Being "Socialist" isn't necessarily a bad thing though, is it?
I think being 100% Socialist is a bad thing. The push to have more, do
more, have accomplishments, and feel proud of a job well-done are
great feelings. Furthermore, there are people that do nothing in
some countries and receive almost as much as the people that bust
their @ss.
There should just be a good balance.
The following 4 users would like to thank HollidayG for this useful post:
I think being 100% Socialist is a bad thing. The push to have more, do
more, have accomplishments, and feel proud of a job well-done are
great feelings. Furthermore, there are people that do nothing in some countries and receive almost as much as the people that bust
their @ss.
There should just be a good balance.
But its't it the case that these people are usually the ones who are born within the poorest of families without proper upbringing, whose parents do not value education/work themselves. So we shouldn't put the blame on the children for being born poor. And these people grow up and share the exact same mentality as their parents. Its a viscious cycle.
This'll probably be split and merged with a healthcare thread, but I can never understand why so many Americans are against the Bill. I've always believed that education and healthcare are a right, not a privilige, irrespective of your background or income.
The following 22 users would like to thank PaddyG for this useful post:
This'll probably be split and merged with a healthcare thread, but I can never understand why so many Americans are against the Bill. I've always believed that education and healthcare are a right, not a privilige, irrespective of your background or income.
Re: American health care bill, a good thing or a bad thing?
I don't really consider this healthcare issue as an issue of security, economy and not even political. I consider it humanitarian. I would put the health of under-privileged humans over political ideology. So I don't really appreciate the political rhetoric about it.
The following 3 users would like to thank for this useful post:
Sad that not one Republican voted for it, sure it wasn't "their" bill but sometimes you should do whats best for the people and not just your party.
I think it is a move in the right direction and will help many.
I think the Republicans are quite angry that Obama managed to get anything through. I believe the political strategy was to not let him have anything at all, so that at the end of his term, they can ask "What has he accomplished?"
Last edited by Phos; 23.03.2010 at 10:38.
The following 6 users would like to thank for this useful post:
Re: American health care bill, a good thing or a bad thing?
It's not clear that most Americans are against this. It depends on how you ask the question. For example, Americans have a fear of "socialism" brought about by misinformation and misinterpretation. Many people have the perception that it will quash independence, individualism, etc. etc. Some think a lot about Cold War frames, I think.
Ask Americans what they think about government run health care programs and many will scream socialism. But if you ask those same Americans whether or not they want Medicare, I believe that a majority will say yes. Medicare is a government -run program that has done well for the citizens. And at its basic core, it is a "socialist" program.
I watched a large part of the debate Sunday night. I was delighted to find that I can watch streaming video from C-SPAN, which just plays what's happening in all of its tedious glory.
I'm very strongly on the left of most Americans, so I am biased. I have to say that what I watched were Republicans screaming about procedure, dead babies and money, without any solutions. They claim that people don't have insurance because it's a choice. Bullsh1t. The Dems were marginally better. One thing I have to say about them is that at least they offered a solution. The bill that was passed is not great, but it's a start, it's something, and that, as someone else has said is really what burns the Repugs. Oh and the thing about raising Medicare taxes? yeah, only if you make more than 250K a year.
So I think the bill is a good thing. I hope the administration has the guts to keep it going, and Obama really has to go on the stump for this one. Health care is a right. And in the long run, insuring more people will mean more business for health care providers, and insurers, but it should alleviate the stress on emergency rooms, and if people can be convinced to pay attention to prevention, it might even result in a healthier population. And people will have access to meds and won't have to choose between meds and food or heat. Most people will be better off, but some might not....it's not clear yet.
But the messages have to be carefully crafted. It will take a lot of energy and patience. I hope they succeed though, because the US will be better for it.
Michael Moore can be a polarizing windbag sometimes, but yesterday he said even the Republicans will get insurance too, which I found amusing.
The following 12 users would like to thank for this useful post:
Re: American health care bill, a good thing or a bad thing?
This would actually be good for the healthcare and pharmaceutical industry. Their stocks got a bump from this.
The reasoning that impoverished people should not get the same coverage as those who work hard for it is outrageous. This isn't about diluting the value of a stock, it's about taking care of Americans and America itself.
The last minute move to exclude abortion was a brilliant move that pissed off a lot of people on the far left. I knew Obama had this up his sleeve. It took the air out of a lot of opposition.
