Glen Beck: Obama's Marxist Agenda

[American Infidel]

Obama has been building a mountain of controversy lately. I haven't mentioned it, though. I got burned out on him after the Rev. Wright thing.

Now, I'm back. Glen Beck exposes the Socialistic values of the good senator -- something people here have often refuted or ignored. Obama and his wife are continuing to prove that the old-school Soviet Union is still alive and well.

Watch it here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMLeamM7Jkk&eurl=http://www.stoptheaclu.com/).

More of what I ignored to post:

•My good friend Texmaster posted Obama's nasty elitism, by degrading the people in Pennsylvania.

•Obama not only marched in Louis Farrakhan's "Million Man March", but helped organize it.

•Obama's name found on a dead FARC terrorist's laptop.

Yet, we will still have people who have been medicated by speeches from the Great Human Prozac. Please...one of you Obama supporters explain to me why. WHY?!?

[Jenovah]

*gasps* It's SOCIALISM! Quick, hide the kids! :ohnoes:

What's the thing about socialism that makes people jump up the tables and scream anyway, is it THAT bad? Where's the evilness in universal healthcare if it means that people that can't afford surgery can be helped?

Everytime someone talks about universal healthcare and what-not some people always like to point and say "ZOMFG COMMUJISM!"

But anyway, keep on rockin' against them evil liberals and socialists before they bring islamic death to the US! :lmao:

[blabam]

*gasps* It's SOCIALISM! Quick, hide the kids! :ohnoes:

What's the thing about socialism that makes people jump up the tables and scream anyway, is it THAT bad? Where's the evilness in universal healthcare if it means that people that can't afford surgery can be helped?

Everytime someone talks about universal healthcare and what-not some people always like to point and say "ZOMFG COMMUJISM!"

But anyway, keep on rockin' against them evil liberals and socialists before they bring islamic death to the US! :lmao:

Socialism is not what America needs at this point in time, it's recession will be twice as bad under a liberal president... oh wait, McCain is a liberal too... what are we talking about again?

[Dayve]

Socialism is not what America needs at this point in time, it's recession will be twice as bad under a liberal president... oh wait, McCain is a liberal too... what are we talking about again?

Socialism would be no worse for the USA than president Bush has been.

[blabam]

Socialism would be no worse for the USA than president Bush has been.

Bush is a liberal.

[Deamatix]

*gasps* It's SOCIALISM! Quick, hide the kids! :ohnoes:

What's the thing about socialism that makes people jump up the tables and scream anyway, is it THAT bad? Where's the evilness in universal healthcare if it means that people that can't afford surgery can be helped?

Everytime someone talks about universal healthcare and what-not some people always like to point and say "ZOMFG COMMUJISM!"


Is there anything good that can come from universal health care? People should be forced to fend for themselves.

If 12 year old crippled orphan Johnny needs a new kidney, he better get a job. If we had UHC, everybody would be forced to pay entire pennies for his surgery, that's money that could have been spent towards causes that benefit everybody, like Iraq and the future war with Iran.

[American Infidel]

*gasps* It's SOCIALISM! Quick, hide the kids! :ohnoes:

What's the thing about socialism that makes people jump up the tables and scream anyway, is it THAT bad? Where's the evilness in universal healthcare if it means that people that can't afford surgery can be helped?

Everytime someone talks about universal healthcare and what-not some people always like to point and say "ZOMFG COMMUJISM!"

But anyway, keep on rockin' against them evil liberals and socialists before they bring islamic death to the US! :lmao:

After reading your post I have to deduce that you are either uneducated, a troll, a blind Barack Obama supporter or an anti-American. My hopes are former, to latter.

Socialism doesn't work. Look at Russia. Look at North Korea. The theory might have looked good on paper, but it's a ship full of holes, in the real world.

Yet, having read some of your other posts, America is the shit-stain on the planet. Isn't that just about right?

[Mr. Heskey]

*gasps* It's SOCIALISM! Quick, hide the kids! :ohnoes:

What's the thing about socialism that makes people jump up the tables and scream anyway, is it THAT bad? Where's the evilness in universal healthcare if it means that people that can't afford surgery can be helped?

Everytime someone talks about universal healthcare and what-not some people always like to point and say "ZOMFG COMMUJISM!"

But anyway, keep on rockin' against them evil liberals and socialists before they bring islamic death to the US! :lmao:

Maybe because there's no motivation for scientific/medical/technological discovery?


Spike Lee calls me an uneducated fool in 5, 4, 3...

[Jenovah]

After reading your post I have to deduce that you are either uneducated, a troll, a blind Barack Obama supporter or an anti-American. My hopes are former, to latter.

Socialism doesn't work. Look at Russia. Look at North Korea. The theory might have looked good on paper, but it's a ship full of holes, in the real world.

Yet, having read some of your other posts, America is the shit-stain on the planet. Isn't that just about right?

I never said I endorsed socialism, I just don't understand how universal healthcare will immediately turn the US into a totalitarian socialist state..

Isn't it plausible for a country to just use certain aspects of socialism for certain areas such as healthcare?

Please stop acting like everything even slightly leftish is inevitably communist in nature, because that's just stupid.

[Fungus Amungus]

Glenn Beck is a badass and he's a personal hero.

I never said I endorsed socialism, I just don't understand how universal healthcare will immediately turn the US into a totalitarian socialist state..

Isn't it plausible for a country to just use certain aspects of socialism for certain areas such as healthcare?

Please stop acting like everything even slightly leftish is inevitably communist in nature, because that's just stupid.

Universal Healthcare will destroy the great strides we've made in medical technology. To get things working faster and cheaper. Also it would destroy the quality of our healthcare. I don't want to go the hospital and wait in line and be treated like I'm at the DMV. The sad fact is when the government gets it's hands on daily parts of life they fuck it up.

[Mr. Heskey]

Is there anything good that can come from universal health care? People should be forced to fend for themselves.

If 12 year old crippled orphan Johnny needs a new kidney, he better get a job. If we had UHC, everybody would be forced to pay entire pennies for his surgery, that's money that could have been spent towards causes that benefit everybody, like Iraq and the future war with Iran.

You're right. I should be forced to pay for a fatass's triple bypass heart surgery because he chooses not to exercise. Or a smoker's chemotherapy for lung cancer.

We should also sacrifice all of the medical technology and innovation that comes from the free market system of the US. The US is far and away the most advanced country medically.

Isn't it plausible for a country to just use certain aspects of socialism for certain areas such as healthcare?

We already do and a lot of it works (for which I am thankful). I'm glad that we have tax-funded firefighters and police officers and highways. I'm also glad that I get a free education (even though public schools aren't exactly the greatest). I just want it to end there.

[texmaster]

Maybe because there's no motivation for scientific/medical/technological discovery?


Spike Lee calls me an uneducated fool in 5, 4, 3...

If he does, consider it a badge of honor.

Obama didn't win most liberal Senator for being a moderate.

[Henkie]

We already do and a lot of it works (for which I am thankful). I'm glad that we have tax-funded firefighters and police officers and highways. I'm also glad that I get a free education (even though public schools aren't exactly the greatest). I just want it to end there.

You approve of that?! But it's socialism, it's what Stalin would've done! :ahhh:

Really, the whole civilized world has some form of universal health-care and even the US has some amount of income distribution. It's not going to destroy your country and it's not the end of all that is good and holy in this world. I honestly don't understand the problem you have with this...

[Fungus Amungus]

You approve of that?! But it's socialism, it's what Stalin would've done! :ahhh:

Really, the whole civilized world has some form of universal health-care and even the US has some amount of income distribution. It's not going to destroy your country and it's not the end of all that is good and holy in this world. I honestly don't understand the problem you have with this...

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

[Henkie]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Well, that's a good arguement, you totally convinced me...

I'm just a bit confused, where exactly am I wrong? Doesn't the US have any form of redistribution, or are there other Western countries that don't have any form of universal health care? Or do you believe Stalin would be opposed to paying the police from state-sources?

[American Infidel]

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Heinie should sig that...

[Henkie]

Heinie should sig that...

Honestly, I'd quite like to put a half-decent insult in my sig if it came from the right person, just to compensate a bit, but if I try to change my sig now, I'd have to shorten to a max of 5 lines, so I'm not touching it, not even for good commentary.

[Fungus Amungus]

Sure it wouldn't literally destroy the country, but ever step too communism/socialism is another step in the grave. There is a reason why China is changing to a democracy and why the Soviet Union fell. After people live in a country where they only exist as a pair of hands in the workplace and faceless being, they tend to get pissy. America offers people who do work hard and who standout to be successful. If people want to be rich so bad work hard at it. Trump, Bill Gates, Murdoch, etc didn't get rich by sitting around and bitching about it.

[American Infidel]

Honestly, I'd quite like to put a half-decent insult in my sig if it came from the right person, just to compensate a bit, but if I try to change my sig now, I'd have to shorten to a max of 5 lines, so I'm not touching it, not even for good commentary.

Hell, if I were a self-absorbed egomaniac, I'd feel the same way. Leave it. It's all you have going for you.

