State-run health care

[Robert Maxwell]

Here's another way to look at it:

Why think about it being that you're somehow paying for someone else, when you could look at the reality that you are paying into a system for yourself for 24/7 coverage if and when you need it..... just like everybody else.

Nobody is going to have a job everyday of their life, and something is eventually going to happen, none of us are imortal. If you think you are, well good luck with that.

The point is that some are going to need the system more then others. You may hardly ever need it, then again you may have some serious medical issue come up you never expected.

When you pay into this system, it's no different then paying into a private insurance company.... except that unlike the private insurance company, there are more regulations, there are laws, there is more oversight, you remove the feringi from your health coverage. You don't have to worry about being denied due to something being "Experimental".... you don't have to worry about being seriously injured and not being able to work for a month or two, then worrying about your company letting you go, then no longer being covered by their insurance plan...... then worry about footing the bill and your monthly living payments all on your own.

And if it does work.... then go back to the old system. How will anybody know if it works if you don't try it?

You certainly won't know if you don't try.

And considering that the US is one of the few developed nations that doesn't have some sort of universal medical coverage and Canada has a higher life expectancy then people in the US as an example...... I personally just don't get it.

From what I have observed, there are basically two camps in the anti-public health crowd:

1. Those who are completely misinformed about what it is and how it works, apparently under the impression that other countries euthanize their elderly, will deny you care if it's not "cost effective" or if you aren't "worth enough to society," and a bunch of other boogeymen that have no basis in reality.
2. Those who subscribe to some form of libertarian dogma, believing that if you can't afford your own health care, you shouldn't have any. Can't afford insurance? Tough. Get sick and get dropped by your insurer? Tough. Pre-existing condition? Tough. Not my problem.

There is some overlap between the groups, but those are pretty much the positions I have seen. People in the first group are just flat-out wrong, and will not usually accept any evidence that contradicts their viewpoint.

People in the second group, well, that's just the philosophy they subscribe to. While such people usually call themselves "libertarians," they are really Objectivists, and I find Objectivism to be an altogether cruel, sadistic, and evil political philosophy, one that has no place in a modern world.

Nobody in the US DIES because of lack of insurance. In the US, people are treated REGARLESS of whether or not they have insurance. People saying otherwise are LIEING. And this lie has been promulgated for FAR too long.

It cannot be argued that people in the US do die from otherwise treatable causes because they cannot afford medical care. Yes, an ER has to treat you. But if you have something serious and long-term, like cancer or diabetes, they don't have to take you at all unless you're in an emergency situation and will die without immediate intervention. So, yes, in fact, people are forced to go without, and some do die as a result.

People come to the US from all over to get care because socialized medicine SUCKS. People die from THAT waiting to get care. The US currently -- although not a PERFECT system -- has the best healthcare in the world bar none.

People come here because they can afford to and they don't want to wait. Of course, most people here have to wait anyway. You're talking about people who can afford to pay for top-tier care. Most people--regardless of which country they hail from--can't, so your entire premise is false. Why do people in socialized countries live longer than us, hmm?

The number of people here who think it's OK to hand their lives and eternally MORE power to the government really disturbs and sickens me.

The number of people who would rather let their fellow citizens suffer and die in exchange for keeping a few more bucks in their paycheck disturbs and sickens me.

When government controls your healthcare, they will eventually tell you how much you can eat...what you can eat...etc., etc. That's just the healthcare.

Oh, please. Go ahead, show me a country where that happens to any greater degree than it does here.

They won't stop there.

Panic!!! Hysteria!!!

It's about CONTROL. And by that, they mean to CONTROL...YOU!

I could go with plenty of facts to support this concern, but why bother...you socialists have made up your minds. But, consider this -- once the tentacles of government control are immersed in your lives you will NEVER get them out -- short of revolution. Going to the ballot box to overturn it after you decide you don't like it won't be an option. Socialism is a failed system that robs humans of their humanity. It turns people into slugs and leeches with no drive or determination to anything...and why should they? Everything is "free".

