Do you think Obama is going give people free healthcare ?

[spice756]

Do you think Obama wants free healthcare if he can get by the ultra conservative? Do yo see a bill being past? There is lots and lots of debate about healthcare in the US on the news ,talk-radio ,books ,paper and message boards/ groups. All this debate about healthcare and people scared of free healthcare.

I believe if the US had free healthcare it would get very little money and mismanaged of money so wait times are high so they can say I said to you guys free healthcare will not work .I believe the only way free healthcare will work is under a socialist country with abolisment of the rich ,capitalist and all modes are done in socialist way than trying to please both the working class and businesses.

I believe any capitalist country is incapable of running social programs for too log before neoliberalism set in. Just look at all the social programs under attack in Europe now and Canada social programs from the pre- 90's era. Well neoliberalism has been running ramped with tax cuts , lack of founds , move to privatization , mismanaged of money ,hidded bills , and pro-businesses ao on.

Yet people in US would not allow privatization of the army ,cops or fire dept but free healthcare is very very evile to them.

Much debate there .What is your take on the deabte there..

http://forums.techguy.org/civilized-debate/180904-american-healthcare-crisis.html


http://forums.techguy.org/62-civilized-debate/index2.html

[KarlMarx1989]

The way he is purposing it is a form of Capitalism, it is just not as extreme as the current healthcare plan.

[Bud Struggle]

Well, nothing is free. The question is who is Obama going to get to pay for healthcare? the problem is that it's difficult to tax the Bourgeoise (the people Obama ultimately wants to pay for his plan.) The system has been tuned to their needs for 240 years and they can tweek and tune the tax system and the economy to their needs.

If Obama really wanted to have the Bourgeoise pay for thing he would have started with overhalling taxes. Right now if there is to be "free" healthcare the Proletarians will pay for it--by other means. Abnd do people need more taxes? I don't think so. The plan will fail--and rightly so. The wrong people are going to pay for it.

[Jazzratt]

I believe that he wanted (wants?) to introduce the option of a publically funded free-at-point-of-use option for healthcare. I'm not really up on what this would entail, presumably he wanted to bring america more in line with the rest of the civilised world or something by making it similar to systems like the NHS. From what I understand it even this minimal level of reform was met with heavy opposition, galivinised no doubt by the accusations of "socialism" he has enjoyed since last year. What he wants now, I guess, would be for a small amount of reform, perhaps an increase in the government medicare coverage or something. Personally if I had his political beliefs and position I would want an asprin.

Bud was surprisingly insightful in his comments about the tax system. It doesn't help that a lot of the american public are also opposed to any kind of tax increase, even ones with minimal impact on themselves (Corporate capital gains for example). If he intends to pull capitalism's arse out of the fire with New Deal style government relief plans and other spending schemes he really will have his work cut out of him in getting the raw spending power. (What this means for revolutuion is another question entirely, but I'm already straying a bit far off topic.)

[danyboy27]

i think he want to give free healthcare but he know that beccause of various factor he just cant make it happen completly

[spice756]

I believe that he wanted (wants?) to introduce the option of a publically funded free-at-point-of-use option for healthcare. I'm not really up on what this would entail, presumably he wanted to bring america more in line with the rest of the civilised world or something by making it similar to systems like the NHS. From what I understand it even this minimal level of reform was met with heavy opposition, galivinised no doubt by the accusations of "socialism" he has enjoyed since last year. What he wants now, I guess, would be for a small amount of reform, perhaps an increase in the government medicare coverage or something. Personally if I had his political beliefs and position I would want an asprin.

Bud was surprisingly insightful in his comments about the tax system. It doesn't help that a lot of the american public are also opposed to any kind of tax increase, even ones with minimal impact on themselves (Corporate capital gains for example).



What the hell is wrong with Americans you got South America , Europe and even Asia that is more progressive now.

Look at all those countries. The US will be the last very soon. Yes even Mexico is planning universal Healthcare some where around 2010.
http://identityrevealed.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/worldhealthcare.jpg


All this anti-universal healthcare stuff, taxes and social programs the little bit the US has and are so dead on destroying yes destroying all of them !! And yes there are still people that want to do away with welfare and social security !!

What has happen to Americans ? Why are they so in the past ? I mean it is so so so funny they think conservatives and businesses are a god and so cannot do any evile at all but liberals and socialist are evile. They never talk about CEO's and all those rich capitalist that get a free ride but talk about welfare moms and moms who are on welfare and have kids working at a sweatshop job.

