I think everyone agrees that having comprehensive universal health insurance for everyone that is both effective and reliable is a great idea. I mean, you'd have to be a fool not to want the very best insurance coverage you can possibly get for you and your family. If that happened to come at little or no cost to you, then of course it would be an absolute dream.
The unfortunate reality is, our country cannot afford this. Please, before you laugh, I know how absolutely stupid that sounds. In all honesty, the abortion of money management within our government is stupid. Our country may be the richest, as far as what we consume, but that is pretty much all we have become....a nation of consumers. Couple that with the fact that much of our consumption is done so on credit. A nation is not rich when we are debt spending. Just because you spend a million dollars on credit, does not mean you've added anything monetarily to our economy if you don't actually have the means to pay it back. Somewhere down the road, there is going to be a million dollar hole that needs to be filled by someone. At the VERY least, just to stay where we are now (which is in a real shit hole of debt) we'd need to cut the equivalent of the health care plan from our budget before it's passed. However, we all know that nothing is going to be cut.
If you were to have a business who's books looked like this: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ you wouldn't stay in business long, and you damn sure couldn't afford to give all your employees health care.
and here's a question.... if you dont work and dont pay taxes, should the police not give a fuck about you if a crime is commited against you? its the same principle of only getting what you pay into, right?
logic is great, but it is flawed here. Cops are for PUBLIC safety. someone who is underinsured getting sick is not a public health risk unless it is with a disease or virus that is deemed a public health risk. In which case there are already programs that take care of people with these problems. you cannot compare the two. In fact, I will jump and say yes you can, but you can only compare them as public safety and health issues, bob johnson getting cancer is not a public risk and should not be paid for by the people who pay the taxes. Sorry if you disagree, but it always seems as though people are always able to spend other people's money. I work hard for everything I have and I don't expect a hand out from anyone, I have been unemployed for a long period of time and scraped and saved and got back on my feet. Universal Health Care, especially in the form that is before the house and senate will be a disaster. I certainly feel terrible for people who go broke because of an illness, I actually donate a lot of my salary (lucky enough to have made my share) to our meds program for Ryan White clients, but I don't think I should be forced to do any of it. This will be health care for all but at a huge cost to everyone else, and I don't think they measure up. Until they come up with a system that won't cripple more people than it will help I cannot support it
That's great that you give to charities... but the way I see things, we shouldn't have to rely on charity to fill in the gaps. Charities also can't get to everyone. Why complicate the process to get health servcies?? Health insurance needs to be streamlined and simplified, for all of our sakes.
Obama should be arguing a lot more strongly for a single payer health care system rather than acting like it can't be done. but maybe he's right... because I really don't understand the mindset of large parts of this country. you can't deny that it's regional. If it were up to the east coast and west coast, we would have had universal health insurance in the 40's. But in some places faith-based charities are big business and they don't want the government competing with them (only subsidizing them)... am I wrong to think that this is what it comes down to? Of course HMOs have the biggest slices of pie. Too many businesses have their fingers in the health insurance pie. The pie should belong to the people, and only the people.
A friend of mine who voted Libertarian in every election since the 90's recently moved to the UK. After experiencing the National Health Service there (and she's not even a citizen) her mindset was completely changed.
My dad has been using the VA for 40 years. He's survived three different kinds of cancer with their help, including lung cancer.
No system is perfect... but there are many more nightmare stories coming from our lack of a health care system than from government systems (excluding third world dictatorships of course).
Which highlights the problem I've pointed out before - if the conservatives would stop raiding Social Security for their own needs, we would still have it. And there's a really simple fix - remove the Social Security cap (currently at the first $100k). Do that and Social Security will stay robust for several generations at least, even maybe forever.
The conservatives ?? Are you on crack ? Im so sick of talking about this with un informed and un educated liberals. There are no Conservatives in the senate our the house that's why we are in the mess were in right now. Just Look at California. Look how bankrupt it is. It's the # 1 in un employment and It's cos out of control spending by Liberals. California should be a prime example what will happen to the rest of the country if we don't stop these massive entitlement programs.
yep... and ironically he has posted a link to a pretty awful story about 1 guy in Canada... doesnt he realise that in the current US system for every one of that Canadian guy there are 100 other Americans being made bankrupt or dying simply because they dont have the right kind of insurance or no insurance at all.
but alas... he's too busy polishing his rifle to actually realise this.
oh scary... 40000 morbidly obese christians wearing fanny packs invading europe is probably the least scariest thing since I watched an edited version of The Care Bears movie in an extremely brightly lit cinema.
