>>>Socialism is orthogonal to the size and strength of government. Socialism means an economic system based on the exchange of labor and the democratic control of capital by those who do the work. >>>
In no socialist country has this EVER been true. You can define "socialism" however you want, but the reality is that Socialism leads to a strong central government that takes away your money, and hands it off to somebody else. I don't enjoy working my ass off just to hand 50% of it away to somebody else.
>>>as someone who has lived in countries with "socialized healthcare" I can say - there is a REASON I live in US now. Sounds good on paper, but in practice you get bare minimum
Quoted for truth.
But nobody wants to hear the dark side of government healthcare - which is about as good as attending school in downtown Baltimore or Philly or L.A. (i.e. lousy)
>>>'Those low earner high spending poster children got what they deserved'
I support free healthcare for children. They can't fend for themselves or work to earn money. But YOU can. YOU can pay your own bills, and there's no reason for you to go-around siphoning money from your neighbors. None at all.
>>>Given your estimates, you'd have saved $18,000 in 5 years.
I made a typo - it should have been 1/2 million collected in my bank over ten years, and that's around $50,000 saved from not buying $1000 a year cable, $900 a year internet, a new Lexus every other year, et cetera. That ~$50,000 is MORE than enough to buy most medical procedures. (Example: A ~$5000 pacemaker implant.) Which goes back to my point: Virtually everybody CAN afford these procedures IF they don't waste their cash on trivial nonsense.
When most (not all, but most) people say, "I can't afford that" what they really mean is, "I could afford it, but I squandered my money on stupid stuff."
> >>>Its not about "raiding" your wallet. Its about the acknowledging the value of human life and human dignity. >
We should also acknowledge the predestined endpoint of human life - death. No matter how rich you are, or how much money the government gives you, you can not live forever. Even the UK government acknowledges this by placing a limit on how much a patient may receive in so-called "free" government healthcare. If the procedure is outrageously expensive (typically $1 million or more pounds), the patient gets turned-down.
And then the patients are left arguing with the Parliament about why the denial should be reversed. Me, I'd rather just pay cash, and avoid the whole mess. I can afford the ~$5000 for a new pacemaker. So too can almost-everyone.
Nearly-everyone has the ability to stand-on their own two feet. They don't need help. Like Barak Obama said, "I grew up believing in self-reliance, hard work, and individual responsibility." - current ad running on television.
>>>Ever known anyone that got cancer? Those bills run into the hundreds of thousands.
Yes my friend. He died in his mid-50s and chose to accept his death rather than fight it. If I had been in his shoes, I would have done the same. It is far wiser to accept death, than to live in denial about the inevitable. No matter how rich you are, or how much "free" healthcare your government gives you, you will not live forever. It is pointless to try.
>>>That's $1200 a month. I'm a college student, I certainly can't find that kind of money.
Your parents can afford it. And even if they couldn't, I support Welfare for children, which would cover your expenses in the event your parents were too poor.
You don't have a right to live forever. What you are asking for is an impossibility. (You also don't have a right to steal other people's money or labor to pay your bills.) And, as I said elsewhere, "I'm paying cash" is often the best way to deal with situations. That way the insurance or HMO is no longer an issue. It's just you dealing *directly* with your doctor.
If you can afford to buy a $2000 computer every year, $1000 of cable tv, $900 on internet, $700 cellphone service, and so on... (cumulative cost of ~$50,000 per decade)..... then surely you can afford to buy the relatively-small cost (~$5000) of a pacemaker if the need arises.
>>>>>You could afford it too if you had SAVED your money, instead of demanding your neighbors' pay the bill for you (tax their paychecks & give the money to you).
>What country do you live in where you get to have tax paid for you by your neighbour? I pay taxes too.
I know you're more intelligent than that. Here's how "free" government, socialized healthcare works:
- I smoke. I destroy my lungs. - Thanks to the miracle of technology, I can get new lungs from a deceased donor. - This procedure costs ~$100,000 per lung. - Who pays the bill? - Not me! - My neighbors have to pay the bill for MY stupid smoking habit. And they pay that bill via taxation. In essence, I have *stolen* money (and labor) from my neighbors to enrich myself, which makes me no better than the old Southern Plantation masters.
>>>Surely we should privatise schools instead of having this "socialist" schooling system?