They never talk about CEO's of the car makers all the money they had , big house and own private plane .The goverment should have used CEO's money has a bailout than the working class.Order them to sale the house ,car and private plane.They never talk about tax cuts to the rich and businesses .

They some how think that the New Deal and having no laws on monoply before 30's will save the US and that Welfare and social security must go ASAP.I mean where are they thinking this stuff and who is spoon feeding them this stuff fox and CNN.

They never talk about businesses or the rich but talk about people on welfare and all those evile liberals and socialists ..

What has happen to the US that they are no more progressive now almost going on 2010 than in the 70's that is almost 40 years of no change at all.

[Bud Struggle]

What has happen to the US that they are no more progressive now almost going on 2010 than in the 70's that is almost 40 years of no change at all.

Like it or not America has gotten into a comfort zone and has no real reason to change. Most people in the US have private health insurance and are pretty content with that. And for that matter the people that have health insurance are reasonably well off so they don't see a need to change.

The thing about the US is that the majority of people here are doing OK financially--of course there is a minority of people--a large minority that aren't doing well and don't have health insurance--but they usually (but not always) get out voted.

There is no mandate for "progress" if people are content--And here in America for the most part we are content. Now there is a little give and take--Obama followed Bush but after Obama there will be another President like Bush. That is just the way America works for us.

I'm not saying it's a good thing--but it's a formula that has worked for "most" American people for some time now.

Why change it?

[Dean]

It's corporate welfare. :rolleyes:

[RGacky3]

Thats a rediculous poll, of coarse he WANTS too, the question is will he be able too.


Well, nothing is free. The question is who is Obama going to get to pay for healthcare? the problem is that it's difficult to tax the Bourgeoise (the people Obama ultimately wants to pay for his plan.) The system has been tuned to their needs for 240 years and they can tweek and tune the tax system and the economy to their needs.

If Obama really wanted to have the Bourgeoise pay for thing he would have started with overhalling taxes. Right now if there is to be "free" healthcare the Proletarians will pay for it--by other means. Abnd do people need more taxes? I don't think so. The plan will fail--and rightly so. The wrong people are going to pay for it.

As its failed in EVERY SINGLE OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY?????????

Listen, the people bailed out wallstreet right? Why? To save the economy that they control, which also affects the lower classes,

So now the government is going to bail out healthcare, which saves lives.

Guess what, the government is ALREADY paying for the uninsured by means of emergency room visits, when its too late because they could'nt see a regular doctor.

The only reason people wnat to stop public health care is not to reduce government costs, not to stop tax increases, its ultimately to save profits, thats it. If people wanted to stop tax increases they would half the military budget.


Like it or not America has gotten into a comfort zone and has no real reason to change. Most people in the US have private health insurance and are pretty content with that. And for that matter the people that have health insurance are reasonably well off so they don't see a need to change.

The thing about the US is that the majority of people here are doing OK financially--of course there is a minority of people--a large minority that aren't doing well and don't have health insurance--but they usually (but not always) get out voted.

There is no mandate for "progress" if people are content--And here in America for the most part we are content. Now there is a little give and take--Obama followed Bush but after Obama there will be another President like Bush. That is just the way America works for us.

I'm not saying it's a good thing--but it's a formula that has worked for "most" American people for some time now.

Why change it?

Because over 70% of the people want it???

[Bud Struggle]

Thats a rediculous poll, of coarse he WANTS too, the question is will he be able too.



As its failed in EVERY SINGLE OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED COUNTRY????????? No offense to other industrialized countries--but we aren't them. America isn't Sweden or Norway or even Britain--Were bigger fatter and more diverse. America is another place alltogether.


Listen, the people bailed out wallstreet right? Why? To save the economy that they control, which also affects the lower classes,

So now the government is going to bail out healthcare, which saves lives. The economy also had it's hiccup because of government intervention--healthcare and bailout aren't connected--and shopuldn't be mentioned within a ten year period of each other. Maybe in 10 to 20 years the subject should be brought up again.


Guess what, the government is ALREADY paying for the uninsured by means of emergency room visits, when its too late because they could'nt see a regular doctor. So that's well taken care of.


The only reason people wnat to stop public health care is not to reduce government costs, not to stop tax increases, its ultimately to save profits, thats it. If people wanted to stop tax increases they would half the military budget. You are right there. a higher military budget doesn't help people in the least.




Because over 70% of the people want it??? But they can't pay for it. If the lower classes want healthcare they have to find a way of funding it without relying on the rich. If they do--no one would care.

[synthesis]

The less people are spending on health-care, the more they can spend on consumer goods. American liberalism is essentially hypermetropic capitalism.