Funny that "socialism is a failed system" when it's working just fine in Europe, and our own socialized programs--Medicare, etc.--are rated better than the private options. I wonder how that's possible, if socialism is so horrible.

I see it took you no time at all to trot out the "anyone who favors socialism is a lazy leech" canard.

All this crap is the real life equivalent of Borg-ism. The warning in Trek of collectivism was appropriate and accurate...and some of you want to jump in willingly!

Yup, because even the worst and most selfish of us deserve medical care.

Sad.

You certainly are.

Socialists never give up power and control willingly.

They don't? So, what, when we hold elections, they just refuse to go home when they get voted out?

Wake up, little pre-programmed socialists! You communist college professors were...and ARE...WRONG!

Oh, those poor, brainwashed socialists, what with their superior access to medical care, longer lives, shorter work weeks, and healthier populations! Why won't they turn to the private sector so they can be more like us?!

 

[Squiggy]

It is ILLEGAL to refuse healthcare to anyone. Doctors cannot and do NOT refuse care.

Only emergency care. They can and do refuse other care all the time based on insurance and ability to pay.

Therefore, the rest of your little ill-informed rant is false.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

From what I have observed, there are basically two camps in the anti-public health crowd:

1. Those who are completely misinformed about what it is and how it works, apparently under the impression that other countries euthanize their elderly, will deny you care if it's not "cost effective" or if you aren't "worth enough to society," and a bunch of other boogeymen that have no basis in reality.
2. Those who subscribe to some form of libertarian dogma, believing that if you can't afford your own health care, you shouldn't have any. Can't afford insurance? Tough. Get sick and get dropped by your insurer? Tough. Pre-existing condition? Tough. Not my problem.

There is some overlap between the groups, but those are pretty much the positions I have seen. People in the first group are just flat-out wrong, and will not usually accept any evidence that contradicts their viewpoint.

People in the second group, well, that's just the philosophy they subscribe to. While such people usually call themselves "libertarians," they are really Objectivists, and I find Objectivism to be an altogether cruel, sadistic, and evil political philosophy, one that has no place in a modern world.

That's something else I never got.... who cares if you have a pre-existing condition? Why should that somehow deny you any sort of coverage?

It's a medical condition, whether it was there for years or you just got it last night, it needs medical treatment. How the heck does it suddenly become the individual's responsibility to treat all on their own or that because you already have this illness, it's suddenly avoided like the plauge for you to either let get worse or pay an arm and a leg to get treated?

Insurance is all about spreading risk. You don't purposely take on bad risks. Someone with a known condition is a clear risk.

It's an enormous flaw in our insurance system. It results in certain people--including some who post here--who cannot get insurance under any circumstances. So, they are forced into destitution to pay for their own care, and they are expected to be thankful for the privilege.

 

[RoJoHen]

They don't? So, what, when we hold elections, they just refuse to go home when they get voted out?

Voters: "It's time to go home now."
Politician: "No! I don't wanna! You can't make me!"

 

[Jetfire]

I am just going to keep using witchcraft.

...it's free.

 

[cultcross]

Nobody in the US DIES because of lack of insurance. In the US, people are treated REGARLESS of whether or not they have insurance. People saying otherwise are LIEING (such as Pelosi and Obama, etc.). And this lie has been promulgated for FAR too long. It is ILLEGAL to refuse healthcare to anyone. Doctors cannot and do NOT refuse care.

So...myth busted on that one. Repeating the lie -- Joseph Goebbel's style -- will not make it so despite all vain efforts to twist lies into reality.

You are wrong. It is illegal to refuse emergency care for acute conditions. Never mind that for a great many conditions, by the time you would present to an ER, it's too damn late. Everyone who ever didn't get a lump checked because they couldn't afford it and was told once the system had to treat them that they had cancer too far gone to operate disagrees with you. Or they would, if they weren't dead.

People come to the US from all over to get care because socialized medicine SUCKS. People die from THAT waiting to get care. The US currently -- although not a PERFECT system -- has the best healthcare in the world bar none.