You really think you can cover more people with health insurance and lower the costs of health care....without doing anything to lower its cost other than provide more people insurance coverage. I don't get it.
You take health care out of the hands of the greedy medical industry and provide universal health care through the tax dollar. This wouldn't mean a rise in taxes for everyone. It would maybe just require the government to manage it's finances better. I.e, spend the tax dollars on saving peoples lives instead of spending a quarter of the national budget on the military in order to kill poor brown people abroad. You could also stop sending $4 Billion to Israel every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_b ... ted_States 'The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2010 for about 19% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures and 28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.'
As I said in my earlier post....in order for us to just remain in the fiscal shit hole we're in now, they'd need to cut at the very least, the equivalent cost of universal health care from our budget before enacting it. Regardless of where it comes from (i.e. military, foreign affairs, social programs etc.). You can't raise taxes enough to do it, and if you could who are you going to raise taxes on? Only about 35% of the population in this country pays 100% of the income tax. That's one helluva burden. So in order to gain the additional revenue you have to levy taxes on various goods and services that directly affect the poor and what's left of the middle class. I don't see how that could help.
"because I really don't understand the mindset of large parts of this country. you can't deny that it's regional. If it were up to the east coast and west coast, we would have had universal health insurance in the 40's. But in some places faith-based charities are big business and they don't want the government competing with them (only subsidizing them)... am I wrong to think that this is what it comes down to? Of course HMOs have the biggest slices of pie. Too many businesses have their fingers in the health insurance pie. The pie should belong to the people, and only the people."
I am not saying I don't think reform is a good thing, I really do think it is necessary, but more regulation is not the answer, less is.
The pie you speak of should belong to those that want to provide the services that others need for a piece of the american dream. Without capitalism the "american dream" would die. Giving everyone health insurance isn't the solution and neither is taking away 1/6th of the total economy and giving it to the federal government, that would be seen as a dictatorship if it were say oil fields, energy resources, and food rations, but since it is a "rich" industry it must be okay.
If something is out of line with what you are providing than most people won't pay it and the prices will be forced to drop. If everyone in the US were forced to pay the first $2500 out of pocket, don't you think they would become better consumers? I know for a fact I can get an MRI done at diff't hospitals around the area I live for about a $1000 difference. Don't you think we should be able to price shop?
it is like having two dogs that fight all the time, you want to get involved so they don't hurt each other so you step in, and they keep doing it time and time again. The problem with that is if you just left them alone to settle their problem they would correct themselves right away and the fighting would cease. More laws and government involvement only temporarily solves a problem, it doesnt fix it forever like the free market can do.
covering everyone is not the solution, letting the market dictate the costs would be a much better solution, but since the government got involved once, it will have to do it forever, or at least until they are bankrupt and we ALL suffer... which unfortunately we are seeing right now. Spending is at an all time high and has been for many years going back to 9/11, but I dont think many people realize the damage running a trillion dollar debt can do to the overall value of our currency and the state of our nation. it is sad to say, but the pay as you go philosophy needs to be inacted or we are all going to suffer greatly. What's worse, 300 million people suffering, or a small percentage of that? I would say the latter, but I realize some think everyone should just share the money, in that case, I will stop working for a while and let someone else pay for my shit. . . . any takers?
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
You really think you can cover more people with health insurance and lower the costs of health care....without doing anything to lower its cost other than provide more people insurance coverage. I don't get it.
You take health care out of the hands of the greedy medical industry and provide universal health care through the tax dollar. This wouldn't mean a rise in taxes for everyone. It would maybe just require the government to manage it's finances better. I.e, spend the tax dollars on saving peoples lives instead of spending a quarter of the national budget on the military in order to kill poor brown people abroad. You could also stop sending $4 Billion to Israel every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_b ... ted_States 'The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2010 for about 19% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures and 28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.'
and then we can't account for trillions of that budget, it just vanished
don't compete; coexist
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
There needs to be a balance between socialism and capitalism (the Canadian system provides that because the funding is public, but the health services are privately managed). Health care services run on a different economic engine than commodities do - it's hard for me to explain this, but this article explains it well:
http://www.pnhp.org is also a great source in general for info on single payer universal healthcare.