Yes we should, because the government monopoly has created only stagnation, whereas competition breeds innovation. This has been demonstrated at the college level & now it's time to apply the same principles at the high school level. ----- We have also seen this with socialized mail delivery. The competitive UPSes and FedExes of the world are much better than the old U.S. Government monopoly.
Competition and Pro-Choice (put power in the hands of the individual) are the way to go.
>>>There are lots more of us who don't have tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars lying around.
And whose fault is that? Maybe you should stop wasting money on $1000 a year Cable TV, or $900 a year Internet access, or $700 a year cellphone connections, or buying a new $2000 laptop every other year. ----- Maybe then you could afford the healthcare. Let me introduce you to new words: "self-sacrifice" "self-help" and "self-responsibility/initiative".
>>>Your idea would also work with car insurance as well -- it'd be much easier to just pay for that totaled car out of pocket rather than fight with an insurance company -- >>>
Funny you mention this example, because that's EXACTLY what I do. In the event of an accident, buying a used car for $3000-$5000 makes a whole lot more sense than paying ~$15,000 per decade to the insurance rapists. I have the state-required minimum, but I do not insure my car. It's cheaper to just junk it, and buy a used one.
>>>What form of government is the collusion of large business and government, with nationalist and religious sentiments?
Or "Democrat" for ease of pronunciation. Democrats, just like Republicans, get billions in corporate donations every year. You think they are not colluding? You think NBC, ABC, and other television corporations are not just drooling to see Obama win this year?
They know he's going to be giving them more money. $500 per new job created in fact. Plus another bailout.
Most Walmart employees *give themselves raises*. They move to better jobs.
Although this is one area where both I and Obama agree - Walmart should be required to give benefits to ALL their employees, whether they work 40 hours or just 4 hour per week. I prefer a competitive, private solution versus a government one.
If Clinton had vetoed the bill, it's entirely possible some of the Congress people (especially the Democrats) would have sided with him, and changed their votes to "no".
And since most people were forced into "repayment plans" that they couldn't afford, they just abandoned ship. They left behind empty houses and banks were left in dire straits.
>>>FOX News. Where else are you going to find conservotard pundits with no basis in reality?
First off, I don't have cable so no FOX News. Second: AM radio. The only ones I can stomach are Glen Beck and Walter E. Williams (a black man who dislikes Obama). Rush Limbaugh and the rest are way too looney for me.
I am more Jeffersonian in my beliefs, but unfortunately neither the Democrats nor the Republicans really represent that view.
>>>I pay $0 on cable, $180 on internet, and I haven't bought a new computer in six years.
And my cellphone is only $60 a year. Why most people pay ten times that amount makes absolutely no sense to me. It's like they don't know how to handle money or look for bargains.
>>>I have saved 1/2 a million in just five years,
That should have been ten years. Not because I'm rich, but just because I don't waste my money on things I don't need. (Try reading Brokaw's book about the Greatest Generation of WW2. They know all about self-sacrifice and self-reliance.)
>>>I'm so glad that I can *choose* which health-care provider to go to, which means that I have a choice between *0* different health-care programs that I can afford. >>>
Maybe you should stop wasting money on $1000 a year Cable TV, or $900 a year Internet access, or $700 a year cellphone connections, or buying a new $2000 laptop every other year.
Maybe then you could afford the healthcare. Let me introduce you to new words: "self-sacrifice" "self-help" and "self-responsibility/initiative". I pay $0 on cable, $180 on internet, and I haven't bought a new computer in six years. As a result of this self-sacrifice, I have saved 1/2 a million in just five years, and I can EASILY afford a doctor's visit at any of a hundred hospitals within driving distance. (Pro-Choice.)
You could afford it too if you had SAVED your money, instead of demanding your neighbors' pay the bill for you (tax their paychecks & give the money to you).
.
I'm sorry if this message comes-across as angry. But I'm sick of this "gimme gimme gimme" entitlement society. If you SAVED your money, instead of wasting it on non-important trivia, you wouldn't have to hold your hand out. You'd be able to pay your own bills.
IMHO the only people who should receive handouts are the handicapped, or children. Able-bodied people should pay their own bills with their OWN money, not raid their neighbors' wallets.
If certain persons (cough democrats) can give praise to Clinton "Because he created the wonderful economy of the 1990s" then I certainly think it's fair to blame Clinton when he repeals Glass-Steagall.
