America and Socialism...

[Leroy]

Pingfah wrote:
Snide little comments like the one TLS made are simply an attempt to paint the issue as entirely black and white so that ill considered, simplistic and one sided points of view appear to be less absurd, whilst painting all those in a less fortunate or successful position as incapable to boost one's own flagging self esteem.

They aren't really worth giving any serious thought to.

They are worth giving serious thoughts to since arguments like his are what denies 50 million Americans access to healthcare and lets millions more slip through the cracks.

alasdairism wrote:
If America embarks on a slope towards socialism I don't think there will be any going back. I, for one, hope this never happens.

As I pointed out earlier the two aren't mutually exclusive the two can exist side by side and have for some time, it's not one way or the other.

TheLonelySquire wrote:
I wouldn't argue that we need health care reform. But to have the government deciding what services are dolled out to who and when, is utterly ridiculous. I can't think of a solitary government agency that runs efficiently. I can't think they would run this any differently.

As opposed to a corporate bureaucracy deciding your fate based on what's more profitable for them? Did you read that article about the guy who got his coverage entirely cut when he was battling cancer? I can think of plenty of government agencies that run efficiently the military being one.

TheLonelySquire Wrote:
What we need is for every American to have ACCESS to AFFORDABLE health care. No able-bodied adult should be entitled to a free ride. Not one. If you're disabled or down on your luck, there should be a social safety net for that. But at some point a person needs to take responsibility for their own life and not expect the government to do it. That saps initiative. Then again many people simply don't have any.

People keep saying that but how do you propose you make it more affordable? People don't choose to get sick there just simply isn't any control over that, eating right and exercising can only do so much.

 

[Pingfah]

They are worth giving serious thoughts to since arguments like his are what denies 50 million Americans access to healthcare including myself and lets millions more slip through the cracks.

I totally agree, by my comment I simply meant that I do not consider the argument to have merit.

 

[Professor Zoom]

No, it is not a fallacy. Any person can do or be anything they want to be here. If they choose not to apply themselves they will be poor. You may not like to hear that, but that is indeed the case.

Are you saying in the UK or Sweden (for example) if one applies themselves they CAN'T be anything they want? Someone should tell JK Rowling and ABBA, they apparently, aren't all that.

 

[ManOnTheWave]

I look at the health care issue this way. Smaller, weaker countries provide excellent to adequate health care for all of their people including foriegner residents and travelers. The "greatest coutry in the world" by contrast can't be bothered to care for its own people. Whether it is because of apathy for them or fear of the AMA, large in insurance corparations, and large drug companies, I don't care. It makes me ashamed to be American.

This thing where we label anything we dislike as "socialism" or "communism" is backwards and self parody.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

Smaller, weaker countries [..]

"Weakness" is relative. I think a country is only as strong as how good it cares for it's young, elderly and disabled and how good it is in offering education to everyone. In that sense, the United States is one of the weakest of the Western countries.

 

[Canadave]

Well, when you have guaranteed child care, guaranteed higher education, guaranteed health care and the guaranteed right to own a home, what exactly are you working for?

To pay the taxes to support the system. Duh. Oh and little things like food, cars, heating and all the luxuries that the welfare state cannot and does not support. Quite simple really.

That you boil down a social and political system as complicated as socialism to a single concept, and label its proponents as simply lazy people who don't want to work betrays either total ignorance of the concept or intellectual dishonesty. Either way, it's not possible to have a fruitful discussion about socialism with you.

Here's a gem for ya... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

Can't load Youtube at work.

Sorry, I don't buy into a system that taxes me more than someone who is less ambitious or less willing to work than I am, just so they can be comfortable. If I want to charitibly give I'll do it on my own, thank you.

Not everyone who is poor is less ambituous or less willing to work than you are. For instance, new immigrants often have trouble integrating into their new country due to language barriers, unrecognized foreign education credentials, etc., and are forced to take on low-paying jobs such as the food service industry. They are, in almost every sense, entirely unable to improve their social status in any reasonable timeframe, so why shouldn't they be eligible for state support? In fact, it can be argued that state support is one of the best ways to help people out of poverty; rather than making them lazy and unwilling to work, it gives them the toehold they need to improve their lives.