[SouthernBelle82]

He's going about it all wrong. He even said he didn't want a system like Canada or France but "American." Wtf does that mean? There's so many wonderful systems out there we can learn from.

[GPDP]

He's going about it all wrong. He even said he didn't want a system like Canada or France but "American." Wtf does that mean? There's so many wonderful systems out there we can learn from.

And none of them keep the insurance companies, who have contributed oh so very much campaign money to the Democrats, Obama included, in the game.

He's not going about it wrong from a capitalist ruling class perspective. Well, the execution of his attempt to make the case for his plan may be iffy, but ultimately, far-right Republican reactionaries nonwithstanding, this is exactly the kind of plan the ruling class wants. Something watered down that gives off the illusion of progress, while little has changed on a substantive level.

And the clincher is, unlike the wishful thinking of many a liberal and progressive would have us believe, Obama's not merely being forced to pursue such a crap plan. He genuinely WANTS to, because he is a firm believer in the market (to potential ancap objection: I don't care if he doesn't embrace your idealized version of the free market; he still embraces it nonetheless).

[willdw79]

Like it or not America has gotten into a comfort zone and has no real reason to change. Most people in the US have private health insurance and are pretty content with that. And for that matter the people that have health insurance are reasonably well off so they don't see a need to change.

The thing about the US is that the majority of people here are doing OK financially--of course there is a minority of people--a large minority that aren't doing well and don't have health insurance--but they usually (but not always) get out voted.

There is no mandate for "progress" if people are content--And here in America for the most part we are content. Now there is a little give and take--Obama followed Bush but after Obama there will be another President like Bush. That is just the way America works for us.

I'm not saying it's a good thing--but it's a formula that has worked for "most" American people for some time now.

Why change it?
http://www.revleft.com/vb/../customavatars/avatar12069_2.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=12069) Jazzratt (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=12069) http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/statusicon/user_offline.gif
Communist Paxman on coke
Commie Club Member
Forum Moderator
Global Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: England
Posts: 6,162
Tendency: Human Progress Group (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../group.php?groupid=8)
http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_pos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gifhttp://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/reputation/reputation_highpos.gif
http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/misc/im_msn.gif (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../#) http://mystatus.skype.com/smallicon/jazzy.the.ratt (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../#)

http://www.revleft.com/vb/../images/icons/icon1.gif
I believe that he wanted (wants?) to introduce the option of a publically funded free-at-point-of-use option for healthcare. I'm not really up on what this would entail, presumably he wanted to bring america more in line with the rest of the civilised world or something by making it similar to systems like the NHS. From what I understand it even this minimal level of reform was met with heavy opposition, galivinised no doubt by the accusations of "socialism" he has enjoyed since last year. What he wants now, I guess, would be for a small amount of reform, perhaps an increase in the government medicare coverage or something. Personally if I had his political beliefs and position I would want an asprin.

Bud was surprisingly insightful in his comments about the tax system. It doesn't help that a lot of the american public are also opposed to any kind of tax increase, even ones with minimal impact on themselves (Corporate capital gains for example). If he intends to pull capitalism's arse out of the fire with New Deal style government relief plans and other spending schemes he really will have his work cut out of him in getting the raw spending power. (What this means for revolutuion is another question entirely, but I'm already straying a bit far off topic.)
__________________




Most Americans are workers, many of them don't know it. They have imaginations as vivid as Joe the Plumber and they think that if someone comes out "on top" financially, it will be them, because capitalism is basically fair. So they enter the rat race with dignity and many retire or die with none. People who have self-respect and integrity are often singled out, fired, and otherwise harassed at work, by the media etc. America is delusional at best and sadistic selfish capitalist at worse. We are the left aren't we, what the heck are some of you doing taking up for the pigs? "I believe that [Obama] wanted (wants?) to introduce the option of a publicly funded free-at-point-of-use option for healthcare", said the commie club member. It seems that revleft may be in need of a purge.

It is essential for any revolutionary to understand that "any and everything we get from them must be extorted". Obama & Company (who BTW are still bombing Iraq and Afghanistan, have a base in Cuba, are occupying South Korea etc etc etc) don't give a fuck about us. Saying that he wants healthcare is like saying a person who runs from the cops kicking his ass "wants to run". Sure that person getting their ass kicked wants to run, but only because of pressure to run (i.e. ass kicking). These are the people who occupy many places and support the occupiers of many more and for you to suggest that they act in any way other than a pragmatic sense of ensuring that the money keeps flowing is insanity, coming from a communist or an anarchist makes me officially, politically depressed.