I know for a fact that universal healthcare works and will not leave the entire population miserable as you say. Half of my extended family lives in Norway. To Americans, Norway would seem like a socialist country, but it's not - they just figured out how to mix socialism and capitalism. Norwegians are far and away happier people than Americans and it's because they take care of each other. That's the kind of country I want to live in - where the exploiter is blamed for exploitation, not the exploited. Competition is good, but not to the extent that people get screwed over, especially when it comes to healthcare... whatthefuck!!!!!!!!! Norwegians love their healthcare system and would never ever trade it for what we have. They think we're crazy, and they're right!
Which highlights the problem I've pointed out before - if the conservatives would stop raiding Social Security for their own needs, we would still have it. And there's a really simple fix - remove the Social Security cap (currently at the first $100k). Do that and Social Security will stay robust for several generations at least, even maybe forever.
The conservatives ?? Are you on crack ? Im so sick of talking about this with un informed and un educated liberals. There are no Conservatives in the senate our the house that's why we are in the mess were in right now. Just Look at California. Look how bankrupt it is. It's the # 1 in un employment and It's cos out of control spending by Liberals. California should be a prime example what will happen to the rest of the country if we don't stop these massive entitlement programs.
Well, about time someone actually paid attention to me. I was afraid I was being ignored.
No conservatives in the Senate or the House? I suppose that depends on your definition of "conservative" but then again the right wing has been constantly moving the goalposts for 30 years - wasn't that long ago that Chimpy McCodpiece was hailed as a real conservative before everyone started distancing themselves from his policies. Kinda hard to face the truth, ain't it?
Oh yeah, and your "conservative" icon Ronald Reagan started the ball rolling when he started raiding the Social Security trust fund to pay for his tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires... and then rocketed the federal debt to 187% of previous levels. In other words, he borrowed more money than ALL the Presidents from Washington to Carter before him. :roll:
Besides you didn't address the meat of my response - Social Security can be well funded way into the future if we lift the cap.
And as far as California, the problems in my state are myriad, but it boils down to two particular things:
1. Voter initiatives to amend the state constitution can pass with 51% of the vote, but an amendment through the Legislature requires a 2/3 vote. The voter initiative system, initially put in place by progressives who got sick of the powerful corporate moneyed interests being able to bribe the government, have been taken over by reactionary interests, such as Howard Jarvis, who put forth that insidious Prop 13, and the Mormon and Catholic churches, who poured millions of dollars into the state to promote an anti gay marriage Prop 8.
2. Because of such reactionary initiatives, the Legislature is hamstrung because we can't raise new revenues: every tax increase has required a 2/3 vote from both houses of the Legislature since the mid-70s: exactly the kind of obstructionism by Republicans has been going on here since the 70s that you now see at the Federal level.
When times are great, we can get by, but when the economy is bad, the state is forced to do massive spending decreases, such as laying off firefighters and teachers, while the right wing "conservatives" in the Legislature create deadlock by stopping the State from raising revenue and even passing a budget. So while people who make money by lounging on their lawns waiting for their dividend checks to arrive have it all made, the guy who has to break his back working a 40 hour week to support his family has to suffer the effects of conservative ideology. (Note that 4 of the last 6 governors starting with Reagan have been Republicans, and one Democrat, Gray Davis, was practically a Republican himself).
I realize it's hard to break away from your cherished conservative ideas such as "government is bad" and "spending is bad" and "tax cuts are good", but we tried all of that for 30 years,and each year it's gotten progressively worse.
It is said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result... so I suppose all these conservatives harping about tax cuts as the solution to everything must be insane.
"It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
0
Options
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Which highlights the problem I've pointed out before - if the conservatives would stop raiding Social Security for their own needs, we would still have it. And there's a really simple fix - remove the Social Security cap (currently at the first $100k). Do that and Social Security will stay robust for several generations at least, even maybe forever.
The conservatives ?? Are you on crack ? Im so sick of talking about this with un informed and un educated liberals. There are no Conservatives in the senate our the house that's why we are in the mess were in right now. Just Look at California. Look how bankrupt it is. It's the # 1 in un employment and It's cos out of control spending by Liberals. California should be a prime example what will happen to the rest of the country if we don't stop these massive entitlement programs.
