Enjoy Capitalism

surferdude

I'm all for universal health care, it sucks but it's still better than any other option. But be very upfront about what you get. You get bigger governments, you get a monopoly on health care delivery, you get people with absolutely zero vested interst in maintaining their health or lowering their use of this "free" system, who have approx. 10% of the population providing health care for all, you get a doctor shortage, you get a hospital shortage, you get a shortage of every kind imagineable, you get old technology as the new technology is too expensive. Services covered and not covered is now up to politicians, on of the few groups of people I trust less than health care insurance providers. Your long term health becomaes a political hot potato. Long term decisions are no longer made, everything becomes about meeting this year's budget.

Be very clear about what you are asking for. Universal healthcare sucks but it beats the alternative for about 50 million Americans.

Is it worth sacrificing the health and healthcare of 225 million to provide a more complete care package for 50 million people?

jlew24asu

spiral out wrote:

Would you be against health care being availible to everyone instead of those lucky enough to be able afford insurance?

at what cost? who pays for this health care?

jlew24asu

don't gimme no wrote:

Yet maybe he's smart enough to read further along in my post where I acknowledged the fact that the wealthy would be paying for it, with a higher tax rate, through the government. Now jlew, I KNOW you're not stupid. So you're trying to be Bill O'Reilly or something and take my post out of context or spin it on me. Seriously, have some integrity and stop trying to mislead. We may not agree but try to be fair about what I'm saying.

fair enough. but why should the rich be forced to pay for everyone's health care? how is it "free" to them?

because you simply stated you want free health care for all. i'm trying to tell you, there is no such thing.

spiral out

surferdude wrote:

I'm all for universal health care, it sucks but it's still better than any other option. But be very upfront about what you get. You get bigger governments, you get a monopoly on health care delivery, you get people with absolutely zero vested interst in maintaining their health or lowering their use of this "free" system, who have approx. 10% of the population providing health care for all, you get a doctor shortage, you get a hospital shortage, you get a shortage of every kind imagineable, you get old technology as the new technology is too expensive. Services covered and not covered is now up to politicians, on of the few groups of people I trust less than health care insurance providers. Your long term health becomaes a political hot potato. Long term decisions are no longer made, everything becomes about meeting this year's budget.

Be very clear about what you are asking for. Universal healthcare sucks but it beats the alternative for about 50 million Americans.

Is it worth sacrificing the health and healthcare of 225 million to provide a more complete care package for 50 million people?

Just because you would have free healthcare for everyone does not mean that you cannot have private healthcare for people who can afford it.

We have private healthcare here to in the UK aswell as the NHS.

Eliot Rosewater

surferdude wrote:

I'm all for universal health care, it sucks but it's still better than any other option. But be very upfront about what you get. You get bigger governments, you get a monopoly on health care delivery, you get people with absolutely zero vested interst in maintaining their health or lowering their use of this "free" system, who have approx. 10% of the population providing health care for all, you get a doctor shortage, you get a hospital shortage, you get a shortage of every kind imagineable, you get old technology as the new technology is too expensive. Services covered and not covered is now up to politicians, on of the few groups of people I trust less than health care insurance providers. Your long term health becomaes a political hot potato. Long term decisions are no longer made, everything becomes about meeting this year's budget.

Be very clear about what you are asking for. Universal healthcare sucks but it beats the alternative for about 50 million Americans.

Is it worth sacrificing the health and healthcare of 225 million to provide a more complete care package for 50 million people?

I really don't think that's how it has to be. Maybe you're more realistic. Even so I'd say yes, sacrifices can be made by the 225 million to save lives in the 50 miillion.

Eliot Rosewater

jlew24asu wrote:

fair enough. but why should the rich be forced to pay for everyone's health care? how is it "free" to them?

because you simply stated you want free health care for all. i'm trying to tell you, there is no such thing.

Well, how's it fair that one child is born into extreme poverty and spends most of his life busting his ass for minimum wage while another is born into wealth? A great deal of the wealth in this country has to do with where you were born, not how hard you work. Sure there are exceptions but overall it's still very unbalanced.