[Bud Struggle]

Most Americans are workers, many of them don't know it. They have imaginations as vivid as Joe the Plumber and they think that if someone comes out "on top" financially, it will be them, because capitalism is basically fair. So they enter the rat race with dignity and many retire or die with none. People who have self-respect and integrity are often singled out, fired, and otherwise harassed at work, by the media etc. America is delusional at best and sadistic selfish capitalist at worse. We are the left aren't we, what the heck are some of you doing taking up for the pigs? "I believe that [Obama] wanted (wants?) to introduce the option of a publicly funded free-at-point-of-use option for healthcare", said the commie club member. It seems that revleft may be in need of a purge.


One of the problems I have with the Communist Left (but certainly not all of the Communist Left) is the way they treat workers with intellectual comtempt. "The workers are to dumb to know they are worker." "The workers are to dumb to know that life is basically infair." Etc.

Listen, the workers know who they are and what they are. they are not idiots and not children that have to be lead to some Socialist Promised Land. If the Workers decide to go in that decision that will be THEIR choice not the choice of some illiuminati that will do their thinking and understanding for them. Most people in America do really well by the American system, it works for them and they lead a rich and full and productive life. There are some that don't--that's no suprise to anyone, most often people that don't make it have made mistakes along the way and in a Capitalist society one is punished for their mistaes in the same way they are rewared for things they do right.

And indeed there are some that are unfairly screwed by the system--we all know that. And any one of us can be caught in that position. So there are risks involved in being a worker in America--and there is a bit of a gamble. But right now the American worker is willing to take that gamble. If things get worse and the odds of failure become greater maybe the American worker may turn to Socialism--we'll see. But if he does it will be because he'll make an intelligent and calculated decision for himself.

The American worker is not an idiot and not a fool and not a child. He doesn't need to be led to anything. He'll make his own decisions.

[Green Dragon]

Because over 70% of the people want it???

Most Americans are happy with their current, privately provided health care insurance.

No Americans object to somebody else having health insurance. That is the source and reason of that 70% figure

The problem is that in order to cover those who are uninsured, the insured will have to face a change in their own health coverage. That is what is causing a lot of the trepidation.

Because it makes no sense. The figures being bandied about who are uninsured (40 million plus or minus a few million) are the same figures hurled around back in '93. And back then we were told without Clintoncare, millions more would be without insurance ect., in the coming years. Same claims being made today. False then; false now.

And today, the breakdowns of the uninsured are more widely known. So most people who are without health insurance are illegal immigrants (and Obama has publically said any overhaul will not cover them), young adults who, for the most part, do not wish to purchase it (being healthy and having no assets at risk should the unexpected to occur.), and those people who are eligible for Medicaid and Medicare, but for whatever reason, do not take advantage of that opportunity. So we are really only talking a very small number of people here. And they are not deprived of healthcare as of course no emergency room can turn away any person due to inability to pay.

So why overhaul the entire the system?
That is the question which Obama is being asked, and quite frankly, he is not answering. He instead is simply demonising his opponents.

[RedPanic]

It's obvious that he isn't going to be just handing out free healthcare to Americans even if he wanted to (which would be unusual for a centre-right politician). Instead of the NHS it'll be something woefully inadequate along the lines of a Medicare/Medicaid expansion. If his own weak party doesn't make it so, the Republicans will see to it.

[willdw79]

One of the problems I have with the Communist Left (but certainly not all of the Communist Left) is the way they treat workers with intellectual comtempt. "The workers are to dumb to know they are worker." "The workers are to dumb to know that life is basically infair." Etc.

Listen, the workers know who they are and what they are. they are not idiots and not children that have to be lead to some Socialist Promised Land. If the Workers decide to go in that decision that will be THEIR choice not the choice of some illiuminati that will do their thinking and understanding for them. Most people in America do really well by the American system, it works for them and they lead a rich and full and productive life. There are some that don't--that's no suprise to anyone, most often people that don't make it have made mistakes along the way and in a Capitalist society one is punished for their mistaes in the same way they are rewared for things they do right.

And indeed there are some that are unfairly screwed by the system--we all know that. And any one of us can be caught in that position. So there are risks involved in being a worker in America--and there is a bit of a gamble. But right now the American worker is willing to take that gamble. If things get worse and the odds of failure become greater maybe the American worker may turn to Socialism--we'll see. But if he does it will be because he'll make an intelligent and calculated decision for himself.

