The Next President is...

[Prozac]

2 hours ago, Guardian said:

Also in socialized health care a board can decide if you need the medical care or not or prioritize others health when you are deemed to be to old or too close to death, etc etc to get any long term value from the procedure. That’s how social medicine works. It can’t be readily available to everyone if it’s good. Think about that loved one in your life that has passed on or not and somehow benefitted from a life saving or altering procedure that they might not on the onset needed. Like someone who has a terminal illness getting an unrelated major proceedure that allows them to live a few years more under their terminal illness. In socialized Medicine a board can opt out of that procedure severely reducing the remaining quality of life or even ending the life early. No thanks. Socialism sucks. Capitalism allows us to take advantage of everyone’s talents for all involved’s benefit.

Substitute ‘for profit insurance company’ for ‘socialized medicine board’ in your example. I’m not sure which one’s better but I at least theoretically get a vote with one of those examples. 

[ViperMan]

On 10/19/2020 at 4:30 PM, Breckey said:

We as a country have determined that we want certain segments of the population to have government supported health care and have for more than 50 years. Why is expanding this out to include others a bad thing if the voting populous determines that is what they want? 

Put simply, because of the cost. Healthcare is inordinately expensive.

On 10/19/2020 at 4:31 PM, Prozac said:

How do you separate the insurance aspect from healthcare? I’m not sure there’s a conversation to be had about the”best healthcare system in the world” without considering insurance in the equation. As far as “healthcare is not a right”, it’s abundantly clear that the majority of Americans would like it to be. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/03/most-continue-to-say-ensuring-health-care-coverage-is-governments-responsibility/ 

The majority doesn't determine what is and is not a "right." Rights pre-exist government - they're not things that we all agree we should collectively pay for.

23 hours ago, drewpey said:

Are we as a culture ok with people falling into unrecoverable lifelong poverty and never returning to be productive taxpaying citizens for what amounts to losing a medical lottery?

I think the large majority of people would agree something should be done.  If so, what?

Not necessarily, but I am ok with it when people don't take care of themselves and become a burden on society. What is the balance? Take a look at many other modern cultures in the world - or non-modern for that matter. They do not look like us. From google (1st hit via the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db360.htm#:~:text=Among men%2C the prevalence of,those aged 60 and over.😞

"Among men, the prevalence of obesity was 40.3% among those aged 20–39, 46.4% among those aged 40–59, and 42.2% among those aged 60 and over. Among women, the prevalence of obesity was 39.7% among those aged 20–39, 43.3% among those aged 40–59, and 43.3% among those aged 60 and over. None of the differences by age were significant."

Well over 1/3 (approaching 1/2) of Americans are medically obese. Let that sink in. Walk around Japan or Poland and you'll notice we do not look like them. They are thin. They are healthy. There is no way in hell I'm interested in paying for end of life care for approximately 1/2 of America, when it's visibly provable that they do not care about themselves. I'm not even interested in hearing arguments about it. I'm a hard "no." Now, we un-screw our food system and the way we eat and feed ourselves in this country and shape up our act, cool, let's start the conversation again.

22 hours ago, lloyd christmas said:

It doesn't.  Even if health care is believed to be a "right", the gov doesn't subsidize any of our other rights provided by the constitution.  Why should health care be any different?  Especially when so many of us do not take care of ourselves.  

Shack. You're 100% correct. Should the government pay for me to open a newspaper or buy me a bull horn? Freedom of speech is a right!! What about a gun. Right to bear arms!

21 hours ago, jazzdude said:

Why should the government provide healthcare coverage for military families/dependants at extremely low cost to the member? Should service members pay insurance premiums comparable to the national average for premiums?

At least for the service member, you could argue they should have healthcare coverage to protect the investment made in the service member if they have a critical skill. Should service members be covered for a pre-existing condition, or for medical accidents that happen not in the direct line of duty (say, breaking your arm while skiing on leave)? Or pay for coverage to cover non-line of duty accidents?

The government subsidizes lots of things. Food stamps, social security, medical research, basic science research, education, arts, conservation of wilderness areas, roads, housing, etc. It also (heavily) subsidizes defense. Basically, it's all an investment in our society to hopefully make us all better, even if it's not a "right."

What about combat zone tax exemption? Why not eliminate that? What purpose does it serve, besides essentially being a pay raise for doing the job we signed up to do? (Especially since HFP/IDP also exists)

 

"Should" they is a fine question - they don't have to. The argument is that they do because it makes a career in the service of your country more attractive. Take away that "right" (benefit) and you'll likely see recruiting and retention decline. Military healthcare is not a right - it's part of the compensation you're being given as part of the contract of your service. Same goes for your family.

11 hours ago, slackline said:

That’s all most of us are getting after in here, not advocating for a specific way to do it, but we maintain that the richest country in the world ought to be able to do a better job at taking care of its people than we do.

Stop blaming it on unhealthy fatties as well! There’s hundreds of thousands in this country that lost the lottery, and just have crappy health. No amount of eating right or exercise will change their health issues. Shouldn’t we help them without bankrupting them?

Half of America is OBESE!!! This kid is 10!!!! (Edit - he's 4). Let's fix this first. No it's not all the problem of obesity, but this is only one (1) problem that contributes to the health crisis in our country - there are many others.