I'm too sexy for my shirt, by the way. I'd sig that, but I'm just not the type to self-congratulate.

So, you'll excuse me for not taking your posts seriously. Er..that is, unless I decide on a serious discussion about megalomania and it's inherent dangers. Don't call me, I'll call you...

[Thomson]

Universal Health Care doesn't equal communism ffs

America spends more money on public services and have more public services than any other country in the world.

so don't start with the "fuck socialism" bullshit.

[pudgmo]

You approve of that?! But it's socialism, it's what Stalin would've done! :ahhh:

Really, the whole civilized world has some form of universal health-care and even the US has some amount of income distribution. It's not going to destroy your country and it's not the end of all that is good and holy in this world. I honestly don't understand the problem you have with this...
I don't get it either. Medical breakthroughs are coming from universities and labs funded by drug companies. Universal Health care wouldn't change that. We'll still need universities and drug companies and they'll still be making money, wtf?
I have no problem with us citizens being able to go and see a doctor and let the dr. deal with billing the fed.
Oh wait, what's this thread about? Oh yeah, Obama, the candidate pushing for more transparency at the federal level has a secret agenda.

[Deamatix]

Sure it wouldn't literally destroy the country, but ever step too communism/socialism is another step in the grave.

Then somebody better warn Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the U.K that they are taking one step in the grave!

Link (http://alessonaday.wordpress.com/2007/06/19/sicko-list-of-commie-pinko-countries-with-universal-health-care-socialized-medicine/)

[Fungus Amungus]

Then somebody better warn Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the U.K that they are taking one step in the grave!

Link (http://alessonaday.wordpress.com/2007/06/19/sicko-list-of-commie-pinko-countries-with-universal-health-care-socialized-medicine/)


Yeah they don't have 350 million fucking people. Not to mention Michael Moore can suck a fat dick.

[Thomson]

no EU has 500million

[Henkie]

Sure it wouldn't literally destroy the country, but ever step too communism/socialism is another step in the grave. There is a reason why China is changing to a democracy and why the Soviet Union fell. After people live in a country where they only exist as a pair of hands in the workplace and faceless being, they tend to get pissy. America offers people who do work hard and who standout to be successful. If people want to be rich so bad work hard at it. Trump, Bill Gates, Murdoch, etc didn't get rich by sitting around and bitching about it.

Argh! The concept-confusion is too much! Socialism =/= communism, there's difference. Socialist =/= undemocratic. Socialism =/= total distruction of the free market. On the one hand you have near-anarchistic unbridled free-market capitalism, on the other hand you have totalitarianist communism, and socialism tries to find some balance.

Also, technically, the democratic reforms of Gorbatjov were a mayor factor in the fall of the USSR, and China may have realised that it's easier to extort people if you don't have to garantuee them an income. And universal health care is not directly handing out money, so people might still starve if they don't work, they'll just not die of cancer while starving.

Hell, if I were a self-absorbed egomaniac, I'd feel the same way.

I'd definately sig that.

[modogthemonkey]

Personally I don't think the biggest, the richest, the most developed and the most powerful country in the world could afford a universal health system for its people. Who made it biggest, the richest, the most developed and the most powerful country in the world.

The money best spent else where like going to the moon and the future war with Iran.

[Fungus Amungus]

Look this arguement between what is better can rage on forever. I'm sticking to non socialized medicine non socialist ways. Like someone said earlier schooling and public works is good enough for me.

[Mr. Heskey]

You approve of that?! But it's socialism, it's what Stalin would've done! :ahhh:

Really, the whole civilized world has some form of universal health-care and even the US has some amount of income distribution. It's not going to destroy your country and it's not the end of all that is good and holy in this world. I honestly don't understand the problem you have with this...

Yeah, I have no problem with it. But in the long run, the free market is truly the better route to go. But like I said, I have absolutely not qualms about funding some things with taxes.

[jajo]

Also, technically, the democratic reforms of Gorbatjov were a mayor factor in the fall of the USSR

:err: are you saying USSR would not fall if those were not implemented or do you just write stuff like that to tie your arguments to historical events of which you know nothing about?

[Mojoe77]

People are okay with the fact that their tax money is being spent on some person they don't even know? I should be responsible for paying for someone's surgery? What's next? Do I have to pay for their car insurance, home insurance, and funeral, too? Do I have to pay for their food? Do people really want the government to baby sit them?

Get a job, get some health insurance, and stop expecting other people to take care of you.

[SouthernPatriot]

People are okay with the fact that their tax money is being spent on some person they don't even know? I should be responsible for paying for someone's surgery? What's next? Do I have to pay for their car insurance, home insurance, and funeral, too? Do I have to pay for their food? Do people really want the government to baby sit them?

Get a job, get some health insurance, and stop expecting other people to take care of you.

You just hit the nail on the head!

Why change a system that has worked for us fine since the very beginning? It just doesn't make any sense!

[Henkie]

People are okay with the fact that their tax money is being spent on some person they don't even know? I should be responsible for paying for someone's surgery? What's next? Do I have to pay for their car insurance, home insurance, and funeral, too? Do I have to pay for their food? Do people really want the government to baby sit them?

Get a job, get some health insurance, and stop expecting other people to take care of you.

You do understand it works two ways, right?

People you don't know would pay for your surgery aswell. You do this not because you really care about the people you save, but because more people will get surgery, and there is a chance you, or somebody you do know and care about, will get one of those. It is a abstract form of self-interest, if you will.

[Mojoe77]

You do understand it works two ways, right?

People you don't know would pay for your surgery aswell. You do this not because you really care about the people you save, but because more people will get surgery, and there is a chance you, or somebody you do know and care about, will get one of those. It is a abstract form of self-interest, if you will.

I understand this works both ways, but i'm still not okay with my money being spent on someone else's healthcare when it could be used for my healthcare or for something else I need. I don't think people should be obligated to pay into a pool of money that everyone shares; what ever happened to earning your money?

Speaking of surgeries, are you aware that due to universal health care surgery wait times are ridiculously long? We're talking months here. Not to mention, the amount of money that would be needed to be spend on universal health care. Also, do you know what happens when something is free? The quality is shit and people take advantage of it.

People need to learn to take care of themselves. If I need help from someone i'll ask a family member, not some random person walking down the street. Matter of fact, I suggest that every American who is AGAINST universal health care ask someone who is for universal health care this question: Will you pay my $20 co-payment for me today? If they say no, then their argument for universal health care goes out the window.

I look at universal health care the same way I would look at a universal car insurance policy. Are you okay with paying taxes out of your paycheck to take care of someone else? Are you okay with fixing someone else's car when you can spend that money on something else you need?

[Jenovah]

:err: are you saying USSR would not fall if those were not implemented or do you just write stuff like that to tie your arguments to historical events of which you know nothing about?

The USSR tried to reverse the effects Stalinism had on the country, but in the end those changes turned out to be too great and a fall would probably be inevitable unless the USSR went back to their stalinist ways, which would be disastrous for the common soviet citizen.

[Fungus Amungus]

The USSR citizens saw just enough freedom they craved for more.

[jajo]

The USSR tried to reverse the effects Stalinism had on the country, but in the end those changes turned out to be too great and a fall would probably be inevitable unless the USSR went back to their stalinist ways, which would be disastrous for the common soviet citizen.

the fall of USSR was inevitable regardless of the path they would choose to take. That's what I meant by my comment

[Henkie]

the fall of USSR was inevitable regardless of the path they would choose to take. That's what I meant by my comment

We're talking "what if"-history here, that's a very complicated, if not dubious sort of history. The point is, that in the chronological order of events, and the usual historical narrative, the fall of the USSR was preceded by a turn towards more freedom and democracy. How this affected the fall of the USSR is up for interpretation, but I'll admit that most likely the fall had more to do with the communistic dictatorship in the decades before. How much exactly and in what way is a complicated discussion that doesn't really add much to this discussion, so I'll leave it at that.

[Fungus Amungus]

People need incentives and like to know they're unique. USSR didn't provide that.

[Henkie]

People need incentives and like to know they're unique. USSR didn't provide that.

I gave you a perfect way out with this statement:

How much exactly and in what way is a complicated discussion that doesn't really add much to this discussion, so I'll leave it at that.

Now, I can tell you, I've got the books right here. I can tell you how the USSR offered loads of incentive for individual performances, they just (mostly) weren't monetary. I'm also going to point out that getting exactly the same paycheck as all your colleagues doesn't necessarily constitute a sign of uniqueness. And there's more wrong with your statement.

We can either actually have that discussion, or I'll let you out if you just ignore this post. I'll have to warn you, the usual American anti-communist propaganda is usually quite wrong and biased, and I won't be gentle.

[Danimal87]

I find it a bit strange that a Dutch Communist is trying to tell Americans what type of medical care they should have.

[pudgmo]

I just don't see how we tolerate this...

Health insurance? That didn't protect 1 million Americans who were financially ruined by illness or medical bills last year.