The American worker is not an idiot and not a fool and not a child. He doesn't need to be led to anything. He'll make his own decisions.
Fuck off! I am the worker you say the "communist left intellectualizes", screw you. I know how it is to organize and get stabbed in the back by sellout unions. I wasn't born an "intellectual communist". I'm not some bourgoise kid who you can typecast. If the workers you talk about are so progressive show me the progress. Women- underpaid Minorities- Underpaid Everyone- Underemployed and exploited and they couldn't give a shit less about workers in other countries for the most part. Some people do care about what happens to the poor, but many more are slimy rats who care only about covering their own ass and have sold-out their values of right/wrong fair/unfair, they have been bought off for 40k jobs, cheap bastards and the result is support for imperialism which is EVIDENT. Fuck you ideal typologies! The American working class is backwards, like many others, Marx said it, they are not yet a CLASS FOR ITSELF!

[Bud Struggle]

Fuck off! I am the worker you say the "communist left intellectualizes", screw you. I know how it is to organize and get stabbed in the back by sellout unions. I wasn't born an "intellectual communist". I'm not some bourgoise kid who you can typecast. If the workers you talk about are so progressive show me the progress. Women- underpaid Minorities- Underpaid Everyone- Underemployed and exploited and they couldn't give a shit less about workers in other countries for the most part. Some people do care about what happens to the poor, but many more are slimy rats who care only about covering their own ass and have sold-out their values of right/wrong fair/unfair, they have been bought off for 40k jobs, cheap bastards and the result is support for imperialism which is EVIDENT. Fuck you ideal typologies! The American working class is backwards, like many others, Marx said it, they are not yet a CLASS FOR ITSELF!

Speaking as a member of the Bourgeoise--you are making a mistake there. They'll never be a Revolution if you go at it that way. I, as a factory owner, am a friend to my workers--I like them and they like me. I try to make them happy, I don't talk down to them, I treat them as equals. I value their opinion, they value mine. I care about their needs and wants. I'm the first among equals in my factory, nothing more.

I am the good shepherd. I know my sheep and my sheep know me.

[spice756]

I thought Obama wanted people to have access to healthcare insurance or pass a law all jobs must give healthcare insurance or better healthcare insurance .

Or at the least free healthcare for kids or small number of the poor people.

But it was the conservatives and media and talk-radio , massage board that comes across has Canada or Cuba run universal healthcare all state own that he wanted:confused: that is wrong.

That is the mix up here. The conservatives and media paint it has Canada or Cuba run universal healthcare .

But we all know that is not going to happen with 70% people anti-universal healthcare .

[RGacky3]

No offense to other industrialized countries--but we aren't them. America isn't Sweden or Norway or even Britain--Were bigger fatter and more diverse. America is another place alltogether.

Please explain to me WHY, exactly what works everywhere else will not work in America. Why being bigger and "fatter" will make it not work? If its more efficient and better run and better quality in the rest of the world why exactly would it suggently not be any of those in the United States, which is bigger, fatter (I'm not sure about that, been to england lately .. yikes), and amore diverse (again, not so sure about that either).


The economy also had it's hiccup because of government intervention--healthcare and bailout aren't connected--and shopuldn't be mentioned within a ten year period of each other. Maybe in 10 to 20 years the subject should be brought up again.


The philisophical argument is that the market should take care of itself, however the government intervention for wallstreet was for the "greater good", THAT was the argument, and how is healthcare not the "greater good"? Your definition of greater good is really messed up, its essncially sumed up with the basic profits over people.


So that's well taken care of.


FOR THE EMERGENCY ROOM!!!! Then its many times too late, doofis.


But they can't pay for it. If the lower classes want healthcare they have to find a way of funding it without relying on the rich. If they do--no one would care.

Health care is not a comodity, if your going to treat that as one you might as well privatize the fire department.


And indeed there are some that are unfairly screwed by the system--we all know that. And any one of us can be caught in that position. So there are risks involved in being a worker in America--and there is a bit of a gamble. But right now the American worker is willing to take that gamble. If things get worse and the odds of failure become greater maybe the American worker may turn to Socialism--we'll see. But if he does it will be because he'll make an intelligent and calculated decision for himself.

The American worker is not an idiot and not a fool and not a child. He doesn't need to be led to anything. He'll make his own decisions.

Using your logic, the Russians were perfectly happy with the USSR up until 1990.


No Americans object to somebody else having health insurance. That is the source and reason of that 70% figure

Universal healthcare means public healthcare.


The problem is that in order to cover those who are uninsured, the insured will have to face a change in their own health coverage. That is what is causing a lot of the trepidation.


How so? Except for that it will be cheaper and higher quality due to competition?