What state are you in? I'm in Illinois and the Dems have been in control for as long as I can remember. There have been GOP Governor's but they are handcuffed because the Dems run both houses. Now they want MORE money for education, not that it is bad but they will just find another way to need more again in a year or two. They don't know how to spend wisely. We have toll roads that were supposed to stop being toll roads once the roads were paid for, we have the lottery which was supposed to be the cure all for education, now they want to raise the income tax again. They want to completely IGNORE paying some bills, and just take borrow to pay others. I wonder what the bank would say to me if I wanted to do that.
$26B revenue = $13B in the hole with the Dems running this shithole state. It is far and away the most corrupt state. I can't wait until this election, but I doubt much will change because Chicago thinks they run the state. I can't wait to find another job out of here. Maybe I will start commuting.
"Norwegians are far and away happier people than Americans and it's because they take care of each other"
that is a BOLD statement, I would imagine their is more to it than that.
I am not talking about commodities, I am talking about prices and how the free market controls them. If you charge too much for a service than no one will pay... who the fuck would pay $19.99 for a 20 oz soda? no one, that is who. the government in the US (not anywhere else) getting involved caused a lot more problems decades ago than anyone could have forseen, I am afraid of that happening here. That caused a huge trillion dollar industry to sprout, cat is already out of the bag, it, unfortunately for some, will have to stay there in my opinion. You are talking about getting rid of a lot of jobs whether you see it or not, and that will make a lot of people miserable, the number is so widely varied on how many people don't have coverage it is astounding. Also,
~ 5,000,000 pop of norway
~ 30,000,000 pop of canada
~ 62,000,000 pop of uk
~ 300,000,000 pop of USA
just saying that a lot more people will need this care than those countries, and considering no one gives a shit about themselves anymore and eats shit all the time and is confused as to why they are sick, there will be a hell of a lot more people in the hospitals and clinics around the country.
I just think it needs to become MORE private not LESS. thats all, I think something should be done, but the "what" is where we are differing I think. All people should be covered, but no one should get it for free. I work hard for what I have, and I would rather myself spend it than the government. I don't think that other countries are any better of a model for life than we are. Government should get smaller not larger. I am with ron paul when he says federal income taxes are unconstitutional, he goes on to say,
"It's no coincidence that the monstrous growth of the federal government has been accompanied by a sickening decline in living standards and moral standards. The feds want us to be hamsters on a treadmill--working hard, all day long, to pay high taxes, but otherwise entirely docile and controlled. The huge, expensive, and out-of-control leviathan that we call the federal government wants to run every single aspect of our lives. Well, I'm sorry, but that's not America. It's not what the Founders gave us."
let me go a different angle, why would I care about someone in utah getting health care with my money more than i would say nigeria or morocco? They are all strangers and they are all human, maybe we should just have universal healthcare for everyone that all countries fund. . .obviously that is an extreme example, but I hope it shows how I view this, all people should be responsible for themselves and their families. The rest, everything they give to strangers should be a gift, not forced. In the US especially you can get some where in life if you work hard. You don't have to have anyone do it for you, and that is the country I want to live in. don't wanna work hard, than guess what, you don't get anything. Everyone would be happier and more fulfilled if everyone took personal responsibility for their own life.
again I have rattled on too much, rather bored today. . . . don't think i am attacking you please kenny, I just am passionate about this . . . first time someone hasn't called me a prick for not believing in UHC so I am enjoying the debate. also, the link you provided seems to back up some of what I am saying, the government, with the laws and programs as they are have completely mucked up everything. prices would never be this high had it not been for the subsidies and guaranteed payment practices.
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
I realize it's hard to break away from your cherished conservative ideas such as "government is bad" and "spending is bad" and "tax cuts are good", but we tried all of that for 30 years,and each year it's gotten progressively worse.
It is said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result... so I suppose all these conservatives harping about tax cuts as the solution to everything must be insane. :mrgreen
Government is BAD
Raising revenue does not always need to come in the form of raising taxes. this is why I don't want any government getting involved in anything like healthcare. . . They are porrly run. how about this novel idea. . . only spend what you take in, and even a little less. A properly run state is one that actually has surplus for "tough times." Raising revenue is just another term for raising taxes, which does not need to be done, SPEND LESS. Christ if I could go in and get a raise everytime I decided I wanted to spend more than I have I would be laughed out of my bosses office. so why should the state and federal government be held to any different standard
also, the laying off of teachers is never a good thing. which is why it should highlight how badly the governments of all states and the federal government have screwed up school funding.. Ughh too much complaining to do, might be time for that self sustaining beet farm...