Turn on CSPAN. What do you hear? "Bush is at fault... Bush did this wrong... Bush's policies made the stock market fail," and on and on and on. I'm just playing the game that the Congress people are playing. If they can lay all the blame/praise on a single president, then I can COPY the "esteemed representatives" and do the same thing.
It seems fair to emulate what I see inside the Congress.
>>>PRIVATE Corporations. Run for PROFIT and in the interest of their Owner
But corporations are run by college-educated persons, most of whom are Democrat or liberal, and espouse their views across the television. Plus corporations benefit from a strong, central, socialist government that can be easily bribed to give-away, say, 700 billion dollar bailouts.
No I don't define "turning away patients because they are too costly" as a good Government/socialized health system.
And since the government is the only providers, where else do you turn??? At least here in the U.S. if one provider sucks, you have a million others to choose from. Private healthcare is PRO-choice.
I've found the best way to "score" with a woman is to act like one. No, I don't mean cross-dressing. I mean being a good listener, with sympathetic emotions.
Of course being able to walk-up and say, "Hey - how would you like to go get some dinner" also helps.
>>>The majority of this can be put onto bad lending practices and the bundling and selling of these loans.
Yes that still would have happened, but the Glass-Steagall Act would have blocked banks from investing into those "mortgage securities", and therefore the banks would have been stable. Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers would still be alive today with solid assets propping them up.
>>>notice that you conveniently forget that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act [wikipedia.org] was sponsored by republicans (Phil Gramm strikes again),
And I notice that you conveniently forget about the "Anti-Bankruptcy Bill" that was sponsored by Vice-President nominee JOE BIDEN. This bill prevented homeowners from appealing to the courts for help (Chapter 11 debt restructuring), and forced millions to default on their loans, thereby creating the first step towards collapse.
Slashdot Mirror
>>>Socialism is orthogonal to the size and strength of government. Socialism means an economic system based on the exchange of labor and the democratic control of capital by those who do the work.
>>>
In no socialist country has this EVER been true. You can define "socialism" however you want, but the reality is that Socialism leads to a strong central government that takes away your money, and hands it off to somebody else. I don't enjoy working my ass off just to hand 50% of it away to somebody else.
It makes me feel like I'm back in 1808 (a slave).
>>>as someone who has lived in countries with "socialized healthcare" I can say - there is a REASON I live in US now. Sounds good on paper, but in practice you get bare minimum
Quoted for truth.
But nobody wants to hear the dark side of government healthcare - which is about as good as attending school in downtown Baltimore or Philly or L.A. (i.e. lousy)
>>>'Those low earner high spending poster children got what they deserved'
I support free healthcare for children. They can't fend for themselves or work to earn money. But YOU can. YOU can pay your own bills, and there's no reason for you to go-around siphoning money from your neighbors. None at all.
>>>Given your estimates, you'd have saved $18,000 in 5 years.
I made a typo - it should have been 1/2 million collected in my bank over ten years, and that's around $50,000 saved from not buying $1000 a year cable, $900 a year internet, a new Lexus every other year, et cetera. That ~$50,000 is MORE than enough to buy most medical procedures. (Example: A ~$5000 pacemaker implant.) Which goes back to my point: Virtually everybody CAN afford these procedures IF they don't waste their cash on trivial nonsense.
When most (not all, but most) people say, "I can't afford that" what they really mean is, "I could afford it, but I squandered my money on stupid stuff."
>
>>>Its not about "raiding" your wallet. Its about the acknowledging the value of human life and human dignity.
>
We should also acknowledge the predestined endpoint of human life - death. No matter how rich you are, or how much money the government gives you, you can not live forever. Even the UK government acknowledges this by placing a limit on how much a patient may receive in so-called "free" government healthcare. If the procedure is outrageously expensive (typically $1 million or more pounds), the patient gets turned-down.
And then the patients are left arguing with the Parliament about why the denial should be reversed. Me, I'd rather just pay cash, and avoid the whole mess. I can afford the ~$5000 for a new pacemaker. So too can almost-everyone.
Nearly-everyone has the ability to stand-on their own two feet. They don't need help. Like Barak Obama said, "I grew up believing in self-reliance, hard work, and individual responsibility." - current ad running on television.
>>>Ever known anyone that got cancer? Those bills run into the hundreds of thousands.