Abookamongstthemany

don't gimme no wrote:

Well, how's it fair that one child is born into extreme poverty and spends most of his life busting his ass for minimum wage while another is born into wealth? A great deal of the wealth in this country has to do with where you were born, not how hard you work. Sure there are exceptions but overall it's still very unbalanced.

http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=247497&highlight=birthright

jlew24asu

don't gimme no wrote:

Well, how's it fair that one child is born into extreme poverty and spends most of his life busting his ass for minimum wage while another is born into wealth? A great deal of the wealth in this country has to do with where you were born, not how hard you work. Sure there are exceptions but overall it's still very unbalanced.

how is it fair to punish the wealthy?

Eliot Rosewater

jlew24asu wrote:

how is it fair to punish the wealthy?

Well, it certainly could be argued that if one is wealthy and not helping others less fortunate then that is punishable. It surely immoral, IMO. That's clearly the case as a whole. The wealthy aren't doing enough to help those less fortunate.

jlew24asu

don't gimme no wrote:

Well, it certainly could be argued that if one is wealthy and not helping others less fortunate then that is punishable. It surely immoral, IMO. That's clearly the case as a whole. The wealthy aren't doing enough to help those less fortunate.

I understand where you are going with this but you cant have it both ways. you cant pick and choose who you punish to suit your needs.

Eliot Rosewater

jlew24asu wrote:

I understand where you are going with this but you cant have it both ways. you cant pick and choose who you punish to suit your needs.

Well, I have health care and I'm educated so it certainly isn't to suit MY needs.

If the golden rule were incorporated here then you tell me the end result, jlew. Surely the wealthy would be more compassionate and willing to help those less fortunate when they put themselves in their shoes. So what's your beef with the golden rule?

jeffbr

don't gimme no wrote:

If the golden rule were incorporated here then you tell me the end result, jlew. Surely the wealthy would be more compassionate and willing to help those less fortunate when they put themselves in their shoes. So what's your beef with the golden rule?

How would the golden rule be incorporated, and what does it have to say about force?

Eliot Rosewater

jeffbr wrote:

How would the golden rule be incorporated, and what does it have to say about force?

I wasn't saying by force. I'm just saying, if we step back and imagine how it would be if it were applied. If everyone treated others as they'd like to be treated.

edit: Will anyone argue that we should be working towards that?

jlew24asu

don't gimme no wrote:

I wasn't saying by force. I'm just saying, if we step back and imagine how it would be if it were applied. If everyone treated others as they'd like to be treated.

edit: Will anyone argue that we should be working towards that?

you should come back down to reality. in your world, you would give me 100 bucks if I asked for it. will you?

Eliot Rosewater

jlew24asu wrote:

you should come back down to reality. in your world, you would give me 100 bucks if I asked for it. will you?

I tried it out but Excel tells me it's a circular reference. You're saying that you would want someone to ask you for $100....

jlew24asu

don't gimme no wrote:

I tried it out but Excel tells me it's a circular reference. You're saying that you would want someone to ask you for $100....

no i'm saying I want you to give me $100.

hippiemom

jlew24asu wrote:

no i'm saying I want you to give me $100.

But it's the golden rule ... if you want others to give you $100 when you need it, you must also want to give $100 to others when they need it, right?

surferdude

hippiemom wrote:

But it's the golden rule ... if you want others to give you $100 when you need it, you must also want to give $100 to others when they need it, right?

Then are the poor people receiving free health care going to bust their asses to provide me with free health care years from now. Or will the large majority be happy with what they have and the handouts they receive and never take on the burden of responsibility of providing for others.

Abookamongstthemany

surferdude wrote:

Then are the poor people receiving free health care going to bust their asses to provide me with free health care years from now. Or will the large majority be happy with what they have and the handouts they receive and never take on the burden of responsibility of providing for others.

Man, can't people be happy with just giving and knowing it's helping out a whole lot of families that dearly need it? I don't really mind that some of them will take advantage of the system. There's always somebody taking advantage of every system. It's makes me feel good to know that it will be helping out plenty of good people who will greatly appreciate it.

hippiemom

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Man, can't people be happy with just giving and knowing it's helping out a whole lot of families that dearly need it? I don't really mind that some of them will take advantage of the system. There's always somebody taking advantage of every system. It's makes me feel good to know that it will be helping out plenty of good people who will greatly appreciate it.

Thank you!