But the bigger surprise was that three-quarters of the medically bankrupt had health insurance.

source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9447-2005Feb8.html):2004
Insurance companies make money by denying coverage.
That's a real good system we have there.:banghead::banghead:

[Henkie]

For some reason I feel you're talking to me. I would like to point out that I'm not a communist, I do not believe in a revolution from the working class, I do not think totalitarianism is a good first step on the way to paradise and I do not think money is the only reason things happen.

I do believe that certain things can't be accomplished purely through the free market. National defense, for one, or the creation of a proper infrastructure, for another. As such, the state serves a purpose in this world and giving this state certain responsibilities is not necessarily a step towards the end of all that is good and holy. I also believe that a universal health care has practical benefits for more people than just those to poor to afford insurance. As such, UH is not just a humanitarian exercise.

I get the feeling that the extreme focus purely on the cost of the thing, rather than the potential gains and also the dominance of anti-Communist propaganda prevent a lot of people from taking an objective approach to a system that has proven usefull in a large part of the world.

Furthermore, I am not telling anybody what to do, I'm just loudly wondering why anybody wouldn't want to do it. There is a difference.

And finally, my problem with Fungus' remark is not that I believe the USSR to have been a happy place to live. There were good reasons why people wanted strong economic reforms and more democracy in Russia and a lot of those reasons were strongly connected to problems inherently connected to communism. The need to feel unique, however, is not one of those. It is, imo, a retarded idea that a different paycheck and the personal identity trump the lack of basic supplies and the historical fear of being arrested and killed for saying you didn't like what Stalin had done with his moustache.

[Dayve]

You just hit the nail on the head!

Why change a system that has worked for us fine since the very beginning? It just doesn't make any sense!

Ask the people who died because their health insurance didn't cover what they needed if the system worked for them...

[PabloHoney]

All the people arguing universal healthcare just seem to be a bunch of self dickheads who think why should i pay more? The face you can put a price on a human life is fucking disgusting, Cya in hell nobheads.

[Sketcher]

Ask the people who died because their health insurance didn't cover what they needed if the system worked for them...

Ask the people who choose not to be insured why the government should force them to get government health insurance. Or ask the poor people without insurance why the rich should be able to get free government health care. Both would be true under Obama's and Hillary's plans.

The fact is, there are a lot of people who are uninsured because their hospital bills are actually cheaper than what their insurance payments would be. The Democrats take these people into account when they tell you how many people "suffer" from not being insured. You also have to take into account that the U.S. is the world leader in terms of medical research and development. A universal heathcare system in this country would destroy that. Other countries can afford "free" healthcare because they rely on the U.S. to provide them with a lot of their medical technology.

So stop arguing about how well universal healthcare works in other countries. The fact is, it's WON'T work HERE.

[Mojoe77]

I just don't see how we tolerate this...

source (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9447-2005Feb8.html):2004

Insurance companies make money by denying coverage.
That's a real good system we have there.:banghead::banghead:

And you think universal health care is any better than the one we have already? No system is perfect and universal health care is not the solution to the problems we have with our health care.

Regarding the article:
As part of a research study at Harvard University, our researchers interviewed 1,771 Americans in bankruptcy courts across the country. To our surprise, half said that illness or medical bills drove them to bankruptcy. So each year, 2 million Americans -- those who file and their dependents -- face the double disaster of illness and bankruptcy

I'm a little confused by this, so if someone can clear this up, please do: how did the article go from "1,771 people, half of which bankrupcy occurs due to health insurance", then they throw in "2 million americans face the double disaster of illness and bankrupcy"? Where are they getting 2 million from? Are they assuming? Is there any data?

[texmaster]

Hell, if I were a self-absorbed egomaniac, I'd feel the same way. Leave it. It's all you have going for you.

I'm too sexy for my shirt, by the way. I'd sig that, but I'm just not the type to self-congratulate.

So, you'll excuse me for not taking your posts seriously. Er..that is, unless I decide on a serious discussion about megalomania and it's inherent dangers. Don't call me, I'll call you...

Henkie lost all credibility long ago.

When asked repeadedly to back up his assertion that pedifilia is specifically against Sharia law. I asked him repeatedly to provide the law in Sharia and he once again ran from the thread.

He also claimed Turkey gained equality for women under Ataturk and when given direct evidence in the law that had to be changed just within the last 10 years to give women equal rights he once again ran from the thread.

As long as you are clear when you are debating Henkie, if he gets in a bind, he will never admit his mistakes and end up running from the thread then later when reminded, will claim he was simply "ignoring you" or "missed it".

Remember, this is the guy who said

I can't remember a single time I was actually wrong.

If anything is worthy of a sig, its this.

[shade]

I wrote an awesome post that got screwed up and not submitted... here is a 2nd try.


Lets say you run a burger joint. You have a competitor down the road. At the end of the year, through good management, you have $150,000 of profit. Your lazy/less smart/worse location/bad food/etc competitor lost $20k and is considering laying off a burger flipper to try to make ends meet next year.

Should the government force you to give $20k to your competitor so he does not have to lay off his cook?



In my opinion, you should let your competitor's business fail. Then his customers will come to you. Then your increased demand might force you to hire a few more burger flippers. Then that layed off burger flipper has a more secure job working for you.

This scenario happens every day. Oil companies are taxed and the money is used to subsidize ethanol, etc etc etc. The government takes money from success (business or people) and gives it to failure (people who squander it).

In the long run, this always fails. It always has and always will. Unfortunately, it hurts a lot of people in the mean time.

[pudgmo]

And you think universal health care is any better than the one we have already? No system is perfect and universal health care is not the solution to the problems we have with our health care.

Regarding the article:


I'm a little confused by this, so if someone can clear this up, please do: how did the article go from "1,771 people, half of which bankrupcy occurs due to health insurance", then they throw in "2 million americans face the double disaster of illness and bankrupcy"? Where are they getting 2 million from? Are they assuming? Is there any data?

The research, carried out jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School, and supported by a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, is the first in-depth study of medical causes of bankruptcy. With the cooperation of bankruptcy judges in five Federal districts (in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas) they administered questionnaires to 1,771 bankruptcy filers and reviewed their court records. 931 of the filers subsequently underwent more detailed interviews about their financial and medical circumstances. The researchers found that illness and medical bills contributed to at least 46.2%, and as many as 54.5% of all bankruptcy filings.http://www.hms.harvard.edu/news/releases/2_2Himmelstein.html

The study estimates that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans annually -- counting debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children.
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/bankruptcy_study.html

1,618,987 bankruptcy cases filed in fiscal year 2004. They're counting spouses and dependents for each one of those.

[Henkie]

And you think universal health care is any better than the one we have already? No system is perfect and universal health care is not the solution to the problems we have with our health care.

What do you feel the problem is? If the problem is that poor people are not getting treated, UH is a real and guaranteed solution, because the problem is in a lack of funds and UH finds a place to get money: rich people. The only question is: is this fair? That is a very personal question, and I tend to say "Yes, oh God, Yes!", while other people might give answers like [bit of a bias]"Don't you be touching my moneys, die for all I care, as long as I don't have to pay for the funeral"[/bit of a bias]


I'm a little confused by this, so if someone can clear this up, please do: how did the article go from "1,771 people, half of which bankrupcy occurs due to health insurance", then they throw in "2 million americans face the double disaster of illness and bankrupcy"? Where are they getting 2 million from? Are they assuming? Is there any data?

This is statistics. I'm guessing that there's roughly 4 million people going bankrupt every year. Out of the 1771 people they asked, half went bankrupt because of medical bills, so they assume that goes for the entire group of 4 million people aswell. This is how most statistics are made, and as long as you don't care about a couple of percents either way, they're probably right.

And @Texmaster: will you calm down already, I gave you a source for the pedophilia claim, twice, and I apologize if my life doesn't revolve around our debates, but sometimes I do other things for a couple of days and I lose track of the threads on here. If you desperately want a response on another topic, send me a PM and I'll respond in the original thread, but don't start getting this thread completely off-topic aswell.

Edit: Shade, thank you for the high-school economy lesson. But you might remember that in the basic classical model there is eventually no profit. In fact, the very existance of profit on any significant time-span is a sign of market-failing, theoretically. And ofcourse, if we didn't make some profit that'd be very bad indeed, but it might be a sign that either the basic model doesn't apply or that this is a slightly more complicated affair.

[Mr. Heskey]

You do understand it works two ways, right?

People you don't know would pay for your surgery aswell. You do this not because you really care about the people you save, but because more people will get surgery, and there is a chance you, or somebody you do know and care about, will get one of those. It is a abstract form of self-interest, if you will.

No, probably not. Because I'm young and fit. There are soon to be a lot of old people in the US. There are a lot of fat people and a lot of smokers. There are a lot of people who would abuse the system.

Why should I take a few thousand out of my paycheck for UH when the only time I even sniff a hospital is when I go for a check-up every other year?

[Chupacabra]

there is a difference between Authoritarian Socialism, and Democratic Socialism, look it up.