Yes my friend. He died in his mid-50s and chose to accept his death rather than fight it. If I had been in his shoes, I would have done the same. It is far wiser to accept death, than to live in denial about the inevitable. No matter how rich you are, or how much "free" healthcare your government gives you, you will not live forever. It is pointless to try.
>>>That's $1200 a month. I'm a college student, I certainly can't find that kind of money.
Your parents can afford it. And even if they couldn't, I support Welfare for children, which would cover your expenses in the event your parents were too poor.
You don't have a right to live forever. What you are asking for is an impossibility. (You also don't have a right to steal other people's money or labor to pay your bills.) And, as I said elsewhere, "I'm paying cash" is often the best way to deal with situations. That way the insurance or HMO is no longer an issue. It's just you dealing *directly* with your doctor.
If you can afford to buy a $2000 computer every year, $1000 of cable tv, $900 on internet, $700 cellphone service, and so on... (cumulative cost of ~$50,000 per decade)..... then surely you can afford to buy the relatively-small cost (~$5000) of a pacemaker if the need arises.
>>>>>You could afford it too if you had SAVED your money, instead of demanding your neighbors' pay the bill for you (tax their paychecks & give the money to you).
>What country do you live in where you get to have tax paid for you by your neighbour? I pay taxes too.
I know you're more intelligent than that. Here's how "free" government, socialized healthcare works:
- I smoke. I destroy my lungs.
- Thanks to the miracle of technology, I can get new lungs from a deceased donor.
- This procedure costs ~$100,000 per lung.
- Who pays the bill?
- Not me!
- My neighbors have to pay the bill for MY stupid smoking habit. And they pay that bill via taxation. In essence, I have *stolen* money (and labor) from my neighbors to enrich myself, which makes me no better than the old Southern Plantation masters.
>>>Surely we should privatise schools instead of having this "socialist" schooling system?
Yes we should, because the government monopoly has created only stagnation, whereas competition breeds innovation. This has been demonstrated at the college level & now it's time to apply the same principles at the high school level. ----- We have also seen this with socialized mail delivery. The competitive UPSes and FedExes of the world are much better than the old U.S. Government monopoly.
Competition and Pro-Choice (put power in the hands of the individual) are the way to go.
>>>There are lots more of us who don't have tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars lying around.
And whose fault is that? Maybe you should stop wasting money on $1000 a year Cable TV, or $900 a year Internet access, or $700 a year cellphone connections, or buying a new $2000 laptop every other year. ----- Maybe then you could afford the healthcare. Let me introduce you to new words: "self-sacrifice" "self-help" and "self-responsibility/initiative".
>>>Your idea would also work with car insurance as well -- it'd be much easier to just pay for that totaled car out of pocket rather than fight with an insurance company --
>>>
Funny you mention this example, because that's EXACTLY what I do. In the event of an accident, buying a used car for $3000-$5000 makes a whole lot more sense than paying ~$15,000 per decade to the insurance rapists. I have the state-required minimum, but I do not insure my car. It's cheaper to just junk it, and buy a used one.
>>>What form of government is the collusion of large business and government, with nationalist and religious sentiments?
Or "Democrat" for ease of pronunciation. Democrats, just like Republicans, get billions in corporate donations every year. You think they are not colluding? You think NBC, ABC, and other television corporations are not just drooling to see Obama win this year?
They know he's going to be giving them more money. $500 per new job created in fact. Plus another bailout.
>>>I don't know of any countries with socialized medicine where the government is the only provider.
Canada. If a Canadian wants service from someone other than the Ottawa Parliament, then they have to come south to the U.S.
Most Walmart employees *give themselves raises*. They move to better jobs.
Although this is one area where both I and Obama agree - Walmart should be required to give benefits to ALL their employees, whether they work 40 hours or just 4 hour per week. I prefer a competitive, private solution versus a government one.
SOLUTION:
Just pay cash. If you pay cash, you don't need to lay there and argue with the insurance or HMO. You just hand-over the cash and you're done.
Before you say this doesn't work, there are lots of us who do exactly what I just described.
If Clinton had vetoed the bill, it's entirely possible some of the Congress people (especially the Democrats) would have sided with him, and changed their votes to "no".
Glass-Steagall might still be in effect.
And since most people were forced into "repayment plans" that they couldn't afford, they just abandoned ship. They left behind empty houses and banks were left in dire straits.
Under the old bill, that would not have happened.