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
here's what I agree with you on, and I was gonna touch on this before but i didnt really have time...
your point on the populations of norway vs UK vs Canada vs USA... I agree that is a factor. I personally think the USA is too big to be ruled by Washington DC. so what does that mean? split the country up? give the states more power? i'd be in favor of either plan. if the New England states wanted to withdraw from the union and form their own country, i'd be in favor of it. i dont think it'll happen... americans cant think of their country being split up... theyre too proud of this country being huge like it is. and the civil war kinda ended discussions of splitting it anyway but the Federal Govt has too much money and power... no question. so let's limit the role of the Feds and increase the roles of the states... i think it has to be done. and then all government programs will work better like they do in little countries like Norway.
here's what I agree with you on, and I was gonna touch on this before but i didnt really have time...
your point on the populations of norway vs UK vs Canada vs USA... I agree that is a factor. I personally think the USA is too big to be ruled by Washington DC. so what does that mean? split the country up? give the states more power? i'd be in favor of either plan. if the New England states wanted to withdraw from the union and form their own country, i'd be in favor of it. i dont think it'll happen... americans cant think of their country being split up... theyre too proud of this country being huge like it is. and the civil war kinda ended discussions of splitting it anyway but the Federal Govt has too much money and power... no question. so let's limit the role of the Feds and increase the roles of the states... i think it has to be done. and then all government programs will work better like they do in little countries like Norway.
couldn't agree more . . .states and local municipalities need much more power than they have to govern things that matter to local areas. The feds just try to throw a blanket over everyone or fit a square peg into about 75 different places it doesn't fit . . .
that’s right! Can’t we all just get together and focus on our real enemies: monogamous gays and stem cells… - Ned Flanders
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
You really think you can cover more people with health insurance and lower the costs of health care....without doing anything to lower its cost other than provide more people insurance coverage. I don't get it.
You take health care out of the hands of the greedy medical industry and provide universal health care through the tax dollar. This wouldn't mean a rise in taxes for everyone. It would maybe just require the government to manage it's finances better. I.e, spend the tax dollars on saving peoples lives instead of spending a quarter of the national budget on the military in order to kill poor brown people abroad. You could also stop sending $4 Billion to Israel every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_b ... ted_States 'The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2010 for about 19% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures and 28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.'
But see - I don't view the medical industry as greedy. I view the government as the greedy one. They are going to force out any competition and give it to the insurance companies that line their pockets the most. That's sadly how our government works.
The only people we should try to get even with...
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Comments
The unfortunate reality is, our country cannot afford this. Please, before you laugh, I know how absolutely stupid that sounds. In all honesty, the abortion of money management within our government is stupid. Our country may be the richest, as far as what we consume, but that is pretty much all we have become....a nation of consumers. Couple that with the fact that much of our consumption is done so on credit. A nation is not rich when we are debt spending. Just because you spend a million dollars on credit, does not mean you've added anything monetarily to our economy if you don't actually have the means to pay it back. Somewhere down the road, there is going to be a million dollar hole that needs to be filled by someone. At the VERY least, just to stay where we are now (which is in a real shit hole of debt) we'd need to cut the equivalent of the health care plan from our budget before it's passed. However, we all know that nothing is going to be cut.
If you were to have a business who's books looked like this: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ you wouldn't stay in business long, and you damn sure couldn't afford to give all your employees health care.
That's great that you give to charities... but the way I see things, we shouldn't have to rely on charity to fill in the gaps. Charities also can't get to everyone. Why complicate the process to get health servcies?? Health insurance needs to be streamlined and simplified, for all of our sakes.
Obama should be arguing a lot more strongly for a single payer health care system rather than acting like it can't be done. but maybe he's right... because I really don't understand the mindset of large parts of this country. you can't deny that it's regional. If it were up to the east coast and west coast, we would have had universal health insurance in the 40's. But in some places faith-based charities are big business and they don't want the government competing with them (only subsidizing them)... am I wrong to think that this is what it comes down to? Of course HMOs have the biggest slices of pie. Too many businesses have their fingers in the health insurance pie. The pie should belong to the people, and only the people.
A friend of mine who voted Libertarian in every election since the 90's recently moved to the UK. After experiencing the National Health Service there (and she's not even a citizen) her mindset was completely changed.
My dad has been using the VA for 40 years. He's survived three different kinds of cancer with their help, including lung cancer.