And they are not deprived of healthcare as of course no emergency room can turn away any person due to inability to pay.


Emergency room care IS NOT healthcare.


Speaking as a member of the Bourgeoise--you are making a mistake there. They'll never be a Revolution if you go at it that way. I, as a factory owner, am a friend to my workers--I like them and they like me. I try to make them happy, I don't talk down to them, I treat them as equals. I value their opinion, they value mine. I care about their needs and wants. I'm the first among equals in my factory, nothing more.

I am the good shepherd. I know my sheep and my sheep know me.

So what, Stalin could have said the same thing, same with Che, Che cut sugar canes with the workers, so what, that does'nt justify the power.

[Bud Struggle]

Please explain to me WHY, exactly what works everywhere else will not work in America. Why being bigger and "fatter" will make it not work? If its more efficient and better run and better quality in the rest of the world why exactly would it suggently not be any of those in the United States, which is bigger, fatter (I'm not sure about that, been to england lately .. yikes), and amore diverse (again, not so sure about that either). You can't really compare Holland or Norway or Sweden or any of those cute European countries each with populations of a couple of million to the USA with a population of 300 million. Their not the same. Besides people in the United States are grown ups and are perfectly able to take care of themselves. They can buy their own health insurace, feed themselves and wipe their own rear ends. They really don't need a big brother government doing things like that for them.




The philisophical argument is that the market should take care of itself, however the government intervention for wallstreet was for the "greater good", THAT was the argument, and how is healthcare not the "greater good"? Your definition of greater good is really messed up, its essncially sumed up with the basic profits over people. My point is that we already spent our surplus cash. On the bailout and the wars we are fighting. (And I agree we shouldn't have Mone either.) But where is all this extra money going to come from? The middle class is taxed enough.


Health care is not a commodity, if your going to treat that as one you might as well privatize the fire department. That is certainly your opinion. But people in the USA are always given the option to purchase their own health care or to get a job where it is provided--the trick is to make sure that you make yourself marketable so that someone wants to pay for the privlege of employing you. In the USA you reap what you sew.


So what, Stalin could have said the same thing, same with Che, Che cut sugar canes with the workers, so what, that does'nt justify the power.Power is a vacuum. People are always looking for someone to lead them--in government, in religion, in their daily life. From Stalin to Dr. Laura people find someone to answer their questions to calm their fears to provide them with a livelyhood and hold their hand through life. There wouldn't be leaders if people didn't want to be led. It's simple human nature.

[spice756]

Health care is not a comodity, if your going to treat that as one you might as well privatize the fire department.

That is certainlyyour opinion. But people are always given the option to purchase their own health care or to get a job where it is provided--the trick is to make sure that you make yourself marketable so that someone wants to pay for the privilige of employing you. In the USA you reap what you sew.



A comodity is item that is bought and sold. How can health care be bought and sold ?

If it cost $5 ,000 for back surgery how can some one else do it for $2,000 ?

You are missing the point why the health care cost so much.

[RGacky3]

Their not the same. Besides people in the United States are grown ups and are perfectly able to take care of themselves. They can buy their own health insurace, feed themselves and wipe their own rear ends. They really don't need a big brother government doing things like that for them.

You still hav'nt explained why something efficient and of bettwer quality in a smaller country would be the oposite in the United States.

Also the ARE buying their own health insurance, through the government, that runs it cheaper and with better quality, rather than paying for tons and tons of overhead and profits.


My point is that we already spent our surplus cash. On the bailout and the wars we are fighting. (And I agree we shouldn't have Mone either.) But where is all this extra money going to come from? The middle class is taxed enough.


Not the middle class, the top 1%. Also the middle class would be SAVING money because they would'nt have to pay for corporate overhead and profits.


That is certainly your opinion. But people in the USA are always given the option to purchase their own health care or to get a job where it is provided--the trick is to make sure that you make yourself marketable so that someone wants to pay for the privlege of employing you. In the USA you reap what you sew.

In the USA the rich and the capitalists reap, they reap like hell, the poor and the workers sew. Unless there is loss, then the workers always pay first.

Its not a comodity because you don't shop around when you have cancer, you don't choose when or if you get cancer, the same way the fire service cannot be treated as a comodity.


Power is a vacuum. People are always looking for someone to lead them--in government, in religion, in their daily life. From Stalin to Dr. Laura people find someone to answer their questions to calm their fears to provide them with a livelyhood and hold their hand through life. There wouldn't be leaders if people didn't want to be led. It's simple human nature.

No they arn't, LEADERS are always trying to convince people that their power is actually needed, which they do very very diligently.

