Otis, sounds to me like you are advocating a British style healthcare system instead of a Canadian style. There IS a difference, and the British healthcare system is a mess.

No, I'm not advocating anything. I'm just pointing out that the things that people here are upset about, are the same reasons that other countries have socialized their healthcare industries. For better or worse., they at least TRIED to make medicine not about money.

I'm actually kind of surprised that you were able to read any kind advocacy into what I said.

Otis, I'm all for a revamp of the US healthcare system, but Obamacare ain't it. I don't know all the answers, but so far I haven't seen anything I like.

Hillary's plan she put forth in the 90's called for a British system where all the doctors work for the government...and she wanted to fire 25% of them to save money. Her plan was such a mess that it couldn't even get out of committee in a Democrat controlled House.

Obamacare is a mishmash of crap that Obama threw together, snagging up what provisions he could get, and patching together this mess he gave us so he could claim a victory.

I don't know the answer, but we should really take a look at how we are going to fix it. And one party jamming a mess down the other party's throat so they can do a victory dance isn't the way to do it.

No I agree with that. I don't like obamacare all that much either. But I do think it's a step in the right direction. It's a messed up hybrid of truly socialized medicine (which will never happen in our lifetimes thanks to a complete lack of objectivity) and what we have now.

The problem is that what you suggest won't ever happen. A revamp that everyone likes? pfft. I don't like what we have, but we have to start somewhere. Step one is make healthcare available to everyone. We improve the system from there.

victory, loss, that doesn't help me or you. Both parties are playing politics instead of fixing problems. With the people we have in washington right now, obamacare is the kind of thing we're going to get from them.

You lack a knowledge of basic economics and how the FREE market works. I'll tell you what a rich man should be able to afford better healthcare, a fancier car, a bigger house, a nicer boat, and more luxurious vacations. That is the incentive to work hard and succeed. The better things in life.

Would you agree with this statement? " From each according to his ability; to each according to his needs!"

Not when it comes to healthcare. That's where you're wrong.

It's also a fallacy that hard work equals success and wealth. Most of the hardest working people in this country are poor or middle class. Hard working, law abiding, upstanding Americans should not have low quality healthcare simply because they are poor.

So Dirt, if I say yes are you going to then scream communist and dismiss anything else I say? And if I say no are you going to ignore it and dismiss anything else I say anyway?

You cannot be serious- when every instance of socialized health care has failed it's patients miserably- you think "it's a step in the right direction"?!?

Failed its patients miserably? Funny that people are even still alive in those countries!

It's easy to throw statements like that around, but that doesn't make them true. I acknowledge that there are issues with those systems too. Just like our current one. I think that we need to change something. The sentiments discussed earlier in this thread are evidence of that. I've already stated that considering our current state of representation in Washington, it's no wonder that we got a subpar product. But I think that at this point, any change that provides healthcare services to more people is a step in the right direction. Yes, I am serious.

No, I see you view health services as some kind of right, and I view it as just another product that the free market would be best at providing the best service at the lowest cost if allowed to do so. There is no way on Gods green earth every individual can be supplied with every health related treatment available in modern medicine. There is going to be rationing based on what an individual can afford, or by bean counters as to what the taxpayers can afford or the amount of service available.

You guys need to pay more tax then you can have good universal healthcare like in Canada.

Well dirt, when your child, or brother, or grandchild needs some really expensive surgery and can't afford it, or insurance won't cover it because it's too expensive, then you might change your mind. Until then, consider this:

Adopted by the US Gov't in 1948

Article 25

(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

The healthcare market is like any other market,it is driven by profit which creates incentive to create products and services.If you take the incentive away,investment goes away and quality of products and services decreases over time.Unless you want the government to fund all the studies and development of new drugs and medical equipment,we already borrow over $.40 for every dollar we spend as a country and our ability to pay it back is questionable.It is not financially feasible to have the quality of care and services we have available to us if government is involved.There will be rationing,either due to bureaucracy in the name of fairness and saving money,or due to someone not being able to pay.Either way people are going to be denied treatment or services,with Obamacare you have no choice in the matter.Break a hip at 78,no hip replacement for you because you don't have enough quality years left.A baby with down syndrome that needs a heart valve replacement,sorry,not enough quality years and not a productive member of society so no heart valve replacement.Every country that has socialized medicine has problems,Canadians cross the boarder all the time to take advantages of services here,rich politicians and dictators come here for medical treatments choosing not to utilize the healthcare systems they put in place for the "commoners" in their own countries.This is about government control of the masses,be a good citizen and tow the line or someday you won't get treated for an ailment.It is about redistributing wealth,take from those that have and give to those that have not.We have become a country of people with their hands out crying about some "right" the government has in their brilliance and wisdom decided to give.Healthcare isn't a right,it is a benefit of living in a free and prosperous society.Without a free and prosperous society and the principles our country was founded on,we would not have the medicines and level of care we have today.Poor countries are poor because of lack of freedom amongst the people and we are slowly being pushed backwards while developing countries are slowly lifted,often at our expense.Eventually we will all be equally poor together...

CLT, the problem is that pretty much every civilized nation in the world, including ours, says that some standard of health care is a basic human right, protected by law. Not cutting edge medicine, but some standard necessary to provide a reasonable quality of life.

So it's fine, lots of us don't like what we have, and lots of us don't like what we're about to get. But, if we're going to just sit around waiting for someone to come up with the perfect plan, we're going to be sadly disappointed.

I thought my rights came from god and were enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, not made up at the U.N. Utopias are hard to achieve especially when you deny man's basic nature; "Self Interest".

Quote:(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection. end quote


Another progressive ideal run amok.It is all well and good in theory and makes people feel good,but it is not practical,unless you subscribe to socialism.It is one thing to voluntarily help your neighbor when you see he needs it.It is another to steal from one neighbor,whom you deem to be overly successful to give to another neighbor whom you deem to be lacking.What gives one man,or government,the right to judge who is deserving of what?Charity is the responsibility,of family,friends,religious institutions and local communities,not government entities.Individual responsibility is gone,if you don't want to work because your lazy there is no distinguishing from the man who can't work for a legitimate reason,a heart problem for example.You can go complain you have back pain,or some mental condition and can't work,it gets done every day.There are more people on disability now than there has ever been and a significant portion of them have ailments and conditions that can't be proven,you are basically taking their word for it.Do I think they are all liars and cheats,no.But I would be willing to bet a significant amount of them are taking advantage of the situation.

Article 4

No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

I guess it is alright to be a slave to your fellow man.

Dirt,don't you know it is about the "collective" and not the individual.We will never be a good socialist nation with all of you selfish individualists.You cull the weak and infirm and aged who are a drain on resources and keep those in a certain age group healthy so that production can be maintained and the "collective" prospers.You control the population of certain ethnic groups or social classes with eugenics(abortion).You remove dissenters and political enemies so the "collective" functions without the populace questioning authority.You control wages, incomes and property so that no one can gain affluence or financial freedom and are beholden to government to provide for their needs that they cannot afford to provide for themselves.There will be economic equality amongst the masses,not amongst the leaders but that is a benefit for service to the government and being a faithful comrade and helping to keep the balance of power where it belongs,with the government.Without a powerful government the collective utopia isn't possible and the individual who sees himself as a, well, individual, only stands in the way.Come on get on board,we can have it all,healthcare,social security,good government job,if your lucky maybe you can get a job in an automobile factory that makes those government approved vehicles,or on a corn farm that produces government approved food and fuel.Ahh comrade,it will be grand!

Article 29

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

I always knew I had an underdeveloped personality. Actually, I advocate freedom and free markets as this will result in the most robust and healthy community possible.

The free market was responsible for the greatest redistribution of wealth in all history recently from the middle class to the wealthy.

I keep hearing that. Did that redistribution involve the 50% of Americans who pay no federal income tax?