[Mojoe77]

What do you feel the problem is? If the problem is that poor people are not getting treated, UH is a real and guaranteed solution, because the problem is in a lack of funds and UH finds a place to get money: rich people. The only question is: is this fair? That is a very personal question, and I tend to say "Yes, oh God, Yes!", while other people might give answers like [bit of a bias]"Don't you be touching my moneys, die for all I care, as long as I don't have to pay for the funeral"[/bit of a bias]



So you're saying that the rich people should be paying for poor people's health care? If that's the case, why don't the rich people pay for the poor people's housing and grocery bills while they're at it. Why should people be spending their hard earned money on themselves and someone they don't know? Why can't people take resonpsibility and take care of themselves?

[BlueQuarter]

People are okay with the fact that their tax money is being spent on some person they don't even know? I should be responsible for paying for someone's surgery? What's next? Do I have to pay for their car insurance, home insurance, and funeral, too? Do I have to pay for their food? Do people really want the government to baby sit them?

Get a job, get some health insurance, and stop expecting other people to take care of you.

Terrible way to look at this..

We get taxed harder here... but by golly if I break my leg or my GF gets pregnant.. Don't gotta worry about a thing.

[Henkie]

No, probably not. Because I'm young and fit. There are soon to be a lot of old people in the US. There are a lot of fat people and a lot of smokers. There are a lot of people who would abuse the system.

Why should I take a few thousand out of my paycheck for UH when the only time I even sniff a hospital is when I go for a check-up every other year?

Interesting thing is, that eventually everybody gets sick and dies. Researches have shown that a steep decline in smoking in Holland (when we found out it caused cancer) did not, and on the long term most likely will not, have an effect on total medical costs. A bit simplified, the argument was that if you don't die of lungcancer at 60, you'll die of braincancer at 80, for the total cost it doesn't matter.

So you're saying that the rich people should be paying for poor people's health care? If that's the case, why don't the rich people pay for the poor people's housing and grocery bills while they're at it. Why should people be spending their hard earned money on themselves and someone they don't know? Why can't people take resonpsibility and take care of themselves?

Because they have no money, that's kind of the problem with poor people.

And ofcourse, that's not what you meant, you meant to point out that most people can get a job if they had invested in themselves and that unemployment is to blaim on poor people and stuff like that. But a bit of kindness to people who are poor never hurt anybody, especially since in the case of UH, poor people aren't getting the money themselves, so they will still starve if they don't get payed some way. The incentive to work will still exist.

[BlueQuarter]

So you're saying that the rich people should be paying for poor people's health care? If that's the case, why don't the rich people pay for the poor people's housing and grocery bills while they're at it. Why should people be spending their hard earned money on themselves and someone they don't know? Why can't people take resonpsibility and take care of themselves?


I think it's a right to have someone there to help you when you're sick.

Groceries and housing is survival necessity, BUT you can't maintain either if your sick or hurt.

No contest.

[godlessmath]

I wrote an awesome post that got screwed up and not submitted... here is a 2nd try.


Lets say you run a burger joint. You have a competitor down the road...

This is a great analogy, in theory. The problem is, that people don't die and there isn't a major public health crisis when the other Burger Joint fails and closes down. I think this is the mistake on one side of the UHC debate- trying to apply the principles of the Free Market Economy to a service which decidedly doesn't operate on these principles. For example, I don't go to the local hospital because I heard it has the best and cheapest service, I go there because I broke my leg and near passed out and that is where the ambulance is taking me.


So you're saying that the rich people should be paying for poor people's health care? If that's the case, why don't the rich people pay for the poor people's housing and grocery bills while they're at it. Why should people be spending their hard earned money on themselves and someone they don't know? Why can't people take resonpsibility and take care of themselves?

Does this include the children of people who, for whatever reason, don't have health insurance?

[texmaster]

And @Texmaster: will you calm down already, I gave you a source for the pedophilia claim, twice,

Actually, you didn't and if you still want to claim it, go back to that thread and post. No PM needed. I'm requesting it now as I did when I originally posted it.

and I apologize if my life doesn't revolve around our debates, but sometimes I do other things for a couple of days and I lose track of the threads on here.

Ah yes the old ignore excuse followed with the "I didn't see it". It would be more amusing if I hadn't predicted that would be your exact response.

And isn't it interesting you didn't address the Turkey point. Again. :rollseyes

Is it really that awful to admit you were wrong?

[Sketcher]

We get taxed harder here... but by golly if I break my leg or my GF gets pregnant.. Don't gotta worry about a thing.

Candians may not worry about a thing, but we would - our economy collapsing. Read my post on the previous page in this thread. You cannot argue for universal healthcare in the U.S. by showing it's effects in other countries. The situations are different and the effects would be different.

[Henkie]

Actually, you didn't and if you still want to claim it, go back to that thread and post. No PM needed. I'm requesting it now as I did when I originally posted it.



Ah yes the old ignore excuse followed with the "I didn't see it". It would be more amusing if I hadn't predicted that would be your exact response.

And isn't it interesting you didn't address the Turkey point. Again. :rollseyes

Is it really that awful to admit you were wrong?

I showed you the wikipedia link and the other link already. I've posted in the thread and I responded to the Turkey thing the first time you made that exact same point. I see no need to keep repeating my arguments, just because you do. Now, for the last time, please stop hijacking other topics because you feel I ignored you somewhere. If you do feel so, PM me, and I'll probably respond, but stop fucking hijacking random topics just because you feel the need to be acknowledged.

[_Joe]

As a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and a citizen in a small town in central PA, Obama probably lost my vote through his comments on the state of small-town America. I might actually vote for McCain now. Also, if the quote is publicized enough, McCain may actually win PA this year if Obama is the candidate. :(

[Stanky105]

As a citizen of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and a citizen in a small town in central PA, Obama probably lost my vote through his comments on the state of small-town America. I might actually vote for McCain now. Also, if the quote is publicized enough, McCain may actually win PA this year if Obama is the candidate. :(

McCain will win the presidency unless he has some huge scandal yet to be revealed.

[texmaster]

I showed you the wikipedia link and the other link already. I've posted in the thread and I responded to the Turkey thing the first time you made that exact same point. I see no need to keep repeating my arguments, just because you do. Now, for the last time, please stop hijacking other topics because you feel I ignored you somewhere. If you do feel so, PM me, and I'll probably respond, but stop fucking hijacking random topics just because you feel the need to be acknowledged.

No highjacking and you are simply not telling the truth. You never ever addressed the evidence I gave you proving women's rights were not addressed under Ataturk.

Now that you are finally addressing the issue, I'll see you in that thread.

[SmartPolitician]

dont bother, 'texmaster,' from my early stage of membership to the site, i have noted that 'Henkie' is a 'europe-traitor' and in support of 'minority- invasion' and 'minority-take-over-tactics.' In addition 'henkie' thinks a muslim in europe have right for political power.

[_Joe]

dont bother, 'texmaster,' from my early stage of membership to the site, i have noted that 'Henkie' is a 'europe-traitor' and in support of 'minority- invasion' and 'minority-take-over-tactics'

He's from Europe....

[Henkie]

He's from Europe....

Yeah, so I'm betraying my home-continent by thinking that citizenship is a more significant qualification for political power than religion. I should be hung, drawn and quartered!

[Jenovah]

Yeah, so I'm betraying my home-continent by thinking that citizenship is a more significant qualification for political power than religion. I should be hung, drawn and quartered!

You traitor, why would you even think that muslims citizens are people too!? :mad:


Anyway, that comment Obama made was rather inappropriate and a rather incorrect generalization IMO.

[Henkie]

You traitor, why would you even think that muslims citizens are people too!? :mad:


Anyway, that comment Obama made was rather inappropriate and a rather incorrect generalization IMO.

Yeah, I know, I just can't help myself!

But aren't you talking about the other "bash Obama"-thread where he made some private, yet rude statements about NRA-loving Christians? This is the one about how he's a marxist because he wants UH...

[American Infidel]

there is a difference between Authoritarian Socialism, and Democratic Socialism, look it up.

Wait a second. Are you trying to imply that Democratic Socialism is much better than Authoritarian Socialism?

Isn't that like trying to compare huge taxation by the government being better, as opposed to an armed robbery?

Socialism is evil, my friend. I don't even compare one type to the other.

[Henkie]

+10 subtlety-points for Heather!

[American Infidel]

+10 subtlety-points for Heather!

+1 post for Heinie!

Do you have nothing of value to say, or are you simply looking to further your post-count?

Post count means nothing, by the way. Nothing.

[Henkie]

+1 post for Heinie!

Do you have nothing of value to say, or are you simply looking to further your post-count?

Post count means nothing, by the way. Nothing.

Ever noticed that the only people who say size doesn't are the ones who lack in size?

My point was that your view shows an extreme lack of subtlety and I wanted to make that point in a sarcastic manner. Although I have never cared for, or bragged about, my postcount. It's attention and praise I crave.

[drahkcorjc]

I wanna go back to the socialized vs. free-market healthcare argument that was going on on the first page of this thread for a moment.

I can say from my experience with both systems, that I 100% stand behind America's free-market healthcare system. Yes, it needs some changes, but it works.
I'm in Europe right now, and I cannot fucking wait to go back home in a couple weeks so I can go to the dentist. I have a constant toothache, and I'm pretty sure it's a cavity (although I've never had one before so I don't know).
I went to the dentist here and told him of the ache. He looked in my mouth with a little mirror for about 5 seconds, said "everything's fine." and saw me to the door. That was it. No X-ray, nothing.
Now I have to endure this little ache until I can go home and get some fucking civilized healthcare. It's ridiculous.