Then explain why you are ranked below every UHC country? And people from 'all over' do not come to the US for care. The number under socialised medicine dwarfs your population, so the vast, vast majority are clearly getting along just fine with our dirty socialist medicine.

What is that kiddies? That's where you WAIT until the government decides you (if they do decide in your favor) that you can get that organ transplant you might need, etc. You know...life saving surgeries, etc!

Organ transplants are determined by donor numbers in every nation in which they are offered, US included. So that's a lie.

And of course, if you are a certain age..then SCREW YOU! Only young are allowed to live -- a' la' the horror of Logan's Run!

A lie; or can you prove it? My grandfather was 84 and still got every treatment available for his cancer, and - shock! he's still alive, and cancer free. Where exactly is the age cutoff?

Oh yeah...some nirvana there. Only problem is -- we ALL presumably get old and need that care eventually. Do you want Big Mac Daddy Socialist Regime to decide when or if you get it?

Well that doesn't happen under UHC. Tell me, though, you're perfectly fine with an insurance company perfectly at liberty to drop you whenever they fancy deciding whether you get it? An interesting disconnect. A government UHC is required to treat you, a private insurance company is not required to cover you.

When government controls your healthcare, they will eventually tell you how much you can eat...what you can eat...etc., etc.

Well we've had it for 60 years, when are they going to tell me what I can eat?

They won't stop there.

It's about CONTROL. And by that, they mean to CONTROL...YOU!

PANIC! Oh wait, no, just an unsupported slippery slope fallacy. Nothing to see here folks.

I could go with plenty of facts to support this concern, but why bother...

Socialists never give up power and control willingly.

I was gonig to ignore your big OMG THE REDS ARE COMING bit of your post but this is particualrly hilarious and noteworthy - and capitalists do give up power and control willingly?

Wake up, little pre-programmed socialists! Your verminous and subversive Communist college professors were...and ARE...WRONG!

Ah, anti-intellectualism, the hallmark of a strong argument.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Quasar, your rant is so hysterical it's hilarious. I sincerely hope you are pulling our leg.

People come to the US from all over to get care because socialized medicine SUCKS.

No. People with lots of money go to the nation that treats people with lots of money better than the others. Not really surprising.

People die from THAT waiting to get care. The US currently -- although not a PERFECT system -- has the best healthcare in the world bar none.

And you know this... how?

I personally know Canadians, Brits, and others who have COME HERE to the US for treatment that they COULD NOT get in their native lands...at least not without being on a waiting list or having to endure healthcare RATIONING.

They could either wait for their turn in public care or pay to have their procedure done by private clinics. Where in the world did you get the idea that private practice is forbidden in countries with public health care?

What is that kiddies? That's where you WAIT until the government decides you (if they do decide in your favor) that you can get that organ transplant you might need, etc. You know...life saving surgeries, etc!

You know... not happening, etc!

And of course, if you are a certain age..then SCREW YOU! Only young are allowed to live -- a' la' the horror of Logan's Run!

Personally, I dig the black-grey uniform.

Do you want Big Mac Daddy Socialist Regime to decide when or if you get it?

Do you want insurance people to decide who could get cover and who would not, due to pre-existing condition, debt, or chronic disease?

The rest of your post is just so crazy that it doesn't even deserve a reply.

Wake up, little pre-programmed socialists! Your verminous and subversive Communist college professors were...and ARE...WRONG!

Is the 50s all over again?

 

[RoJoHen]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing. Why don't people get that?

 

[JuanBolio]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing. Why don't people get that?

Decades of Cold War-era capitalist programming.

 

[RoJoHen]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing. Why don't people get that?

Decades of Cold War-era capitalist programming.

Glad I wasn't there.

 

[Sky]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing. Why don't people get that?

But apparently they are both the Borg.

 

[JuanBolio]

The degree of control capitalist corporations have over our government, our media, and out national mindset to this day is disturbing. Nothing terrifies money-making companies more than the thought of socialized... anything!