[Bud Struggle]

You still hav'nt explained why something efficient and of bettwer quality in a smaller country would be the oposite in the United States. Because it would engender a mass bureauocracy and that would be a hub of power. to give and run healthcare to 300 million people would be a huge fiasco. Like everythying else the government does on a huge scale.


Also the ARE buying their own health insurance, through the government, that runs it cheaper and with better quality, rather than paying for tons and tons of overhead and profits. There is nothing wrong with making a profit. As a matter of fact--it's a pretty good thing.


Not the middle class, the top 1%. Also the middle class would be SAVING money because they would'nt have to pay for corporate overhead and profits. You are never going to tax the top 1%--it just isn't going to happen, so the burden would fall to the middle class and they already pay for their own health care--the problem is the people at the bottom of the food chain.


In the USA the rich and the capitalists reap, they reap like hell, the poor and the workers sew. Unless there is loss, then the workers always pay first. The workers have it pretty good here compared to the rest of the world. that's why they are so content.


Its not a comodity because you don't shop around when you have cancer, you don't choose when or if you get cancer, the same way the fire service cannot be treated as a comodity. Theoretically you should shop around BEFORE you get cancer.


No they arn't, LEADERS are always trying to convince people that their power is actually needed, which they do very very diligently. If people didn't want leaders they wouldn't have them. It's rare to find a person that doesn't want to be led--but they are around--in Capitalism they are called Entrepreneaurs.

[Qayin]

Not unless you get fired/layed off from downsizing from your job and you can no longer pay for health insurance.

America is an extremely wealthy country, I do not understand why we cannot have Universal healthcare. From the nay sayers who say EU countries are too small and wouldnt work for america. Um China? Russia? Brazil?

[RGacky3]

Because it would engender a mass bureauocracy and that would be a hub of power. to give and run healthcare to 300 million people would be a huge fiasco. Like everythying else the government does on a huge scale.

Like Medicare? Like the fire department? Like the Post office?


There is nothing wrong with making a profit. As a matter of fact--it's a pretty good thing.

Not when it involves peoples lives.


You are never going to tax the top 1%--it just isn't going to happen, so the burden would fall to the middle class and they already pay for their own health care--the problem is the people at the bottom of the food chain.


No, you can cut George Bushes Tax cuts, we'd also be saving some money as well, and like I said, middle class people would be saving money because they won't have to pay for corporation s profits and overhead.


The workers have it pretty good here compared to the rest of the world. that's why they are so content.

Not compared to most other industrialized countries.


Theoretically you should shop around BEFORE you get cancer.

For health insurance yes, but you can't do it for the treatment, thats why there are doctors.


If people didn't want leaders they wouldn't have them. It's rare to find a person that doesn't want to be led--but they are around--in Capitalism they are called Entrepreneaurs.

I suppose with your logic, again, people were absolutely fine with Stalin.

Listen I just explained to you why public healthcare WOULD work more efficiently and with better quality and cheaper, you have just stated it could'nt on a large scale, without any reasons, the fact is the insurance companies are a fiasco, the only difference betwee nteh companies and the government is one has to worry about profit the other does not.

[Comrade B]

I think Obama is well intended, however he places his trust in a broken system, and because of this nothing will come out of it.

[Bud Struggle]

Like Medicare? Like the fire department? Like the Post office? Medicare is VASTLY expensive and underfunded. The Fire Department is local and the Post office gets ists ass beat by FedEx and UPS on a regular basis.


Not when it involves peoples lives. Why not?


No, you can cut George Bushes Tax cuts, we'd also be saving some money as well, and like I said, middle class people would be saving money because they won't have to pay for corporation s profits and overhead. The middle class WORKS for the corporations. They get THEIR healthcare fronm the corporations. The corporation employ the middle class.


Not compared to most other industrialized countries. I rather have a choice on my heathcare provider. I rather have (as I do) lots of companys competing for my healthcare dollar.


I suppose with your logic, again, people were absolutely fine with Stalin.
I have no idea what you are talking about with this "Stalin thing." I want to have a choice of companies that offer me healthcare so I can pick the one that best suits my needs. That's the American way.



Listen I just explained to you why public healthcare WOULD work more efficiently and with better quality and cheaper, you have just stated it could'nt on a large scale, without any reasons, the fact is the insurance companies are a fiasco, the only difference betwee nteh companies and the government is one has to worry about profit the other does not. No the healthcare industry could work better--but as a healthcare purchaser for my family and for my employees--it works just fine for me. And I do like having a choice in such matters.