[Henkie]

Talk about the effeciency caused by the free market...

Untill there's a cavity he can see, there's nothing the dentist can actually do about, except for things you can come up with yourself (painkillers!). What the dentist did, was saving time, effort and money because he knew there was no point in further investigation. While a free-market dentist would treat you like a cash-pinata and do all kinds of unnecessary tests, because he knows somebody'd pay the bill, whether the tests were pointless or not. While it might make you feel all taken care of, it is not in so many words what people say they want.

[chalupa]

I wanna go back to the socialized vs. free-market healthcare argument that was going on on the first page of this thread for a moment.

I can say from my experience with both systems, that I 100% stand behind America's free-market healthcare system. Yes, it needs some changes, but it works.
I'm in Europe right now, and I cannot fucking wait to go back home in a couple weeks so I can go to the dentist. I have a constant toothache, and I'm pretty sure it's a cavity (although I've never had one before so I don't know).
I went to the dentist here and told him of the ache. He looked in my mouth with a little mirror for about 5 seconds, said "everything's fine." and saw me to the door. That was it. No X-ray, nothing.
Now I have to endure this little ache until I can go home and get some fucking civilized healthcare. It's ridiculous.

Don't lie, you can't get treatment for the clap. You can't wait to get home to get some salve and rub it all over your privates.

As for universal health care vs not, we DO have universal health care in the form of mandatory emergency treatment and federal and state grants for those who cannot afford it.

I see people in the emergency room for a fever because they have no insurance, no primary care physician, and no idea that you take fucking TYLENOL and sleep it off. Instead, I'm standing there with a gaping head wound, blood running down my face. It's ok, though, because this system couldn't be improved.

Bullshit.

We need to be honest with ourselves. If we wanted free market health care, true free market health care, then the HMO's and the hospital systems, and everything else associated with health care in the country would have to be tossed right out the window.

If we want to standardize the already socialized aspect of this thing, then we should do it, and do it right.

A two-tiered approach. Private AND social health care. Just because you are poor does not entitle you to the same level of care that I receive. Part of my tax money gets syphoned off anyway to help those in need, yet they are clogging up my system. Fine, I'll help cover their costs, and they can get the second level of treatment. However, and this is the beauty, instead of individuals letting festering problems fester, they can get some primary care work done, and keep the costs down.

Is it easy? No. Will it save money? I think so, in the long haul. My tax contributions could hypothetically go down, and there would be some incentive for private companies to focus on the govt sponsored side, thereby increasing efficiency. Will it cause corruption? Sure. Just as much as any other govt funded program does.

Two tiered FTW. I can keep rolling along and paying out the ass to my health plan in the off chance that I'll need it. In the meantime, a smaller proportion of my tax money will be used up by those who don't pay in as much.

[Jenovah]

Don't lie, you can't get treatment for the clap. You can't wait to get home to get some salve and rub it all over your privates.

As for universal health care vs not, we DO have universal health care in the form of mandatory emergency treatment and federal and state grants for those who cannot afford it.

I see people in the emergency room for a fever because they have no insurance, no primary care physician, and no idea that you take fucking TYLENOL and sleep it off. Instead, I'm standing there with a gaping head wound, blood running down my face. It's ok, though, because this system couldn't be improved.

Bullshit.

We need to be honest with ourselves. If we wanted free market health care, true free market health care, then the HMO's and the hospital systems, and everything else associated with health care in the country would have to be tossed right out the window.

If we want to standardize the already socialized aspect of this thing, then we should do it, and do it right.

A two-tiered approach. Private AND social health care. Just because you are poor does not entitle you to the same level of care that I receive. Part of my tax money gets syphoned off anyway to help those in need, yet they are clogging up my system. Fine, I'll help cover their costs, and they can get the second level of treatment. However, and this is the beauty, instead of individuals letting festering problems fester, they can get some primary care work done, and keep the costs down.

Is it easy? No. Will it save money? I think so, in the long haul. My tax contributions could hypothetically go down, and there would be some incentive for private companies to focus on the govt sponsored side, thereby increasing efficiency. Will it cause corruption? Sure. Just as much as any other govt funded program does.

Two tiered FTW. I can keep rolling along and paying out the ass to my health plan in the off chance that I'll need it. In the meantime, a smaller proportion of my tax money will be used up by those who don't pay in as much.

Quoted for Truth.

Doesn't Australia use the two-tier-system already?

[American Infidel]

Bah! The problem with America's health care system resides in the frivolous lawsuits, by trial lawyers, like John "$1200-dollar-hair-cut" Edwards.

That's what's causing our doctors to leave my state, in order to pay for less insurance, and a fear a Democratic rebuttal, in court, for Mother Nature's way of acting "naturally".

It's sad that species die off and plants are being eaten by bugs and racism is still being promoted as a means to an agenda.

We all die, eventually. For one reason or another, people want to assume it's someone else's fault, and expect monetary compensation for it. As if that will help with the loss of Granpa Jones...

Have IQ's dropped sharply, since I've been gone? -- Ripley's quote, from Aliens, that is frighteningly prophetic, in today's terms.

[Mr. Heskey]

Don't lie, you can't get treatment for the clap. You can't wait to get home to get some salve and rub it all over your privates.

As for universal health care vs not, we DO have universal health care in the form of mandatory emergency treatment and federal and state grants for those who cannot afford it.

I see people in the emergency room for a fever because they have no insurance, no primary care physician, and no idea that you take fucking TYLENOL and sleep it off. Instead, I'm standing there with a gaping head wound, blood running down my face. It's ok, though, because this system couldn't be improved.

Bullshit.

We need to be honest with ourselves. If we wanted free market health care, true free market health care, then the HMO's and the hospital systems, and everything else associated with health care in the country would have to be tossed right out the window.




Are HMOs to be considered 'non-free market' since they are provided thru a company rather than the government?

[drahkcorjc]

Talk about the effeciency caused by the free market...

Untill there's a cavity he can see, there's nothing the dentist can actually do about, except for things you can come up with yourself (painkillers!). What the dentist did, was saving time, effort and money because he knew there was no point in further investigation. While a free-market dentist would treat you like a cash-pinata and do all kinds of unnecessary tests, because he knows somebody'd pay the bill, whether the tests were pointless or not. While it might make you feel all taken care of, it is not in so many words what people say they want.

My little story was just the most recent example of my frustrations with this healthcare system. And the "unnecessary test" you refer to is a simple X-Ray. In America I get my teeth X-rayed every single time I go to the dentist. He tells me that it's not uncommon for cavaties to be invisible to the naked eye.
So yeah, I guess I just wanted to illustrate my perspective on things.

[Azwethinkweizm]

I remember in the 90's when there was a man who couldn't afford surgery and the doctor said "If you won't pay for it, Bill Clinton will."

Shame, shame, shame. Just remember, you will be paying more taxes for frivolous things like this and the national debt will never be paid off.

[Bergs]

Bah! The problem with America's health care system resides in the frivolous lawsuits, by trial lawyers, like John "$1200-dollar-hair-cut" Edwards.

"Frivolous" lawsuits (and I use that word very loosly since it has an actual definition that doesnt apply to 99% of lawsuits labeled as such) wouldn't be even be on the radar if the insurance companies would grow some balls and the legislatures would close some incredible loop holes in certain rules of evidence.

The insurance companies are the #1 culprit because of their incredible willingness to settle every claim that comes before them. They use a cost-benefit-analysis that limits itself to the case at hand whereas if they used a long-term CBA, the individual case might cost them more to litigate but it would discourage future attempts. They wont do that though because the long term costs are less measurable, although common sense tells us that if cases are costing litigators too much and they can't recover their fees, they will be more selective of what they will accept. The unethical trial lawyers and the litigants are a product of capitalism caused by the insurance companies handing out free money. The insurance companies then have the balls to go after the doctors! Its insane to blame the trial lawyers and litigants and give the insurance companies a pass.

And as far as the legislatures go, do you know that in the state of New York a podiatrist can give an expert opinion in a case involving neurology? Hello New York State, thats just stupid!

[Nocturnal]

I thought Obama was a teh muslim? No, I thought he was a radical black power christian? No..now he is a socialist?

Obama is not a socialist. This is pure nonsense. Even for a political attack piece of this simple minded. "Well, we don't really have any ammo, let's try to convince the morons in the US that he is a ....dun dun dun...Commie!!!" :rollseyes

People are okay with the fact that

their tax money is being spent on some person they don't even know? I should be responsible for paying for someone's surgery? What's next? Do I have to pay for their car insurance, home insurance, and funeral, too? Do I have to pay for their food? Do people really want the government to baby sit them?

Get a job, get some health insurance, and stop expecting other people to take care of you.

We pay for thousands of things for other people. I don't know why it's difficult to grasp that.