 

[J.T.B.]

I wouldn't argue that we need health care reform. But to have the government deciding what services are dolled out to who and when, is utterly ridiculous.

As opposed to having insurance companies deciding what services are doled out to whom and when? Because of you think they don't "ration" care, you are way out of touch with the kind of coverage most Americans have. And, really, is there any proposal that wouldn't allow anyone to "go private" and get whatever care they want at their own expense?

I can't think of a solitary government agency that runs efficiently. I can't think they would run this any differently.

Do you advocate privatized fire departments? Insurance-based police protection?

Sorry, I don't buy into a system that taxes me more than someone who is less ambitious or less willing to work than I am, just so they can be comfortable. If I want to charitibly give I'll do it on my own, thank you.

I don't want to buy into a system that gives the biggest tax breaks to the richest 5% of the population, but that's what we've had for the last 25+ years. Middle-class Americans' income has remained basically flat since 1980, while that of the wealthiest people has gone up like a rocket. The economic benefits that have helped the wealthy and big business have not "trickled down" to most Americans, so rapidly increasing health care costs have hit the middle and lower income brackets disproportionately. That includes plenty of "ambitious" and "willing to work" Americans, and a lot of small business opeartors that politicians like to talk about helping. Government and the tax system is the only way to address that inequity. Charity is not doing making any noticeable impact.

Oh, and those luxuries. Smart Car? Being allowed to only set the temperature in my house to a certain level? Are you kidding me? Not what this country is all about.

Nobody can agree on "what this country is all about." The closest you can get is what the voters decide.

People like me are already sheltering our income. For example, I do consulting for companies in Amsterdam, the UK, and Canada. Not one penny of that is going into a U.S. bank account. And I'll bet I'm not alone.

For the purpose of evading taxes?

--Justin

 

[ManOnTheWave]

Smaller, weaker countries [..]

"Weakness" is relative. I think a country is only as strong as how good it cares for it's young, elderly and disabled and how good it is in offering education to everyone. In that sense, the United States is one of the weakest of the Western countries.

"Weaker" is simply my contrast to "the greatest country in the world" bit which is something I've heard repeated my whole life. I tend to agree with you. My apologies to anyone who took the term literally.

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

"Weaker" is simply my contrast to "the greatest country in the world" bit which is something I've heard repeated my whole life. I tend to agree with you. My apologies to anyone who took the term literally.

No need to apologize, you were right in using that term. I just tried to point out that it's such a shame that there still are a lot of Americans who actually believe the "we are the strongest because our military is big!" stuff.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

Snide little comments like the one TLS made are simply an attempt to paint the issue as entirely black and white so that ill considered, simplistic and one sided points of view appear to be less absurd, whilst painting all those in a less fortunate or successful position as incapable to boost one's own flagging self esteem.

They aren't really worth giving any serious thought to.

Whatever. Less fortunate people are less fortunate for a reason. If they are disabled or elderly they should receive assistance. If not, they can work like the rest of us.

This is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read. Less fortunate people are less fortunate for a reason...Yeah, it's called life!

Right now it is extremely difficult to get a job, even if you are a skilled worker, much more if you aren't. I mean...come on TLS. Think with your head!

 

[DiSiLLUSiON]

Right now it is extremely difficult to get a job, even if you are a skilled worker, much more if you aren't. I mean...come on TLS. Think with your head!

Well, to be honest, how can one not become a skilled worker after a good education? And if you can't have a job, there's no problem -- just take welfare until the market brightens. Oh, wait, you don't have that in the United States. I can see how that can be a problem.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

Right now it is extremely difficult to get a job, even if you are a skilled worker, much more if you aren't. I mean...come on TLS. Think with your head!

Well, to be honest, how can one not become a skilled worker after a good education? And if you can't have a job, there's no problem -- just take welfare until the market brightens. Oh, wait, you don't have that in the United States. I can see how that can be a problem.

Skilled workers = years of experience for us. It's -- difficult sometimes when the market tightens to find years of experience. Education also does not = skilled worker...

 

[Leroy]

Skilled workers = years of experience for us. It's -- difficult sometimes when the market tightens to find years of experience. Education also does not = skilled worker...

