not the same as health care in Canada, so please look up what a bill does before making comparisons. Thirdly, if you look at the best health care systems in the world (France, Japan, Germany, etc), they are ALL "socialized" systems (though in reality many of them are simply regulated private systems that guarantee everyone coverage). Let's look at just Japan. Japan imposed cost controls on procedures. The result? An MRI in the US costs $1,500. In Japan, it costs the equivalent of $98, and the labs still make a profit. Japan also has government provided health care. The result? In the US, 20% of medical costs go to paperwork and bureaucracy. In Japan... wait for it... 1.5% (those wasteful French and Canadian systems are at 4% and 6% respectively). Oh, and wait times? They're pretty damn short. source

Japan also can't afford their system.

Re:http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/


Edited by KoS - August 31 2009 at 00:16

Equality 7-2521 wrote: Or people could willingly give their money to help others which would actually involve some level of compassion rather than the majority rule stealing money from the unwilling to be put in the hands of a doomed to failed government bureaucracy which now has the power to determine based on some abstract "common good" argument who deserves what care and who does not.

People could, but they don't (or, at least, they don't enough). Hence the 47 million uninsured in the US (even if you take out those who can afford health care but choose not to buy it, it's still an egregiously high number).

As for the latter half (doomed to fail), numerous systems exist that provide coverage to everyone that are not failing despite "government bureaucracy."

Frankly, I value the lives and welfare of poor people more than the additional wealth of rich people, especially since the distribution of wealth in this country is based on arbitrary factors such as natural assets (intelligence, looks, strength, athleticism, etc) and the social class into which you were born just as much as if not more than non-arbitrary factors like how dedicated a worker you are.

Edited by The Antique - August 31 2009 at 01:00

So do you oppose taxes altogether? The only reason people have a right not to have money stolen from them is because we collectively agree that we have this right. I am making the argument that this right ends where it impedes our ability to provide basic services to people who cannot provide it for themselves.

I am not making this rich vs. poor. It is simply the case that, if more money is needed and the only way to get it is through taxes, the fairest way to obtain it is to tax most those with the most money, since it causes them the least harm.

People work jobs based in part on their opportunities (going to college will get you a better job in general, but people born into poor families are much less likely to get this opportunity than people born into rich families).

As for natural abilities (in which I should not have included strength since it is very much dependent on the effort you put into it, way moreso than the others), yes, they can be improved, but no amount of hard work is going to turn me into an NBA star or a person with an IQ of 90 into a particle physicist.

In addition, there are simply not enough well-paying jobs for everyone to make a reasonable living, and moreover there are low-paying jobs that need to be done (some of which are almost exclusively done by people born into poor families or born with low intelligence, such as janitors, at least in my personal experience).

For these reasons, the distribution of wealth in a capitalist system will inevitably be arbitrary and unfair to a very great degree, and thus it is not immoral to take money from those this system benefits in order to help those it shafts.

The T wrote: J-Man wrote: No. Not at all. Why should I have to pay for other people's problems? Next thing that's coming is communism. I'm watching Obama destroy America one bill at a time.   Individualism, lack of knowledge, exaggeration... a sign of the times...   I'd love if any of the people who call Obama communist would have the slightest idea of what communism really means, either Marxist communism or what existed until the end of the 80's in the Soviet Union....     Anyway, I really don't understand how someone could be against universal healthcare... one could be in favor or against specific ways of paying for this universal healthcare, one could be against the public option, but against universal healthcare???   But then again, you have to have lived a few years (and I'm not even that old, I'm just 30) to understand some things, or to have experienced them....

Sorry. Maybe communist doesn't fit your liking. Socialist is the word. When the wealthy pay for the poor through taxes, what else is that called if not socialism?

Relax J...we conservatives are just cold-hearted b*****ds who don't care about the little folks...even if we are the little folks (I know I am...I'm twelfth generation poor).

As I mentioned, I think a moderate approach for health care could work...

...but I do find it kind of weird that people who probably would oppose slavery in America don't mind people working hard to have their money taken from them for the benefit of those who didn't lift a finger for it.

Just sayin.

And if the Russians ever come, they'll all be beating bongo drums.  Joe Jackson




Edited by Slartibartfast - August 31 2009 at 08:38

Blacksword wrote: The T pointed out that most people have no idea what communism actually is, and this is quite right. 'Communism' is a bogeyman word, used to scare Americans into supporting right wing legislation. To most people the 'c' word, doesn't have any actual definition. It's as meaningless a term to most people as 'codpiece' or 'sixpence' and yet when the word is uttered, people start flapping around like frightened ducks running for the water, when they see a dog off a leash. People need to get a grip. A government trying to introduce some supportative policies for their populations less well off, is not an act of communism. If you think it is, go and live in North Korea for while. If you survive the experince without being beaten to death or shot, then return to the US, and start counting your lucky stars...and stripes! You're in a good place. Communism, my arse!

I guess you 'conservatives' could try getting rid of taxes all together if you don't feel any responsibility for your fellow man.  Try living without rubbish collection, street lighting, police service, fire service - in the good old days they would only put out the fires in houses that had paid just leave it to the free market which works sooooo well (Look at the banks everyone and see how well they have done for us) .