The following 2 users would like to thank for this useful post:
Most people against this reform just hear "socialism, socialism, socialism!" in their minds and haven't actually bothered to find out what the reform consists of. They're brainwashed, what they believe has turned idelogical and any empathy is gone. Remember when Morgannon said that he believed that critically ill people who didn't have insurance should be left out on the street to die?
This is what happens when people like that are faced with reality:
The following 5 users would like to thank Russkov for this useful post:
This would actually be good for the healthcare and pharmaceutical industry. Their stocks got a bump from this.
The reasoning that impoverished people should not get the same coverage as those who work hard for it is outrageous. This isn't about diluting the value of a stock, it's about taking care of Americans and America itself.
The last minute move to exclude abortion was a brilliant move that pissed off a lot of people on the far left. I knew Obama had this up his sleeve. It took the air out of a lot of opposition.
Totally agree. The pro-business aspect of this needs to be emphasized. And it will help small business owners too. My sister currently spends more than $45k per year to insure 7 employees. So, if it helps small businesses, how can it be that "socialist."
Countries like France and Germany have proportionally far fewer abortions than the US (I think France was 20% less and Germany 50%), so if people really wanted to be "pro-life", they'd ensure that women had access to proper health care and education. I don't feel that Obama gave in much to appease Stupack and his friends.
I think every American deserves the same coverage as their elected officials.
I think the Republicans are quite angry that Obama managed to get anything through. I believe the political plan was to not let him have anything at all, so that at the end of his term, they can ask "What has he accomplished?"
It's not just the Republicans that are angry, it's the people. The polling on this issue reflects a 40% swing over the last 14 months.
Congress approval rating has jumped down to 11% and some individuals have an 8% approval rating. I believe it was Rasmussen that had a poll that was close to 70% against this CURRENT HEALTH BILL just last week. Rasmussen is a Democrat btw. It's the indepentens that caused a large part of the swing. I believe they are the group that voted for Obama.
People and even the Republicans wanted health care reform JUST NOT THIS BILL. Where is the Tort Reform?
Obama has accomplished something - he's run up the US deficit more than any other president in the history of the country. I thought he was a Marxist in 2007 and I haven't changed my mind but I didn't like McCain either. (It might have been you Phos that told me when I said that I didn't want to vote for him because he was a Marxist that what I really meant was that he was Black. I don't remember though).
The number of people who are uninsured were first quoted at 47 mio, now they say 31 or 33 mio (I can't remember the exact figure and I'm not sure if the 14-20 mio illegal alliens are in that number).
The majority of Americans are happy with their health plans. Most just didn't understand why the government didn't deal with just those folks who were uninsured.
Why throw the baby out with the bath water?
Alll the talk about being "able to keep your own healthcare" is drivel. The politicians were already out today talking about the public option. Many are on record as saying this is just a first step - the end game is to have only a public option.
As to healthcare being a right - well that's up for discussion. Is food a right? Is a home a right? Is a job a right? So easy for a politician to *******ize the idea of "rights". Such easy pickings.
Age old question in these discussion - Where do your rights end when somebody else has the responsibility to pay it for you? What happens when your rights and "MY" responsibility to pay for you begin to infringe on "MY" rights.
The European idea of what is a "right" is a bit different to the American. We believe our rights come from God - according to our Constitution.
Once a government gives you your rights - the government can take it away. More importantly in my mind is that once a government (i.e., politicians) give you your rights, there is an immediate conflict of interest.
The politican will take your hard earned money and redistribute it to others. He has a vested interest in redistributing it as much as possible, the more give aways, the longer he can stay in power and the longer the person paying for it becomes an indentured servant to the State.
Also most of the politicians didn't read the bill and don't even know what the hell is in it - that's just really sad.
Anyway those are just some of my thoughts to give you a bit of the other side. Did I just say "bit" - sorry I didn't mean to type out so much and there are probably at least 5 topics that should be threads on their own and I didn't even include that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are already either bankrupt or edging toward insolvency - all unsustainable.
So the question remains, why didn't we help alll those without healthcare.
Why add such a large entitlement on top of all the others that are collapsing?
- sorry I didn't mean to type out so much and there are probably at least 5 topics that should be threads on their own and I didn't even include that Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security are already either bankrupt or edging toward insolvency - all unsustainable. 
Linear Mode