Universal Healthcare will destroy the great strides we've made in medical technology. To get things working faster and cheaper. Also it would destroy the quality of our healthcare. I don't want to go the hospital and wait in line and be treated like I'm at the DMV. The sad fact is when the government gets it's hands on daily parts of life they fuck it up.

People in the US wait longer for primary care than most nations with socialized medicine.

Bush is a liberal.

yeah yeah, everybody is a liberal

Or perhaps the republican spin machine is so retarded that they don't even have a cohesive thought pattern anymore.

Originally Posted by American Infidel
Bah! The problem with America's health care system resides in the frivolous lawsuits, by trial lawyers, like John "$1200-dollar-hair-cut" Edwards.

ha, like the republican politicians don't spend money on fancy haircuts, makeup, nice suits etc.?

[navi86]

Are HMOs to be considered 'non-free market' since they are provided thru a company rather than the government?
No because they were forced onto the market by the government in the 70's. HMOs are not products of the free market.

[Mr. Heskey]

No because they were forced onto the market by the government in the 70's. HMOs are not products of the free market.

Sorry, never knew that.

[Fungus Amungus]

People in the US wait longer for primary care than most nations with socialized medicine.



Show me. When someone needs immediate care for them to live they don't wait. They get the operation done right away. "Beneficial" operations, where it improves health, but isn't required to live, I can see that. Unless you pay then again it's right away. The reason why patients have to wait is because there is other patients in queue. Having more patients doesn't help. Also don't post a "fact" unless you back it up. YOu post like just because you say it means I'll believe it.

[Nocturnal]

Show me. When someone needs immediate care for them to live they don't wait. They get the operation done right away. "Beneficial" operations, where it improves health, but isn't required to live, I can see that. Unless you pay then again it's right away. The reason why patients have to wait is because there is other patients in queue. Having more patients doesn't help. Also don't post a "fact" unless you back it up. YOu post like just because you say it means I'll believe it.

They don't wait in other countries either. If you show up bleeding in front of a Canadian hospital (one of the longer wait times for healthcare) they don't hand you a clipboard and ask you to come back in 6 months.

Not finding the article I read on this the other day, but this one provides some insight.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2007/tc20070621_716260.htm
Despite spending lots more per capita on health care, the U.S. is often as bad or worse than other industrialized nations in wait times

Now to flip this around. Why do you "know" that the US has such a good wait time for doctors? Did you research it or did you just listen to some talking head somwhere?

[anti-liberal]

Now to flip this around. Why do you "know" that the US has such a good wait time for doctors? Did you research it or did you just listen to some talking head somwhere?

Not to make Fungus' arguement for him or anything; but, whenever I need a Doctor's opinion or medical advice on whats making me ill or whatever, I usually call them up and schedule an appointment. To this day, I don't think I've waited any longer than maybe a few days to get checked up; and usually the wait is because its not really serious and I have other things to do in the meantime.

For instance, I had 4 Wisdom Teeth removed back in Dec '07. They had actually asked me if I would be fine with scheduleing the surgery the very next morning barely 18 hours later. Since my teeth weren't really bothering me too much, and there were certain procedures I had to follow, I elected to postpone for a few weeks; but you get point. Afterwards, the oral surgeon who performed the operation even gave us his cell number, so I could contact him after-hours should any complications arise.

I don't know the National average wait-time, but for me, the quality and expediancy of my medical care throughout my life has been done with the utmost in professionalism with relative urgency.

[Fungus Amungus]

They don't wait in other countries either. If you show up bleeding in front of a Canadian hospital (one of the longer wait times for healthcare) they don't hand you a clipboard and ask you to come back in 6 months.

Not finding the article I read on this the other day, but this one provides some insight.
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2007/tc20070621_716260.htm


Now to flip this around. Why do you "know" that the US has such a good wait time for doctors? Did you research it or did you just listen to some talking head somwhere?

My family has had ALOT of experiences from simple colds to cancer. NEVER has anyone of them ever experienced wait. Maybe sitting the hospital waiting for the enxt availble physician, but that is too be expected. We something is an emergency they'll get to you right away.

[/Tilt/]

My father had an emergency once. Years ago he smashed his head on a piece of metal and was gushing blood out of the wound. He drove to the hosptial and after waiting for a good hour to see anyone, he was told that he needed to go see a specialist because there could have been nerve damage or something. Anyway, the hospital tells him he could wait until the next day for the specialist to come there, but that he should probably go see the specialist that day because it was an emergency. My father does not want to risk the nerve damage, and he cannot afford an ambulance ride to the specialist, so he drives himself over there while he is drifting in and out of conscienceness because of his blood loss. He could have crashed and died or killed someone else because he couldn't afford the ambulance ride. That's why I support universal healthcare.

[advertisehere]

i dont see how you arent paying for other people's health care when you have an insurance plan. the only differences i can see between and insurance company and a government providing health care is that the government is much larger & doesnt rip you off as much, unless the government health care is provided through insurance companies, which doesnt make much sense.
i also dont see why people who make absurd amounts of money shouldnt have to pay higher taxes than people in the middle class.
medical advances, if anything, are hindered by drug companies that are looking to make as much money as they can

[BlueTorpeedo]

Most of the arguments against socialized medicine work just as well against private medicine.

"Zomg, Socialized medicine will limit where I can receive treatment and who my doctor(s) are!"

~ And privatized insurance doesn't? (frankly, I would think it would be the opposite with socialized medicine.)

"ZOMG, I don't want my money paying for other people's care."

~ How do you think insurance works? (as I'm sure has already been pointed out)

"ZOMG, Socialized medicine would be a huge inefficient bureaucracy!"

~ And the current industry isn't? At least with a socialized system we wouldn't have to worry about the overhead of claims adjusters, account managers, underwriters, lawyers, actuaries, reinsurance, analysts, marketers... or the need to limit services to maintain a profit.

"ZOMG, there will be long wait times and it will be difficult to get fast medical services."

~ Do you live under a rock? We already have that problem NOW.

"ZOMG, I don't want the government regulating the health care industry!"

~ They already do.

[Mr. Heskey]

^^^

Where would all of the innovation and medical technology come from though? Where would all of the breakthrough medications come from?


Well to answer you question, the vast majority of it comes from the US. And it's because of the free market system.

[Henkie]

^^^

Where would all of the innovation and medical technology come from though? Where would all of the breakthrough medications come from?


Well to answer you question, the vast majority of it comes from the US. And it's because of the free market system.

But not in insurance companies or hospitals. Drugcompanies are technically something totally different and unrelated, which will still manage to make a whole lot of money. Possibly even more because they will be able to sell their drugs to more people.

[Lord Gold]

How can an ideology be "evil" and "bad"?

Socialism is a very practical ideology too, I don't understand the stigma.

Democracy has it's downfalls too. Like never lasting long. Like, in every single instance in history that there ever fucking was.

Socialism FTW. Seriously. You have to be retarded to deny it.

[Mr. Heskey]

How can an ideology be "evil" and "bad"?

Socialism is a very practical ideology too, I don't understand the stigma.

Democracy has it's downfalls too. Like never lasting long. Like, in every single instance in history that there ever fucking was.

Socialism FTW. Seriously. You have to be retarded to deny it.

Oh well, capitalism has only gotten the modern world where it is today. Yes, it is an evil system.

[Nocturnal]

Not to make Fungus' arguement for him or anything; but, whenever I need a Doctor's opinion or medical advice on whats making me ill or whatever, I usually call them up and schedule an appointment. To this day, I don't think I've waited any longer than maybe a few days to get checked up; and usually the wait is because its not really serious and I have other things to do in the meantime.

For instance, I had 4 Wisdom Teeth removed back in Dec '07. They had actually asked me if I would be fine with scheduleing the surgery the very next morning barely 18 hours later. Since my teeth weren't really bothering me too much, and there were certain procedures I had to follow, I elected to postpone for a few weeks; but you get point. Afterwards, the oral surgeon who performed the operation even gave us his cell number, so I could contact him after-hours should any complications arise.

I don't know the National average wait-time, but for me, the quality and expediancy of my medical care throughout my life has been done with the utmost in professionalism with relative urgency.

Why is everyone so certain that foreign nations have such longer wait times?

[ThoughtCriminal]

The medical insurance industry is run by fucking murderous criminals. Under the current system it's almost better sometimes to have no coverage, at least you won't waste money on monthly premiums only to have your claim denied when you need care, I experienced this first hand... Christ, these insurance companies are giving bonuses to policy agents who deny the most claims... sickening corporate sanctioned homicide, pure and simple.

[mr_sauce]

I live in Canada, a self-proclaimed socialist country. The health care system is cool but everything else sucks ass. Socialism is just another step towards communism. Everyone in Canada is so full of BS and so brainwashed by social engineering it makes me vomit constantly. Seriously I can't keep food down living here. I'm dangerously underweight, I could keel over at any moment. It is good to know at least I wont be paying for my stay at the hospital.

Socialized Medicine is a good thing but fuck socialism, fuck socialists and especially fuck sociology and no, I'm not some ignorant old redneck living in the woods. I am a young adult that somehow made it through the Canadian school system without being completely brainwashed. Actually I am simply impervious to mind fucking of any type. I think I might be one of only a lucky (or not so lucky) few people that cannot be controlled. Hypnosis seems to have no effect on me either, although I'm not sure if that is related.

