Socialism: Maybe not such a bad idea?

Actually this isn't really correct. There are many people who obtained wealth through their own efforts and it had nothing to do with luck or connections. The inherited wealth you speak of are very few even if the inheritance is very great, I mean those who literally would never have to work for the rest of their lives because their money works for them. If my parents leave me $100,000 on their death bed and I go out and do something productive with the money to make more money its a matter of skill and wisdom and work not anything else, in this scenario I still work for my money my money doesn't work for me. There is no such thing as a complete equal playing field unless you have some notion of carrying out your own cultural revolution where you place those on top in the fields to work and then give power to the peasants...oh wait that's not an equal playing field at all its just penalizing those that have simply because you don't have. That didn't work out too well anyway.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course not, the public option was taken off the agenda entirely due to pharmaceutical and insurance lobbyists not because it wasn't part of the original plan. It had been studied what works in other countries: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/view/

Its just that small groups who didn't understand it whined and called it 'socialism'. And as for the large groups?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/obamasdeal/view/

Pay very close attention to how and why Obama's initial health care program was corrupted, subverted and derailed and by whom. You have the health care industry to thank for the 'bits and pieces of bubblegum and matchsticks'. You, the people, your needs and your (society) concerns were sold out by your own political system which allows private interests to set public policy. If you people don't realize this soon and keep turning it into a partisan issue you'll find you're all being sold down the drain by both parties who do not work for you but for the interests of large industries (lobbies). Wake the fuck up already!!!! What you think of universal health care was determined by propaganda paid for in full by the health care industry which had everything to lose while the american people (society) had everything to gain. Its like the masters of the universe which you guys have made of large industries have devised a way for you to cannibalize yourselves and the only ones who don't see it is the american people. Its really and truly a sad thing to watch and why I don't believe the american people will be able to pay enough attention and act decisively so they can guide policy to their own advantage and pull themselves out of this economic climate, they allow others to set the agenda for them which by all accounts amounts to system failure. You are no longer a true democracy because its industry that sets the debate, owns the politicians and therefore sets the agenda yet the only ones who don't know their democracy has been subverted are the american people. I have to hand it to the health care industry and big business in general, they really know how to micromanage and manipulate the american mind. Unfuckingbelievable!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

indeed - it does seem like you are just trying to patch up something that is fundamentally broken, but we've witnessed what happens if someone even mentions adopting what has proven to be the most cost effective system: namely a single-payer system - you guys work yoursevles into a frenzy over imaginary socialist folk-devils, block or sabotage any attempts to put things right and end up with a watereded down, patched up, overpriced, shored up mess as a "compromise"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Agreed - just be careful to not include ME in the general group.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So you have another policy on top of your taxed health care that you are also paying for with your taxes...which if you add up all the taxes is more than what buying insurance costs to beging with eh...or D A M N close.

No...socialism isnt just paying higher taxes.

 

lucy do you know what the number one thing that will predict whether or not you will be successfull is? the wealth of the family you were born into. so spare me the bullshit how people are self made. its a lie and myth used to let the rich believe they are better than everyone else.

for every super successful person out there, there are probably between 20 to 30 people who could do what they did as good or better but because they weren't born into a family that could give them the same advantages they weren't able too.

 

Nope, it's YOU who are perpetuating a myth. The KEY to success is not so much where you came from but how much attention you pay to details and how much effort you put into cultivating the right contacts. Most people are just like you - far to lazy to do either of those right and content to just hang out with others who are just like you: those who are lazy, just killing time and who have no ambition. They usually do poorly in school and NEVER set goals for themselves or bother to plan long-range for their future. It actually takes WORK to rise above the crowd and lots of people have managed to do so - because they have drive and ambition. Period.

 

But why? Why would they be more successful? If you are born into a family of doctors I would assume you may have had a good education which would lead to better job possibilities. This will be true forever. Even in communist countries you will have those who are better off than others. No one here has put forth that the rich are better than everyone else except you. The problem isn't that there are wealthy people PJ, the problem is creating a society where offer enough social welfare programs so that society is humane (decent education, health care, housing and access to the political process) if you live in a society where there are no wealthy people then you're living in a society where there are no middle-class and you only have the poor. Just look at Denmark, they have a very good social welfare program, the better off you are the more taxes you pay and yet they still have wealthy people and a monarchy to boot!

Really? 20 or 30? Care to show how you know this for sure?