No system is perfect... but there are many more nightmare stories coming from our lack of a health care system than from government systems (excluding third world dictatorships of course).
The conservatives ?? Are you on crack ? Im so sick of talking about this with un informed and un educated liberals. There are no Conservatives in the senate our the house that's why we are in the mess were in right now. Just Look at California. Look how bankrupt it is. It's the # 1 in un employment and It's cos out of control spending by Liberals. California should be a prime example what will happen to the rest of the country if we don't stop these massive entitlement programs.
:wtf: :crazy: :lolno:
Canada's Health Ins Looks good to me :roll:
http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnis ... 38311.html
see dunky, some people just don't get it.
here we go again. the only difference is Canada is now inserted where the UK was a couple of weeks ago.
but alas... he's too busy polishing his rifle to actually realise this.
You take health care out of the hands of the greedy medical industry and provide universal health care through the tax dollar. This wouldn't mean a rise in taxes for everyone. It would maybe just require the government to manage it's finances better. I.e, spend the tax dollars on saving peoples lives instead of spending a quarter of the national budget on the military in order to kill poor brown people abroad. You could also stop sending $4 Billion to Israel every year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_b ... ted_States
'The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2010 for about 19% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures and 28% of estimated tax revenues. Including non-DOD expenditures, defense spending was approximately 25–29% of budgeted expenditures and 38–44% of estimated tax revenues. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... penditures
The top 15 countries with the highest military expenditure for 2008 by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute using market exchange rates.[1]
1. United States
Total National Budget %
607.0 ($ b.)
World Share
41.5 %
2. People's Republic of China
Total National Budget %
84.9 ($ b.)
World Share
5.8 %
3. France
Total National Budget %
65.7 ($ b.)
World Share
4.5 %
4. United Kingdom
Total National Budget %
65.3 ($ b.)
World Share
4.5 %
5. Russia
Total National Budget %
58.6 ($ b.)
World Share
4.0 %
"because I really don't understand the mindset of large parts of this country. you can't deny that it's regional. If it were up to the east coast and west coast, we would have had universal health insurance in the 40's. But in some places faith-based charities are big business and they don't want the government competing with them (only subsidizing them)... am I wrong to think that this is what it comes down to? Of course HMOs have the biggest slices of pie. Too many businesses have their fingers in the health insurance pie. The pie should belong to the people, and only the people."
I am not saying I don't think reform is a good thing, I really do think it is necessary, but more regulation is not the answer, less is.
The pie you speak of should belong to those that want to provide the services that others need for a piece of the american dream. Without capitalism the "american dream" would die. Giving everyone health insurance isn't the solution and neither is taking away 1/6th of the total economy and giving it to the federal government, that would be seen as a dictatorship if it were say oil fields, energy resources, and food rations, but since it is a "rich" industry it must be okay.
If something is out of line with what you are providing than most people won't pay it and the prices will be forced to drop. If everyone in the US were forced to pay the first $2500 out of pocket, don't you think they would become better consumers? I know for a fact I can get an MRI done at diff't hospitals around the area I live for about a $1000 difference. Don't you think we should be able to price shop?
it is like having two dogs that fight all the time, you want to get involved so they don't hurt each other so you step in, and they keep doing it time and time again. The problem with that is if you just left them alone to settle their problem they would correct themselves right away and the fighting would cease. More laws and government involvement only temporarily solves a problem, it doesnt fix it forever like the free market can do.
covering everyone is not the solution, letting the market dictate the costs would be a much better solution, but since the government got involved once, it will have to do it forever, or at least until they are bankrupt and we ALL suffer... which unfortunately we are seeing right now. Spending is at an all time high and has been for many years going back to 9/11, but I dont think many people realize the damage running a trillion dollar debt can do to the overall value of our currency and the state of our nation. it is sad to say, but the pay as you go philosophy needs to be inacted or we are all going to suffer greatly. What's worse, 300 million people suffering, or a small percentage of that? I would say the latter, but I realize some think everyone should just share the money, in that case, I will stop working for a while and let someone else pay for my shit. . . . any takers?
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
and then we can't account for trillions of that budget, it just vanished
what are you but my reflection? who am i to judge or strike you down?