 

[RoJoHen]

Socialism and Communism are not the same thing. Why don't people get that?

But apparently they are both the Borg.

Well, I mean, the Borg probably don't have to worry too much about healthcare.

 

[Holdfast]

Socialism has never worked anywhere anytime.

Socialised medicine has worked everywhere it's been implemented and every country that has it ranks above the United States, but sure, if you repeat this lie enough it might become true.

Just for kicks, it's worth noting in passing that my own NHS trust has to implement around 5% savings per year, for a little over a 20% saving to be delivered over the next 4 years. That's a best case scenario for the cuts, by the way. This is not going to be unique to my trust, but a function of over-indulgence over the last 10 years, an inevitable wider crackdown on public spending due to the public debt levels, and other mandatory efficiency savings. Try to think about what happens to a business when you absolutely have to shave off 20% of the budgets and work that through to the NHS. Sure, some trusts will have to shave off a little more, or a little less, but you get the idea.

The NHS is about to discover what the real world is like, after being in an artificial economic bubble since its inception, and especially over the last 10 years when it's effectively been a patient in a persistent vegetative state being forcefed nutrients despite little prospect of ever living a normal life again.

The only way these budget cuts are going to be implemented without extensive point-of-need service cuts is to transfer large elements of care to the private sector. Essentially you will see an effective privitisation of the NHS with a large shift in balance towards the private sector and away from the directly state-funded components of the NHS. Central government (or the SHAs) will be contract negotiators and regulators at most. This is the real underlying explanation for Andy Burnham's press statements today. It's been the undercurrent of central government policy (by both parties, during their respective tenures, actually, though most of their MPs, and probably most Secretaries of Health too, never figure out what they're doing) since the late 1980s, except the public isn't yet ready to accept it electorally, so it can't be implemented en masse but instead will evolve through successive crises.

I suspect the UK will end up closer to the USA model in a decade or two. The USA will nudge closer to the UK model too, but trust me on this, it'll be the UK that ends up moving more. I think a reasonable system of checks and balances will involve the traditional NHS itself being a primary contractor and the DoH/SHAs running the contract system. Eventually there'll almost inevitably be some variety of private top-up system introduced, with a certain amount of state money "following the patient" and the individual then choosing to use that for NHS care (not requiring top-up) or privately (to be topped up either out of pocket or via insurance). That sort of insurance would be cheaper than current insurance, because it would only be a top-up, and more employers will end up offering it as a perk.

 

[Misfit Toy]

Quasar, your rant is so hysterical it's hilarious. I sincerely hope you are pulling our leg.

He's not.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

I was trying to figure out where QuasarVM got this idea that socialists never give up power, and then I realized he just means that once people have socialist systems in place, they don't get rid of them. It's not because the state has taken control and now refuses to give it up. It's because the people fucking like it. If they didn't, they would elect people who would dismantle those systems. They don't.

Even in the US, most of us are quite happy with socialist programs, even if we can't benefit from them personally. I certainly don't begrudge my grandparents for getting Social Security and Medicare. I have no qualms about my payroll taxes going to pay for a poor child's medical care. Those are things we, as a society, should be banding together to do.

 

[Praxius]

Nobody in the US DIES because of lack of insurance.

Have any information to back up that claim? Not one single person died because they didn't have insurance and couldn't afford to pay the fees on their own?

In the US, people are treated REGARLESS of whether or not they have insurance. People saying otherwise are LIEING (such as Pelosi and Obama, etc.). And this lie has been promulgated for FAR too long. It is ILLEGAL to refuse healthcare to anyone. Doctors cannot and do NOT refuse care.

I personally never said health care is denied because you don't have health insurance.... the bigger issue that continually is avoided on the counter side is the cost. Do these people wish to or are they capable of paying off these fees on their own?

If they can not afford these payments, many will tend to not seek treatment. If they do, then they're in debt for quite some time, thereby a reduction in their overall quality of life, thus further risk to their future health due to not being able to afford other things they need..... therefore a vicious cycle of never getting out of the hole.