Tell me about it I found out the hard way after graduating from my local tech college with a degree in electronics companies are obsessed with experience they aren't interested in a newbie like myself. If it were up to me I'd be working for over a year with a job in my field with benefits and great pay, I'm not some lazy person or a stuck up liberal arts major either.

Well, to be honest, how can one not become a skilled worker after a good education? And if you can't have a job, there's no problem -- just take welfare until the market brightens. Oh, wait, you don't have that in the United States. I can see how that can be a problem.

We have welfare in the form of Food Stamps but good luck getting them if you aren't blind and can't walk.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

hey! I'm a liberal arts major

 

[Leroy]

hey! I'm a liberal arts major

I said stuck up liberal arts major.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

hey! I'm a liberal arts major

I said stuck up liberal arts major.

Oh...Well, yeah

But no really. It sucks. You work hard to get a degree and then bam! Do you have experience? Uh...what? I thought a degree would HELP get experience.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

Snide little comments like the one TLS made are simply an attempt to paint the issue as entirely black and white so that ill considered, simplistic and one sided points of view appear to be less absurd, whilst painting all those in a less fortunate or successful position as incapable to boost one's own flagging self esteem.

They aren't really worth giving any serious thought to.

Whatever. Less fortunate people are less fortunate for a reason. If they are disabled or elderly they should receive assistance. If not, they can work like the rest of us.

This is one of the dumbest statements I have ever read. Less fortunate people are less fortunate for a reason...Yeah, it's called life!

Right now it is extremely difficult to get a job, even if you are a skilled worker, much more if you aren't. I mean...come on TLS. Think with your head!

Sorry Boli, people need to make their own success in life. Sure there are ups and downs and everyone needs a hand up sometime, but at the end of the day hard work and smart planning mean you'll be successful and not poor.

 

[Davros]

Those that continually complain about socialism in America have little clue as to what socialism actually is.

 

[miraclefan]

TedShatner10:
With outrageous stories of credit cards paying for health care,

That's one of the worst solutions I've seen for healthcare reform I've seen since reform has become a serious issue. Check out these articles I've found on the status of the "greatest health care system in the world".
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/08/shriners.hospitals/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/19/begala.health.care/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/06/05/bankruptcy.medical.bills/index.htm

TheLonelySquire wrote:
I believe in capitalism because I'm a competitor and know how to make money. I can certainly understand if someone lacks in this area though, and is cool with the government taking care of them from cradle to grave. But this increasingly hypothetical someone would not be me.

That's not really the issue the issue is working hard doesn't cut it anymore when you could be ruined by hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of doctor bills. I like to be self reliant too but I also like to live in the real world.

Socialism and capitalism aren't mutually exclusive the two can exist side by side the fire department, police, and postal service are all examples of socialist concepts.

There is a reason I try to find independent news sites (no cnn, msn, fox, bbc) do you have any other sources besides CNN? which is LEFT leaning?

 

[Leroy]

There is a reason I try to find independent news sites (no cnn, msn, fox, bbc) do you have any other sources besides CNN? which is LEFT leaning?

I'm sure there are but at least I try to back up my claims with more evidence than repeating slogans over and over. I hardly think CNN is as left leaning as people make it out to be, since they gave Glenn Beck his first show. I also figure CNN is a lot better than some random liberal blog. The mainstream media doesn't bother to report on this stuff hardly they are actually less likely to report on this issue because of advertiser pressure, the need for subscribers via sensationalism, demographics, editorial pressure, critisism of media observers, and reporters who aren't interested in the subject.

I also found an excellent eye opening video even for me someone who is well versed in the issue. Bill Moyers interviews Wendell Potter somebody who has worked in the US health insurance industry for almost 20 years.
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch2.html

Here is an article from a local paper about Shriners
http://www.greenvilleonline.com/article/20090401/NEWS01/304010004
Robin Beaton testimony before Congress (she was mentioned in the Begala article)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEj-Mi7D_1o
Here is the testimony of Steffie Woolhandler (she was quoted in the Tamkins article) and PNHP has been published in JAMA.
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/june/testimony_of_steffie.php