 

it's not a policy - it's a choice - and it's voluntary, not funded or subsidised by taxes.

single payer healthcare systems have been demonstrated to be the best at providing a high standard of overall healthcare for the greatest number of people at the lowest cost - but this can result in certain non emergency procedures being rationed to the extent that there is a waiting list, some people prefer not to wait so will pay for private insurance to "top up" their cover so they can get the procedures they want more quickly.

Furthermore, the quoted overall spend per person on healthcare in the uk of around $2,300 P/A (compared to around $5700 in the US) refers to total healthcare expenditure so it INCLUDES that which is spent on private policies - so your point that adding the public and private costs together would equal that which is spent the US is wrong - we are STILL charged half as much for a service that is superior in most areas.

ref: http://www.creditloan.com/blog/2010/03/01/healthcare-costs-around-the-world/

at the end of the day rather than throwing around emotive terms like freedom or socialism, or seeing this as a left vs right argument, I prefer pragmatism - what has been demonstrated to give the best result for the largest number of people for the lowest overall cost

 

Interesting how even the folks who disagree with one-another here all seem to define "success" in monetary terms. Well, more sad than interesting...

 

How does anyone find happiness without money for food, or healthcare or housing? Are you going to inundate us with your stories of the happy poor who find love and friendship through their deprivation? Even a socialist program needs money. Don't believe me just ask the North Koreans. N.Korea has no money, no real currency and they starve. I bet that experience really has made them feel oh so 'successful'.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs:


1.Physiological needs

2.Safety needs:

Personal security
Financial security
Health and well-being

Safety net against accidents/illness and their adverse impacts

3. Love and belonging:

Friendship
Intimacy
Family
Esteem

4. Self-actualization

5. Self-transcendence

If you don't define happiness in monetary terms its because those needs which money supplies are already taken care of. There's a saying that the only thing separating civilization from anarchy is seven meals. Go for a whole week without food and other types of security and then come back and tell me the meaning of happiness.

 

The children of wealthy families also have their college tuition paid so this is a huge foot up. These young people are not in debt tens of thousands of dollars to begin their adult lives and they will not have those ready made contacts who are usually family friends.

 

But is this the fault of the wealthy or the corporate interaction with schools?

 

No it is not about blame just a call for an equal playing field(socialuzed higher education).

 

Yes but still you have to see there is no equal playing field. If someone is smart and driven and gets a good education they will leave the lower ranks of the poor and enter what is known as the middle or upper classes. Even in socialized countries you have a lower, middle and upper its just that the gap is not as wide as it is here in the States which is what needs to be addressed. PJ's resentment as well as Iceaura's are directed towards those who have, not towards the system that keeps them from having. As a matter of fact they seem to blame all the ills on those who have. Its their fault, they did it, etc etc

Meanwhile wealthy can be anything from upper middle class to filthy rich.

 

Well I see it as systemic and not fault (capitalism works this way), so by socializing medical and education (which the wealthy have in the sense that they do not worry about or struggle to afford either, we set more people up to win. To be $50,000 dollars in debt just to become a teacher is ludicrous and it needs to change! To have a chronic disease and have a job w/ no med. insurance and having to choose whether to pay for necessary blood work or kite checks to buy groceries is just as ludicrous.

 

Yes.

 

I moved home when I got sick. As my wife put it, I had to pay "lung rent," which was about double what I'd been paying for apartment rent...

 

There is also the issue of incentives. In a pure capitalist system it's sink or swim so everyone has a strong incentive to bust their ass. In a pure communist system, there's very little incentive to work since effort and pay are completely separated.

A more esoteric issue is emergence. The tendency of complex systems to self organize naturally in ways that are often superior to what we can achieve through a careful top down approach. What Adam Smith called the Invisible Hand.

“As every individual, therefore, endeavors as much as he can both to employ his capital in the support of domestic industry, and so to the direct that industry that its produce may be of the greatest value; every individual necessarily labours to render the annual revenue of the society as great as he can. He generally, indeed, neither intends to promote the public interest, nor knows how much he is promoting it. By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, he intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. Nor is it always the worse for the society that it was no part of it. By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it (Wealth of Nations. VI, ii. P.456).​

 

@Madanthonywayne

Except Smith's model has turned into a nightmare and failure where private industry completely unregulated has offered little incentive since there are fewer avenues of advancement and what it offers isn't even superior in quality for the cost compared to models that are regulated. This is why I can get better and cheaper complete medical care at the Bumrungrad Hospital in Bangkok (where shockingly even this developing nation has been able to offer universal health care) than if I went to the private hospital down the street in NY (And I can still see a western doctor if I want).

No one here is advancing the idea of communism per se but what you have in the States isn't really capitalism at all and to boot is undergoing system failure.