It is a cold, dark and lonely world when you see things clearly and all of your former friends become slaves to the communist tyrants who wish to undermine our society by unraveling the threads that hold it together.

I'm not crazy, I live a normal life. but it is a depressing life. I see the world crumbling around me. I watch as the English language is slowly simplified to a series of grunts. I watch in horror as stupidity is rewarded and intellect is shunned. I am no rich elitist snob or some crazy Klan member. I am someone who fell through the cracks unnoticed by our oppressive overlords. Do not be fooled people.

:preachon:

[Mahalo]

I live in Canada, a self-proclaimed socialist country. The health care system is cool but everything else sucks ass. Socialism is just another step towards communism. Everyone in Canada is so full of BS and so brainwashed by social engineering it makes me vomit constantly. Seriously I can't keep food down living here. I'm dangerously underweight, I could keel over at any moment. It is good to know at least I wont be paying for my stay at the hospital.

Socialized Medicine is a good thing but fuck socialism, fuck socialists and especially fuck sociology and no, I'm not some ignorant old redneck living in the woods. I am a young adult that somehow made it through the Canadian school system without being completely brainwashed. Actually I am simply impervious to mind fucking of any type. I think I might be one of only a lucky (or not so lucky) few people that cannot be controlled. Hypnosis seems to have no effect on me either, although I'm not sure if that is related.

It is a cold, dark and lonely world when you see things clearly and all of your former friends become slaves to the communist tyrants who wish to undermine our society by unraveling the threads that hold it together.

I'm not crazy, I live a normal life. but it is a depressing life. I see the world crumbling around me. I watch as the English language is slowly simplified to a series of grunts. I watch in horror as stupidity is rewarded and intellect is shunned. I am no rich elitist snob or some crazy Klan member. I am someone who fell through the cracks unnoticed by our oppressive overlords. Do not be fooled people.

:preachon:


*backs... away... slowly...*

[Henkie]

Just wondering, but what exactly do you feel, is the link between socialism and sociology, except for their names?

Edit:

Why is everyone so certain that foreign nations have such longer wait times?

Hah, that is actually quite nice. People think we have longer wait times, because we try to shorten them. Why would we change something if it wasnt a problem? In the US, however, there is no large scale attempt to shorten them (yet) so they cant be that long, can they? I dont know who actually has the longer waiting times, but I wouldnt be too sure its over here in Europe. Thing is, most of these statements are actually based on assumptions that we dont back up with data.

[anti-liberal]

I'm still borderline on the idea of socialized healthcare. I still have a big underlying question that I'd like to ask you e-scholars out there:

Is it fair for me to have to pay more in taxes so that everybody can have universal healthcare?

How does it make sense that I should pay an extra 13% of the equity of my home(on top of 15%) so that Johnny Dipshit can get free treatment for fucking up a skateboard trick? How can you ensure that only those deserving of it recieve healthcare, so that I don't end up paying for Johnny D's cast and painkillers?

I tend to believe that Universal Healthcare is an expensive excuse to expand the role and influence of government and exploit voters under the Democratic Party banner in no different a way than the Republican Party has done with the Patriot Act/Iraq.

Democrats: "If you vote for McCain, you won't be able to afford healthcare, global warming will destroy the Earth, and the governemnt won't increase your entitlements."

Republicans: "If you vote for Obama, we'll lose the war and Terrorists will attack America."


It's all the same fundamentals: Get the people scared - 'monger-up' some fear.

You get the people dependant on your party's goverance, whether it be through the Democrat's massive and pervasive social programs, or through the Republican's contiunal invoking of patriotism and national security, and they will continue to vote you into office.

Please, prove me wrong.

Why is everyone so certain that foreign nations have such longer wait times?

My post was in regards to the article you linked. The article was implying that the United States, despite having the highest per capita spending on healthcare, has longer wait times than other nations - as evidenced by the story of the Woman and her mammogram.

I provided an example to the contrary- as evidenced by own experiances (surgery scheduled less than 18hrs after an appointment)

[Henkie]

It all really depends on the way it's done. It's doable trough regulating the quality and price of insurance, which can be seen as the creation of clarity in the market, and might paradoxically be seen as a stimulus to market forces (in a fully functional free market profits don't exist over a longer period of time, people seem to forget that one, but forcing companies to deliver quality goods at the expense of their high profits is a limit on free enterprise, but not necessarily on market forces, especially when the market is out of the development phase). This means that the consumer might actually not pay all that much more. Also, through Medicaid and Medicare, you're already paying for a lot of people, and the entire idea for insurance has it's origin as a social security system of shared risk. As such, it's a very defendable analysis, that UHC is not something new, it's something you largely have, just not functioning as well as it should.

That also changes the question from "Is it right that I pay for others", to "Is it right that we pay for eachother", which is the basic principle of insurance, which can even be rationalised towards economically logical risk-limitation.

[mr_sauce]

Just wondering, but what exactly do you feel, is the link between socialism and sociology, except for their names?

Sociology is a creation of the socialist, Marxist agenda. It is meant to brainwash us into believing false truths and causes the ignorant and insane to rise up against the intelligent and logical under the guise of ethics. Sociology forces us to accept certain viewpoints and shoves a type of twisted "morality" down our throat without allowing us to learn or think for ourselves.

Sociology tells you how to think and makes a science out of random speculation in order to keep you ignorant and numb, it's like a fundamentalist religion. Basically, it is a perfect way for a socialist government to control people and it seems to be working.

I truly believe our education system causes brain damage.

[j.elohim]

Sociology is a creation of the socialist, Marxist agenda. It is meant to brainwash us into believing false truths and causes the ignorant and insane to rise up against the intelligent and logical under the guise of ethics. Sociology forces us to accept certain viewpoints and shoves a type of twisted "morality" down our throat without allowing us to learn or think for ourselves.

Sociology tells you how to think and makes a science out of random speculation in order to keep you ignorant and numb, it's like a fundamentalist religion. Basically, it is a perfect way for a socialist government to control people and it seems to be working.


VV ^^ I agree.
I truly believe our education system causes brain damage.

[Henkie]

Sauce, just wondering, did you by any chance go to a university before 1990?

[mr_sauce]

Sauce, just wondering, did you by any chance go to a university before 1990?

No, quite a while after that.

[Henkie]

No, quite a while after that.

Strange...

Because I still don't see the correlation between a science that studies the interactions between groups of people and Marxism. It would've made sense if you had studied it during the "Marxist Era", when a bunch of universities were dominated by Marx-influenced teachers and students.

[advertisehere]

i dont see how giving more money to the government is worse than giving it to companies that pay other people to reject insurance claims.
i would rather have everyone who walks into a hospital get the care they need and not have to worry about the bill. too bad this wouldnt actually be the case under obama, he would merely make insurance "affordable" meaning that you would get ripped off a little less for the same shitty coverage.
it would also reduce the burden on businesses to pay for their workers' insurance.
i dont have any experience with insurance companies though, so just ignore me completely.

[Buddha Bukakke!]

Bush is a liberal.
Just because he's a shitty president doesn't make him a liberal. He represents every "conservative" view that the republican party has had within the last 20 years. Sorry but the idea that Ron Paul is a true conservative is just ridiculous, especially by todays standards.

[chrisvet]

It would've made sense if you had studied it during the "Marxist Era", when a bunch of universities were dominated by Marx-influenced teachers and students.

American collages / universities, you'll find lots.

[Mr. Heskey]

Just because he's a shitty president doesn't make him a liberal. He represents every "conservative" view that the republican party has had within the last 20 years. Sorry but the idea that Ron Paul is a true conservative is just ridiculous, especially by todays standards.

The simplest definition for 'conservative' is 'not much'.

So how is Ron Paul not conservative? He's very libertarian, but at the heart of every libertarian is a conservative.

[_Joe]

American collages / universities, you'll find lots.

There's this one old guy in our poli-sci department that has a hard on for Marxist theory. He actually knows a lot about political theory in general, so he's a really good professor.

[chrisvet]

There's this one old guy in our poli-sci department that has a hard on for Marxist theory. He actually knows a lot about political theory in general, so he's a really good professor.

1 word bro: "Feminism" and lots of it in all levels of education / gov't / and the workplace.

The entire concept is based on Marxism, forcing equality (or actually equal outcome) regardless of performance; destroying the family unit; (could go on for hours on it...)

Those old prof's need to get out more, a Visit to Eastern Europe / former USSR to see what wonderous accomplisments Marxism did.

Generations of innefficient people dependent on big gov't w/entitlement complexes, discrepid cities falling apart, poverty everywhere (especially 15 plus years ago) Horrible mindset, never having mastered his/her own life by achieving the best they possibly can w/monetary / psychological rewards to enjoy.

[Cheburashka]

Maybe because there's no motivation for scientific/medical/technological discovery?


Spike Lee calls me an uneducated fool in 5, 4, 3...

That's completely untrue. The Soviet Union lived under Socialism, yet more scientific breakthroughs were discovered there than in the US.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

That's unfortunate.