"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the bank." - Barack Obama
when you told me 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em'
i was thinkin 'death before dishonor'
There needs to be a balance between socialism and capitalism (the Canadian system provides that because the funding is public, but the health services are privately managed). Health care services run on a different economic engine than commodities do - it's hard for me to explain this, but this article explains it well:
http://www.pnhp.org/publications/compet ... system.php
http://www.pnhp.org is also a great source in general for info on single payer universal healthcare.
I know for a fact that universal healthcare works and will not leave the entire population miserable as you say. Half of my extended family lives in Norway. To Americans, Norway would seem like a socialist country, but it's not - they just figured out how to mix socialism and capitalism. Norwegians are far and away happier people than Americans and it's because they take care of each other. That's the kind of country I want to live in - where the exploiter is blamed for exploitation, not the exploited. Competition is good, but not to the extent that people get screwed over, especially when it comes to healthcare... whatthefuck!!!!!!!!! Norwegians love their healthcare system and would never ever trade it for what we have. They think we're crazy, and they're right!
Well, about time someone actually paid attention to me. I was afraid I was being ignored.
No conservatives in the Senate or the House? I suppose that depends on your definition of "conservative" but then again the right wing has been constantly moving the goalposts for 30 years - wasn't that long ago that Chimpy McCodpiece was hailed as a real conservative before everyone started distancing themselves from his policies. Kinda hard to face the truth, ain't it?
Oh yeah, and your "conservative" icon Ronald Reagan started the ball rolling when he started raiding the Social Security trust fund to pay for his tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires... and then rocketed the federal debt to 187% of previous levels. In other words, he borrowed more money than ALL the Presidents from Washington to Carter before him. :roll:
Besides you didn't address the meat of my response - Social Security can be well funded way into the future if we lift the cap.
And as far as California, the problems in my state are myriad, but it boils down to two particular things:
1. Voter initiatives to amend the state constitution can pass with 51% of the vote, but an amendment through the Legislature requires a 2/3 vote. The voter initiative system, initially put in place by progressives who got sick of the powerful corporate moneyed interests being able to bribe the government, have been taken over by reactionary interests, such as Howard Jarvis, who put forth that insidious Prop 13, and the Mormon and Catholic churches, who poured millions of dollars into the state to promote an anti gay marriage Prop 8.
2. Because of such reactionary initiatives, the Legislature is hamstrung because we can't raise new revenues: every tax increase has required a 2/3 vote from both houses of the Legislature since the mid-70s: exactly the kind of obstructionism by Republicans has been going on here since the 70s that you now see at the Federal level.
When times are great, we can get by, but when the economy is bad, the state is forced to do massive spending decreases, such as laying off firefighters and teachers, while the right wing "conservatives" in the Legislature create deadlock by stopping the State from raising revenue and even passing a budget. So while people who make money by lounging on their lawns waiting for their dividend checks to arrive have it all made, the guy who has to break his back working a 40 hour week to support his family has to suffer the effects of conservative ideology. (Note that 4 of the last 6 governors starting with Reagan have been Republicans, and one Democrat, Gray Davis, was practically a Republican himself).
I realize it's hard to break away from your cherished conservative ideas such as "government is bad" and "spending is bad" and "tax cuts are good", but we tried all of that for 30 years,and each year it's gotten progressively worse.
It is said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result... so I suppose all these conservatives harping about tax cuts as the solution to everything must be insane.
What state are you in? I'm in Illinois and the Dems have been in control for as long as I can remember. There have been GOP Governor's but they are handcuffed because the Dems run both houses. Now they want MORE money for education, not that it is bad but they will just find another way to need more again in a year or two. They don't know how to spend wisely. We have toll roads that were supposed to stop being toll roads once the roads were paid for, we have the lottery which was supposed to be the cure all for education, now they want to raise the income tax again. They want to completely IGNORE paying some bills, and just take borrow to pay others. I wonder what the bank would say to me if I wanted to do that.
$26B revenue = $13B in the hole with the Dems running this shithole state. It is far and away the most corrupt state. I can't wait until this election, but I doubt much will change because Chicago thinks they run the state. I can't wait to find another job out of here. Maybe I will start commuting.
that is a BOLD statement, I would imagine their is more to it than that.