>>>FOX News. Where else are you going to find conservotard pundits with no basis in reality?
First off, I don't have cable so no FOX News. Second: AM radio. The only ones I can stomach are Glen Beck and Walter E. Williams (a black man who dislikes Obama). Rush Limbaugh and the rest are way too looney for me.
I am more Jeffersonian in my beliefs, but unfortunately neither the Democrats nor the Republicans really represent that view.
P.S.
>>>I pay $0 on cable, $180 on internet, and I haven't bought a new computer in six years.
And my cellphone is only $60 a year. Why most people pay ten times that amount makes absolutely no sense to me. It's like they don't know how to handle money or look for bargains.
>>>I have saved 1/2 a million in just five years,
That should have been ten years. Not because I'm rich, but just because I don't waste my money on things I don't need. (Try reading Brokaw's book about the Greatest Generation of WW2. They know all about self-sacrifice and self-reliance.)
>>>I'm so glad that I can *choose* which health-care provider to go to, which means that I have a choice between *0* different health-care programs that I can afford.
>>>
Maybe you should stop wasting money on $1000 a year Cable TV, or $900 a year Internet access, or $700 a year cellphone connections, or buying a new $2000 laptop every other year.
Maybe then you could afford the healthcare. Let me introduce you to new words: "self-sacrifice" "self-help" and "self-responsibility/initiative". I pay $0 on cable, $180 on internet, and I haven't bought a new computer in six years. As a result of this self-sacrifice, I have saved 1/2 a million in just five years, and I can EASILY afford a doctor's visit at any of a hundred hospitals within driving distance. (Pro-Choice.)
You could afford it too if you had SAVED your money, instead of demanding your neighbors' pay the bill for you (tax their paychecks & give the money to you).
.
I'm sorry if this message comes-across as angry. But I'm sick of this "gimme gimme gimme" entitlement society. If you SAVED your money, instead of wasting it on non-important trivia, you wouldn't have to hold your hand out. You'd be able to pay your own bills.
IMHO the only people who should receive handouts are the handicapped, or children.
Able-bodied people should pay their own bills with their OWN money, not raid their neighbors' wallets.
If certain persons (cough democrats) can give praise to Clinton "Because he created the wonderful economy of the 1990s"
then I certainly think it's fair to blame Clinton when he repeals Glass-Steagall.
Turn on CSPAN. What do you hear? "Bush is at fault... Bush did this wrong... Bush's policies made the stock market fail," and on and on and on. I'm just playing the game that the Congress people are playing. If they can lay all the blame/praise on a single president, then I can COPY the "esteemed representatives" and do the same thing.
It seems fair to emulate what I see inside the Congress.
>>>PRIVATE Corporations. Run for PROFIT and in the interest of their Owner
But corporations are run by college-educated persons, most of whom are Democrat or liberal, and espouse their views across the television. Plus corporations benefit from a strong, central, socialist government that can be easily bribed to give-away, say, 700 billion dollar bailouts.
No I don't define "turning away patients because they are too costly" as a good Government/socialized health system.
And since the government is the only providers, where else do you turn??? At least here in the U.S. if one provider sucks, you have a million others to choose from. Private healthcare is PRO-choice.
Funny.
I've found the best way to "score" with a woman is to act like one. No, I don't mean cross-dressing. I mean being a good listener, with sympathetic emotions.
Of course being able to walk-up and say, "Hey - how would you like to go get some dinner" also helps.
So a balance between bravery and sensitivity.
>>>The majority of this can be put onto bad lending practices and the bundling and selling of these loans.
Yes that still would have happened, but the Glass-Steagall Act would have blocked banks from investing into those "mortgage securities", and therefore the banks would have been stable. Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers would still be alive today with solid assets propping them up.
I hear that a similar technique involving puppies & babies will cause women to suddenly appear and make sounds resembling, "oooh how cute".
>>>notice that you conveniently forget that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act [wikipedia.org] was sponsored by republicans (Phil Gramm strikes again),
And I notice that you conveniently forget about the "Anti-Bankruptcy Bill" that was sponsored by Vice-President nominee JOE BIDEN. This bill prevented homeowners from appealing to the courts for help (Chapter 11 debt restructuring), and forced millions to default on their loans, thereby creating the first step towards collapse.
Read more here. Or just google. There are dozens of similar articles: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/biden-bill-to-blame-for-foreclosure-crisis