There's a map that shows all countries with socialized healthcare. All First-World nations have some form a socialized medicine except the US.

Oh, and by the way, I lived in the Soviet Union, and the quality of healthcare far surpasses anything I received in the US, even though I have full health insurance and pay a ridiculous percentage of my salary on it.

[Cheburashka]

Double post, sorry.

[bergshadow]

"Socialist" seems to be the Ranters' the new word, as "liberal" loses its effect and "left" becomes the purely relative or contingent term the spewers have been claiming it was all along.

I actually recall reading an article by one of the neo-con "intellectuals" a little while ago that recommended the use of "socialist" as the new pejorative. And a bit later there's Kristol - inexplicably hired by the NYT, maybe to balance their occasional forays into integrity and intellectual rigor (which make them look lefty) - dutifully promoting the word in his flagpole column. I wonder if there's a committee somewhere, or an annual conference, like the fashion conference that picks the next year's hot colors.

Obama is about as Socialist as Dwight Eisenhower, if it matters.

[chrisvet]

That's completely untrue. The Soviet Union lived under Socialism, yet more scientific breakthroughs were discovered there than in the US.

<insert stats where USA landslides former USSR & the rest of the world in inventions.>


I lived in the Soviet Union, and the quality of healthcare far surpasses anything I received in the US
benefits


, even though I have full health insurance and pay a ridiculous percentage of my salary on it.
vs Costs.

[American Infidel]

"Socialist" seems to be the Ranters' the new word, as "liberal" loses its effect and "left" becomes the purely relative or contingent term the spewers have been claiming it was all along.

I actually recall reading an article by one of the neo-con "intellectuals" a little while ago that recommended the use of "socialist" as the new pejorative. And a bit later there's Kristol - inexplicably hired by the NYT, maybe to balance their occasional forays into integrity and intellectual rigor (which make them look lefty) - dutifully promoting the word in his flagpole column. I wonder if there's a committee somewhere, or an annual conference, like the fashion conference that picks the next year's hot colors.

Obama is about as Socialist as Dwight Eisenhower, if it matters.

Well, that's the whole problem. Stop with the RINO's, who lost the US congress and end the liberal hope for a utopian dream of the "state owes ME".

It's not a sin to make a profit. Capitalism is not evil. On the contrary, capitalism is good for the economy and society.

The problem is ambulance-chasing lawyers, who profit from frivolous lawsuits that bog down the court system and lobby our congress for idiotic measures to protect the criminals, while limiting those who obey the law.

[Mr. Heskey]

That's completely untrue. The Soviet Union lived under Socialism, yet more scientific breakthroughs were discovered there than in the US.




I'm talking about now. The vast, vast majority of any kind of prescription medication or medical innovation made today is made in the US.

[Henkie]

I'm talking about now. The vast, vast majority of any kind of prescription medication or medical innovation made today is made in the US.

But by institutions that nobody is suggesting to change. Nobody is touching universities or farmaceutical companies. Insurances have nothing to do with research.

[Mr. Heskey]

But by institutions that nobody is suggesting to change. Nobody is touching universities or farmaceutical companies. Insurances have nothing to do with research.

??? Explain. I know insurance has nothing to do with it. They contribute nothing to technology.

[Henkie]

??? Explain. I know insurance has nothing to do with it. They contribute nothing to technology.

Well, that was mainly my point. I thought you were going on one of them "Omgz, socialism doesn't produce progress so socializing something irrelevant will stop progress!"-rants.

[Mr. Heskey]

Well, that was mainly my point. I thought you were going on one of them "Omgz, socialism doesn't produce progress so socializing something irrelevant will stop progress!"-rants.

I wasn't going to say that. But in the long run a capitalistic society does much better.

[Henkie]

I wasn't going to say that. But in the long run a capitalistic society does much better.

It doesn't have to be a "black or white"-choice. Personally, I quite like the fact that I'm not living in a violent and totalitarian dictatorship, but on occasion I also like that my parents with not too high an income can still send all three of their childeren to college and that if I lose a finger my insurance will pay to have the thing sewn back on. These things aren't contradictory.

[mr_sauce]

That's completely untrue. The Soviet Union lived under Socialism, yet more scientific breakthroughs were discovered there than in the US.

Even if your statement is true your argument is false. The "Soviet Union" was born out of a military and fascist annexing of many European nations. So if the "Soviet Union" made some sort of scientific breakthrough it was most likely the work of another nation simply forced behind the iron curtain.

The "Soviet Union" should not be considered a legitimate country, it was a war. The soviet tyrants rolled their tanks through the streets of small defenseless nations and raped them. This "Soviet Union", you speak so highly of was not at all dissimilar to an evil alien collective that corrupts and assimilates other civilizations without ANY regard for human life.

(Soviets = The Borg)

[Fungus Amungus]

That's completely untrue. The Soviet Union lived under Socialism, yet more scientific breakthroughs were discovered there than in the US.



That's unfortunate.

There's a map that shows all countries with socialized healthcare. All First-World nations have some form a socialized medicine except the US.

Oh, and by the way, I lived in the Soviet Union, and the quality of healthcare far surpasses anything I received in the US, even though I have full health insurance and pay a ridiculous percentage of my salary on it.

What in the hell are you talking about? There is a reason Russia's technology is half assed and we came out on top. The cold war was one of weapons and tech (against Russia vs US). Also the US has a form socialized healthcare. You speak of lies and made up bullshit.

[Cheburashka]

Even if your statement is true your argument is false. The "Soviet Union" was born out of a military and fascist annexing of many European nations. So if the "Soviet Union" made some sort of scientific breakthrough it was most likely the work of another nation simply forced behind the iron curtain.

The "Soviet Union" should not be considered a legitimate country, it was a war. The soviet tyrants rolled their tanks through the streets of small defenseless nations and raped them. This "Soviet Union", you speak so highly of was not at all dissimilar to an evil alien collective that corrupts and assimilates other civilizations without ANY regard for human life.

(Soviets = The Borg)

I guess your vast knowledge of the Soviet Union's bloody past is because you lived in one of the countries, "Raped" by the Soviet Union? No?

Please. You know nothing about the USSR other than the propoganda and lies written in American textbooks.

And corrupting and assimilating other civilizations without any regard for human life is the job of a superpower. The US has killed more people than the Soviet Union anyway.

As a former resident of the Soviet Union, I can say that I am proud of both its failures and triumphs, and nobody is going to tell me that the country I grew up in is the "Empire of Evil".

[American Infidel]

I guess your vast knowledge of the Soviet Union's bloody past is because you lived in one of the countries, "Raped" by the Soviet Union? No?

Please. You know nothing about the USSR other than the propoganda and lies written in American textbooks.

And corrupting and assimilating other civilizations without any regard for human life is the job of a superpower. The US has killed more people than the Soviet Union anyway.

As a former resident of the Soviet Union, I can say that I am proud of both its failures and triumphs, and nobody is going to tell me that the country I grew up in is the "Empire of Evil".

Then, please, enlighten us of the great utopian dream that Russian people have been enjoying.

Are your paws still numb, by the way?

[Mr. Heskey]

I guess your vast knowledge of the Soviet Union's bloody past is because you lived in one of the countries, "Raped" by the Soviet Union? No?

Please. You know nothing about the USSR other than the propoganda and lies written in American textbooks.

And corrupting and assimilating other civilizations without any regard for human life is the job of a superpower. The US has killed more people than the Soviet Union anyway.

As a former resident of the Soviet Union, I can say that I am proud of both its failures and triumphs, and nobody is going to tell me that the country I grew up in is the "Empire of Evil".

It's better to just give up and call you a troll. Besides, did you and your people enjoy starvation? And Joseph Stalin's murder of 25 million people?

[bergshadow]

So we agree that Obama has no Marxist agenda, and the scurrilous Beck has wasted the country's bandwidth ?

If only he did have a reasonable socialized (not Marxist) medical program on a back burner, there would be more hope for the coming mess. The US is going bankrupt and losing industrial capability (as well as getting sicker) dealing with the ludicrous corporate approach to medical care, and the costs are going nowhere but up.

Now Ayn Rand's acolyte's are even deregulating banks (with consequences much more severe but otherwise identical to the last time, when they deregulated the S&Ls) and privatizing the military (which has had the predictable explosive effect on the costs of the Iraq War) and no one will be surprised if waterway maintenance and the road system is next, with schools on the horizon, or vice versa.

Thing is, the US completed an extraordinary era of wealth accumulation that took off exponentially after WWII. Wealth in many forms, from invented technology to an educated and skilled populace with stable lives on owned land to road and electrical systems knitting the whole country, we piled up as an investment in the hands of the general citizenry. And what the folks who recognize best what happened want to do with all that wealth, starting around 1975 and getting rolling in '81, is transfer it to themselves.

When the US citizenry spends twice as much as anyone on the planet for a level of delivered care that barely meets - or in truth doesn't meet - First World minimum standards for outcome, where do you think the difference ends up ?

The country as a whole is being mined, like a coal seam. And investing in a higher level of health and medical care for the public just slows that down.