So...myth busted on that one. Repeating the lie -- Joseph Goebbel's style -- will not make it so despite all vain efforts to twist lies into reality.

Just because you say so with no sources or studies to back up your claims, doesn't prove or mean anything other then stating your opinion.

People come to the US from all over to get care because socialized medicine SUCKS.

Speaking of lies, there's a typical one I've heard in several other forums I've ventured on. Yes, so many people just simply flock to the US to get medical treatment .... I never once stepped foot in the US, nor do I plan on it anytime soon, and certainly not for your health care. While I'll agree there will be some people who are too much of a fuss pot to wait 2 or three months for a non-life threatening surgery and would rather pay up the wazoo simply because they can afford it and don't want to wait like everybody else....... however the majority of people in my country prefer our system much more then your system:

New poll shows overwhelming support for public health care
http://medicare.ca/new-poll-shows-overwhelming-support-for-public-health-care

"A new poll conducted by Nanos Research points to overwhelming support (86.2%) for strengthening public health care rather than expanding for-profit services. “With more than eight in ten Canadians supporting public solutions to make public healthcare stronger, there is compelling evidence that Canadians across all demographics would prefer a public over a for-profit healthcare system,” said Nik Nanos, President of Nanos Research. Nanos Research was commissioned on behalf of the Canadian Health Coalition (CHC) to conduct a random telephone survey of 1001 Canadians between April 25th and May 3rd. The margin of accuracy for a sample of 1,001 is ±3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

As well, the federal government just released its report: Healthy Canadians – A Federal Report on Comparable Health Indicators 2008. Its findings identically mirrored the CHC polling results. In that report, a leading indicator pointed to the fact that, “Most Canadians (85.2%) aged 15 years and older reported being ‘very satisfied’ or ‘somewhat satisfied’ with the way overall health care services were provided, unchanged from 2005.”

^ So I don't know what studies or which countries you are referring to on who is all flocking to the US for your health care, but it's certainly not Canadians.

People die from THAT waiting to get care. The US currently -- although not a PERFECT system -- has the best healthcare in the world bar none.

Once again, baseless opinion. Nobody around here sits around and simply dies because of a lineup or waiting period. If someone is in serious condition or needs surgery right away, they get it.... I have never seen or heard of anybody dying in a waiting room in such a manner.

You want to talk about lies and not know what people are talking about, I suggest you educate yourself on the system you are bashing, rather then just listening to the typical propaganda crap the US politicians keep spewing in your media. Start to think for yourself, it's far better then being spoon fed what people want you to believe.

The only waiting lines people have to deal with are when they go into the ER for a cold or headache (Which they shouldn't be doing in the first place) and people who are waiting for non-life threatening surgery that can wait.

And you have no idea if your health care system is the best in the world, mainly because you don't even know anything about any other system in comparison based on your response thus far. Once again, just saying so, doesn't make it so.

And logically now, if you guys had the best system in the world, why is there such a big push to drastically change how it works?

I personally know Canadians, Brits, and others who have COME HERE to the US for treatment that they COULD NOT get in their native lands...at least not without being on a waiting list or having to endure healthcare RATIONING.

And I know many Americans who came here for medical coverage they couldn't get or even afford in the US.... what's your point? How are your handfull of examples (without proof mind you) somehow justify a broad and ignorant generalization that everybody in those countries can't get what they need when they need it?

I've never experienced healthcare rationing in any sense of the term, I have a mother, step mother, a sister and several cousins and aunts whom all work in the health care industry here where I live and we all have direct and first hand knowledge of how this system really works. Uppercasing your text doesn't make you anymore correct.

What is that kiddies? That's where you WAIT until the government decides you (if they do decide in your favor) that you can get that organ transplant you might need, etc. You know...life saving surgeries, etc! And of course, if you are a certain age..then SCREW YOU! Only young are allowed to live -- a' la' the horror of Logan's Run!