I am not talking about commodities, I am talking about prices and how the free market controls them. If you charge too much for a service than no one will pay... who the fuck would pay $19.99 for a 20 oz soda? no one, that is who. the government in the US (not anywhere else) getting involved caused a lot more problems decades ago than anyone could have forseen, I am afraid of that happening here. That caused a huge trillion dollar industry to sprout, cat is already out of the bag, it, unfortunately for some, will have to stay there in my opinion. You are talking about getting rid of a lot of jobs whether you see it or not, and that will make a lot of people miserable, the number is so widely varied on how many people don't have coverage it is astounding. Also,
~ 5,000,000 pop of norway
~ 30,000,000 pop of canada
~ 62,000,000 pop of uk
~ 300,000,000 pop of USA
just saying that a lot more people will need this care than those countries, and considering no one gives a shit about themselves anymore and eats shit all the time and is confused as to why they are sick, there will be a hell of a lot more people in the hospitals and clinics around the country.
I just think it needs to become MORE private not LESS. thats all, I think something should be done, but the "what" is where we are differing I think. All people should be covered, but no one should get it for free. I work hard for what I have, and I would rather myself spend it than the government. I don't think that other countries are any better of a model for life than we are. Government should get smaller not larger. I am with ron paul when he says federal income taxes are unconstitutional, he goes on to say,
"It's no coincidence that the monstrous growth of the federal government has been accompanied by a sickening decline in living standards and moral standards. The feds want us to be hamsters on a treadmill--working hard, all day long, to pay high taxes, but otherwise entirely docile and controlled. The huge, expensive, and out-of-control leviathan that we call the federal government wants to run every single aspect of our lives. Well, I'm sorry, but that's not America. It's not what the Founders gave us."
let me go a different angle, why would I care about someone in utah getting health care with my money more than i would say nigeria or morocco? They are all strangers and they are all human, maybe we should just have universal healthcare for everyone that all countries fund. . .obviously that is an extreme example, but I hope it shows how I view this, all people should be responsible for themselves and their families. The rest, everything they give to strangers should be a gift, not forced. In the US especially you can get some where in life if you work hard. You don't have to have anyone do it for you, and that is the country I want to live in. don't wanna work hard, than guess what, you don't get anything. Everyone would be happier and more fulfilled if everyone took personal responsibility for their own life.
again I have rattled on too much, rather bored today. . . . don't think i am attacking you please kenny, I just am passionate about this . . . first time someone hasn't called me a prick for not believing in UHC so I am enjoying the debate. also, the link you provided seems to back up some of what I am saying, the government, with the laws and programs as they are have completely mucked up everything. prices would never be this high had it not been for the subsidies and guaranteed payment practices.
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
you wrote
I realize it's hard to break away from your cherished conservative ideas such as "government is bad" and "spending is bad" and "tax cuts are good", but we tried all of that for 30 years,and each year it's gotten progressively worse.
It is said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result... so I suppose all these conservatives harping about tax cuts as the solution to everything must be insane. :mrgreen
Government is BAD
Raising revenue does not always need to come in the form of raising taxes. this is why I don't want any government getting involved in anything like healthcare. . . They are porrly run. how about this novel idea. . . only spend what you take in, and even a little less. A properly run state is one that actually has surplus for "tough times." Raising revenue is just another term for raising taxes, which does not need to be done, SPEND LESS. Christ if I could go in and get a raise everytime I decided I wanted to spend more than I have I would be laughed out of my bosses office. so why should the state and federal government be held to any different standard
also, the laying off of teachers is never a good thing. which is why it should highlight how badly the governments of all states and the federal government have screwed up school funding.. Ughh too much complaining to do, might be time for that self sustaining beet farm...
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
here's what I agree with you on, and I was gonna touch on this before but i didnt really have time...
your point on the populations of norway vs UK vs Canada vs USA... I agree that is a factor. I personally think the USA is too big to be ruled by Washington DC. so what does that mean? split the country up? give the states more power? i'd be in favor of either plan. if the New England states wanted to withdraw from the union and form their own country, i'd be in favor of it. i dont think it'll happen... americans cant think of their country being split up... theyre too proud of this country being huge like it is. and the civil war kinda ended discussions of splitting it anyway
couldn't agree more . . .states and local municipalities need much more power than they have to govern things that matter to local areas. The feds just try to throw a blanket over everyone or fit a square peg into about 75 different places it doesn't fit . . .
It is terrifying when you are too stupid to know who is dumb
- Joe Rogan
But see - I don't view the medical industry as greedy. I view the government as the greedy one. They are going to force out any competition and give it to the insurance companies that line their pockets the most. That's sadly how our government works.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.