Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm actually in favor of Universal Healthcare but that Bloomberg ranking system is just silly. Whether it's a single payer system or not, the US is never going to get it better if the actual costs aren't contained. This includes the standard inefficiencies from billing and administration, controlling unnecessary tests, reducing malpractice costs (which includes tort reform). It also means doing more to expand the number of doctors and medical professionals - and we need to push more primary care down to physician assistants (or we need more doctors - like everything in system serving over 300 million people there is no easy answer and there are contradictory arguments for everything).
Finally, someone who understands that just because you have a taxpayer funded system, doesn't mean it's affordable. I am against universal healthcare for lots of reasons, both philosophical (it's really about centralizing power and control) and financial (I really don't think it will be anywhere near as good as advertised, financially or in terms of quality of care).
But there's actually some good news out there that no one seems to want to learn. If we really wanted to, we could actually bypass 70% of what's wrong with our health care system, just by living a healthier way of life. We now spend over $70 Trillion on treating largely preventable diseases. This guy, who studied the lifestyles of people in long lived societies (who use very little health care), has some great ideas for how to achieve that:
If you are not part of the top 10%, you are literally kicking yourself in the behind every time you vote Republican.
It has been that way for generations.
After the US War Between the States the African American community took more than sixty years of abuse at the hands of the Republican party before they were totally convinced that their needs and the needs of the super rich were in conflict and they would always lose in the Republican party's agenda. President 'laissez-faire' Hoover was apparently the last straw for most of them.
It is the same for all ordinary folks, but many have not received the message yet. The donor class runs the party, and the typical voter's only function is to drink the kool aid and vote in support of them.
The party accomplishes this by splitting the electorate over wedge issues, which makes some people so upset they just lash out in anger and don't realize they are voting against the best advocates they could ever have in government. I personally watched them do that in Chicago years ago with race baiting, there was a lot of anxiety over the changing neighborhoods and the party exploited that for all they could.
These days they push a lot of myths to get the electorate ginned up. Similar to the 'red scare' tactics they used in the fifties and sixties. The techniques are repeated because they work very well when carefully crafted.
because universal healthcare is not free......I'm middle class and if we have universal healthcare and open borders like Democrats want then my taxes will go way up and the quality of healthcare will go down.
what naive liberals like you that probably don't have a full-time job and don't have a family to take care of don't understand is that nothing in life is free......I learned that when I started working and the government took almost half of my paycheck.
if you start with healthcare "free" for everybody, then why not universal housing and universal food........and then why work if the government gives you everything for free that others have to pay for it? what is the incentive to work?
even Liberal lefty California rejected Medicare for all for their state because it would double their debt, imagine for the rest of the nation.
I agree. Take a look at the history of those countries that fully invest in social welfare programs.
Denmark just announced plans to cut taxes to make "employment" more attractive than "unemployment".
They are facing a labor shortage but not because they don't have enough people; they don't have enough people that want to work.
I think the bolded gets at the crux of much of it. There's a tension between what people believe is best in the short run vs. the long run. People think in different time horizons. Most people think only of the short term. That short term thinking inevitably works against society in the long run.
People don't like socialism because they see it as anti-freedom. It may help in the short run, but it hurts in the long run. I am not that old and I have seen America get steadily more socialist since the 1980s. I don't think it has helped us in the long run. Just made us weaker, physically and mentally, and more dependent on the government.
Freedom is hard. Very hard. That's why most of the world isn't really free. People want someone to bail them out when they screw up. Problem with that is the people in government who are happy to bail them out are the worst kind of sociopaths--hungry for power and control. But your average person who only thinks short term doesn't think about any of that.
Yep, did you notice that the shorter term people think the less net worth they have.
The Poor: Think day to day, rarely thinking about the future. They depend on and support bigger government. Government welfare policies holds them back from preparing for tomorrow and from being able to get off welfare. Make $1 above a specific income set by government and they lose benefits so this encourages people not to try to get ahead.
The Middle Class: Think month to month. (monthly bills or when buying a big ticket item they focus on monthly payment instead of total cost). Some may focus on the future ie.. an emergency fund or retirement but it's not enough.
Government also holds this group back (progressive tax code), instead of being able to keep all your money, you have to give a bigger chunk to government.
The Rich: They use their money to invest for future capital gains or income. They also "plan.. investments and expenditures" with tax efficiency in mind.
Without immigrants our agricultural system would collapse. Instead of pointing fingers at immigrants maybe blame the rich for undercutting native peoples wages in the pursuit of profit.
Indians get free housing, medical care, education and a stipend. I don't think they complain too hard.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