Are you even serious? Do you even know anything about this subject?

Yeah ok, if what you're saying is true then my grandmother and grandfather would have been killed off years ago. My grandfather has been fighting bladder cancer for about three years now and gets weekly treatments and the best care anyone could ask for.... and he's almost 85 years old. The government has no place in the decision on his treatments, his doctors make those decisions.

Oh yeah...some nirvana there. Only problem is -- we ALL presumably get old and need that care eventually. Do you want Big Mac Daddy Socialist Regime to decide when or if you get it?

I don't and half the US population (at least) believes the same.

Then they, just like you, are very ignorant on the subject. That's no an insult, that's the actual truth. If you believe any of what you just said above, then you clearly have no understanding of what really goes on in other systems and have been filled with so much tripe from politicians ranting off about "Death Panels" and the Government somehow rounding up all the sick and old to be killed off and dumped somewhere.... seriously my god, you know how to get on the internet, you know how to use a computer..... you must have enough knowledge and intelligence to know better then this.

If what you're assuming was indeed happening in all of our countries who have universal health coverage..... don't you think all of this would be in the news, people would be crying foul, revolutions would be occuring, there'd be piles and piles of cases and examples of this happening?

There isn't any, because this isn't happening except in the imaginations of some fearmongering americans who are too afraid of "Change."

The number of people here who think it's OK to hand their lives and eternally MORE power to the government really disturbs and sickens me.

And if you're that paranoid of your own government, why do you allow it to remain in power? The government is supposed to work for you the people, you're not supposed to be fearful of your own government.... they're supposed to be fearful of you and what the people can do.

If it's that bad and you can't trust your own government to do what it's supposed to..... why allow it to continue? Why not revolt? Isn't that what you're supposed to do?

If you have a government that you don't want to have anything to do with your own life and well being, then what's the point of having them there wasting money and time doing nothing to benefit you? If you think they're out to get you and kill your whole family, then perhaps you guys should do something about it.

Just a suggestion.

When government controls your healthcare, they will eventually tell you how much you can eat...what you can eat...etc., etc. That's just the healthcare.

They won't stop there.

Funny, Canada has had UHC for decades and that hasn't started yet. Any time frame when you expect this to all unfold?

It's about CONTROL. And by that, they mean to CONTROL...YOU!

Wow man.... that like totally boggles the mind man *puffs* They're out there man.... they're out to get you. *puffs*

Yes, everything is always a conspiracy and everyone is always out to get you.

I could go with plenty of facts to support this concern,

I haven't seen any facts yet to be honest.

but why bother...you socialists have made up your minds. But, consider this -- once the tentacles of government control are immersed in your lives you will NEVER get them out -- short of revolution. Going to the ballot box to overturn it after you decide you don't like it won't be an option. Socialism is a failed system that robs humans of their humanity. It turns people into slugs and leeches with no drive or determination to anything...and why should they? Everything is "free".

So what you're saying is that Socialism doesn't work well with Society?

Just because people want to have socialized Health Care, like you already have Socialized Police, Military and Fire Dpts. doesn't mean that you're going to lose everything you lived and worked for and suddenly you're going to be a "Slug" and that it robs people of their humanity.

Robs people of humanity? Capitalism does that. As we are all aware of how well Capitalism worked so well with your health care system.... or perhaps how about the global economic crsis that began in the US because of lack of control and oversight of your Capitalist corporations who were allowed to run free and screw everything up.

How about how big Pharma and your private health insurance companies thrive to no end in this capitalist system you have in place that puts the almighty dollar ahead of your own health/life?

You want to talk about lack of humanity? How many people down in the US seem to go on shooting rampages these days because they got laid off, or because they lost out on a bunch of money or because someone else is holding back on their money or their investments? Of course that's a whole other subject, but money is none the less involved.

You can have Democracy with either Capitalism or Socialism, or even both..... the difference between Capitalism and Socialism is that with Capitalism is that it's all about you first no matter what the cost and screw everybody else..... where as socialism is about knowing where you stand in a community..... in a society and that you help out equally like evey other person in that society to better everyone's quality of life, which in turn betters your own.