[jake williams]

I neither know nor care what Barack Obama wants "personally". It's pretty irrelevant on a whole number of levels.

[Olerud]

Obama wants to give people free healthcare

[Jazzratt]

I neither know nor care what Barack Obama wants "personally". It's pretty irrelevant on a whole number of levels.

Perhaps, but consider that if what he personally wants is much more radical than what he is able to push through it says a lot about the political climate in america.

[spice756]

Medicare is VASTLY expensive and underfunded. The Fire Department is local and the Post office gets ists ass beat by FedEx and UPS on a regular basis.

When heathcare was state run in Canada it was doing better than when the provence took over. But in past 10 years they have been downgrading the heatcare to local level.Toronto has best heathcare in Canada well out west in small cities or town get less care.

The US army has the highest funding in the world ,biggest state of the art technology ,DAPA ,NSA ,CIA so on and the best in the world .

North Kora a China when a war with numbers lots army guys tanks so on and the US with technology .Well China and North Korea has highest numbers they are 25 years in past with technology .But there are rumours that China is working on a stealth fighter plane now.



The middle class WORKS for the corporations. They get THEIR healthcare fronm the corporations. The corporation employ the middle class.

Not all corporations.




I rather have a choice on my heathcare provider. I rather have (as I do) lots of companys competing for my healthcare dollar.


A choice on what ? If they can cover your cost or not? A competing for what ? It not a commodity they can make more of ,lower the price or make a better commodity .There is a fixed price doctors charge for labour for service .



I have no idea what you are talking about with this "Stalin thing." I want to have a choice of companies that offer me healthcare so I can pick the one that best suits my needs. That's the American way.


What companies cover your cost or not?




No the healthcare industry could work better--but as a healthcare purchaser for my family and for my employees--it works just fine for me. And I do like having a choice in such matters.



All companies have to make profit to do well :laugh:and the goverment does not they do well by staying in power.

If back surgery cost $5,000 they take $5,000 of people tax money to cover it.Now companies you pay so much every month and they profit of it.So the company will cover $5,000 but has to charge more to profit and so become dirty rich.Lots of insurance companies and drug companies are dirty rich do to the profit of the sick.

Now that just say there was this one insurance company ( that did not want to get dirty rich and loves the poor people and sick) that was so moral and live life like a monk and they cover the $5,000 cost for back surgery .They cannot charge you $5,000 cost just to stay in businesses they at least charge you $5,000 + 1$ . A flat cost cover $5,000 the businesses would not profit .It like making TV that cost $500 and you buy it in the store for $500.

The government does not care about profit has they get their profit by staying in power . And that is what government want to do is stay in power.

Now I'm not fan of government or capitalists has both are sloppy at running things and don't care about anyone but them self.

Now government don't have accountability to people they bureaucrats do to the court system and the way the laws are set up.

Most likely it is impossible to get a goverment to be socialist.They come in with good goals and are devoted to socialism .

But when in no accountability nothing ,small privilege group , profit is in charge or sale out on socialism or become power hungry.

Take it this way government and capitalists have their own class system and that is why it is impossible to get government and capitaliststo to give the money and say money and power I don't care about but the people.

The only way that may work to get the government to be good is passing a people law. No one can stay in power no more than 2 years ( even if the people want it) , can be taken out of power any time for bad doing or running it sloppy( no country does this ) ,all money and bills must be improve by workers council , any sloppy running the govermet will get removed and charged and have to use his or her own money and may go to jail .The government cannot pass bill or go to war with out going through the workers council , the people in power must be force to live in a poor area and get same services has the poor people , the goverment can not take money or bribes.

A leader that has no power that only does what the party tells him to do.A group of people who job is only to investigate goverment corruption and police corruption .

All bills must go to election for vote not a group of people in power passing bill people do not want.





Obama wants to give people free healthcare


It will not happen not on by dead body:( if such a thing did pass you can bet both party will run it so bad trying to destroy it.I know Canada is trying very hard to destroy it and even the UK.

It would be better for socialist that the US does not pass reform laws like this that will hurt socialist big time.That all the problems be catalyst for revolution than band aid on a problem .With band aid running sloppy or lack of money put into it do to political agenda to say ( I said it would NOT work your socialist or trying please both the working class and rich.captalits ).This would have people beome more anti-socialist ..

[Olerud]

I know Canada is trying very hard to destroy it and even the UK.

Most people in the Uk enjoy the free health care. The conservatives even said they were "THE PARTY OF THE NHS" ! and Obama's hearts in the right place but he puts his faith in the system.