I can still do the job I enjoy, get paid as I see fit for my work, I have my own home, I have my own relationships, my own life, I have security in my community via police and fire dpts, I also have health coverage anytime I want/need it..... and in my personal opinion, I have a hell of a lot less things to worry about in my life then what I see with others elsewhere in the world.

All this crap is the real life equivalent of Borg-ism. The warning in Trek of collectivism was appropriate and accurate...and some of you want to jump in willingly!

Sad.

What is sad is that your arguments are based around total black and whites and don't understand that there are balanced areas of approach and moderation. You don't even understand that your own police, military and firemen are all socialism..... yet all your life I imagine you never had issues with these things being socialist.

If your police and fire departments were all privately run and you have to merc out your police forces and firemen to the highest bidder, you'd end up with prohibition era corruption on such a scale you couldn't even imagine.... which is why they are regulated through the governments.

Now similar things are occuring in your health care and when someone comes up with the idea of socializing health care to fix the corruption and problems..... suddenly the government wants to toss you into the coal mines and tell you what to do with everything you do in your lives....... seriously stop being so paranoid, it's silly.

Socialists never give up power and control willingly. So, what's wrong with Socialism (I still can't believe I read such comments...even here.)? It's an oppressive and power-gobbling form of government that robs people of incentive, drive and ultimately their humanity.

I have yet to see any examples how..... just random opinions being posted.

But, I suppose there is NOTHING wrong with it if you want zip, zero, nada control of the decisions in your life and care not a whit about having choices and freedom!

Funny, I have plenty of decisions in my life and I have plenty of control over what I do with my life, where I do it and how i do it...... so you're also wrong on that angle.

And based on everything I read and hear in US news and media compared to my own life, news and media..... I personally feel I have more freedom then most in the US..... not to mention feel a lot more safer where I live too.

People who are willing to concede their freedom do NOT deserve it. You deserve to live in a nanny-state, but please go and create your own (some desert island somewhere would be a good idea!) and let the rest of us continue to live in freedom.

So that's what you'd call democracy? "So long as you live the way I do and do things the way I say, you're welcome to live here"

Oh but once someone has an idea or wish to change things around, which they're democratically allowed to do just like yourself.... suddenly the solution is deportation, rather then facing the fact that you are on a losing side?

Nice.

Wake up, little pre-programmed socialists! Your verminous and subversive Communist college professors were...and ARE...WRONG!

What is this WWII? Have you perhaps worked on any propaganda posters back then? Your fearmongering is silly and quite an over reaction.

 

[siskokid888]

The Government couldn't even keep Walter Reed in good enough shape, and you expect *me* to believe that it can efficiently run Health Care?

Ah yes, the old "Government ain't as efficient as private sector" canard. Little factoid - of every dollar that goes to Medicare/Medicaid, 3 cents goes toward "non health realted costs" e.g. administrative costs. For the insurance companies? 45 CENTS. Why? ye old profit margin and shareholder responsibilities. So, who is more proficient? And, btw, if the private sector is so efficient, why are we in the mess we are in with PRIVATE HEALTH CARE?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

Damn, Praxius! I think you belong with the rest of us crazies in TNZ!

 

[Robert Maxwell]

The Government couldn't even keep Walter Reed in good enough shape, and you expect *me* to believe that it can efficiently run Health Care?

Ah yes, the old "Government ain't as efficient as private sector" canard. Little factoid - of every dollar that goes to Medicare/Medicaid, 3 cents goes toward "non health realted costs" e.g. administrative costs. For the insurance companies? 45 CENTS. Why? ye old profit margin and shareholder responsibilities. So, who is more proficient? And, btw, if the private sector is so efficient, why are we in the mess we are in with PRIVATE HEALTH CARE?

Walter Reed is a red herring, anyway. The scandal there is the direct result of outsourcing to the private sector. D'oh!