10 hours ago, slackline said:

That's quite a stretch to say I'm looking for universal healthcare based off me saying it should be accessible. Nott looking for free, but we shouldn't be bankrupting anyone because they got cancer. Why is that so ridiculous a request?

I also said I don't have the answer. But certain people are unwilling to start the conversation because you can't get passed, "no, it's expensive". I've always told my guys, tell your boss "yes, but" and I've always told my bosses "yes, but". That should be the starting point. "No!" seems to be the only starting point some of you are willing to consider...
 

It is no until we fix some other underlying issues first. I'm not interested in forsaking people who truly lose the health lottery in life. But we MUST differentiate between those, and just blanket providing hundreds of thousands of dollars of care at the end of life for every American.

Edited October 21, 2020 by ViperMan

[Guardian]

Haha, I would never.... You're both good dudes....it's just the image that came to mind while watching this "discussion" on psychiatry....er, public health care and the U.S. Constitution.

Just being ornery. Didn’t think you were implying anything other than I’m a crazy loon. Probably true.

[slackline]

It is no until we fix some other underlying issues first. I'm not interested in forsaking people who truly lose the health lottery in life. But we MUST differentiate between those, and just blanket providing hundreds of thousands of dollars of care at the end of life for every American.

I get it, you don’t want to subsidize the healthcare of fat people. It pisses me off as well. The military has destroyed my body, back and neck are 10 kinds of jacked, but I take care of myself. I believe a lot more people should and could do a lot of the same thing. I eat right, and I exercise a ton. That takes care of a lot of my issues and keeps my QoL higher than it would be. If I can do that, they can do that... to an extent. Food that is healthy is waaay harder to get for low income families. Not just the prices (healthy food is more expensive than garbage food) are messed up, but there’s the time aspect. People working multiple min wage jobs often times have very little free time, so popping in the microwave dinner is faster than preparing healthy food.

That doesn’t excuse a gross neglect of your own health on the part of many fat people. I’m simply making the point that it isn’t as simple as “fat people should all die of diabetes because they’re lazy” which seems like what you’re advocating (heavy on the sarcasm there in case you were unsure). Oh, and guess what, there’s tons of fat people in the military driving up our healthcare costs. Fix that problem for us while you’re on your high horse (again, sarcasm meter should be in the ON position).

BL: we can do better, and if fat people get to go along for the ride, so be it... Again, people other than fat people need healthcare.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jazzdude]

Also in socialized health care a board can decide if you need the medical care or not or prioritize others health when you are deemed to be to old or too close to death, etc etc to get any long term value from the procedure. That’s how social medicine works. It can’t be readily available to everyone if it’s good. Think about that loved one in your life that has passed on or not and somehow benefitted from a life saving or altering procedure that they might not on the onset needed. Like someone who has a terminal illness getting an unrelated major proceedure that allows them to live a few years more under their terminal illness. In socialized Medicine a board can opt out of that procedure severely reducing the remaining quality of life or even ending the life early. No thanks. Socialism sucks. Capitalism allows us to take advantage of everyone’s talents for all involved’s benefit.

This is also how medical insurance works in our country. Except that it's not the government making the decision, but a private company out to make money for it's shareholders making that decision. And even with insurance, you can still run up some significant bills that wipe out savings pretty quickly. Especially if you end up at an out of network emergency room for a catastrophic event.

I think many countries that have socialized medicine also have a second layer of medical care, where you can buy treatments above/beyond the basic coverage, or accelerate timeline.

Even if you got rid of insurance and socialized medicine, so long as medical care is a limited resources, there will be some level of triage and prioritization of care

Either way/system, money buys options. Unfortunately, I'd wager that most of us don't have that kind of money laying around

[dream big]

6 hours ago, Negatory said:

Semantics. They have universal healthcare we do not.

Oh and that’s with roughly the same quality of life that comes with living in a standard first world country.

Define ‘quality of life’? Paying >60% taxes doesn’t constitute quality of life for me and many Americans.  However many in those countries are happy so like the old saying goes “one man’s trash..”.   That’s the beauty of America for the most part; freedom and liberty to make your own choices and spend your own money ...because god help you if you think our government can spend it more effectively.  

[viper154]

1 hour ago, slackline said:

I get it, you don’t want to subsidize the healthcare of fat people. It pisses me off as well. The military has destroyed my body, back and neck are 10 kinds of jacked, but I take care of myself. I believe a lot more people should and could do a lot of the same thing. I eat right, and I exercise a ton. That takes care of a lot of my issues and keeps my QoL higher than it would be. If I can do that, they can do that... to an extent. Food that is healthy is waaay harder to get for low income families. Not just the prices (healthy food is more expensive than garbage food) are messed up, but there’s the time aspect. People working multiple min wage jobs often times have very little free time, so popping in the microwave dinner is faster than preparing healthy food.

That doesn’t excuse a gross neglect of your own health on the part of many fat people. I’m simply making the point that it isn’t as simple as “fat people should all die of diabetes because they’re lazy” which seems like what you’re advocating (heavy on the sarcasm there in case you were unsure). Oh, and guess what, there’s tons of fat people in the military driving up our healthcare costs. Fix that problem for us while you’re on your high horse (again, sarcasm meter should be in the ON position).

BL: we can do better, and if fat people get to go along for the ride, so be it... Again, people other than fat people need healthcare.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

To your point of low income and food quality, it’s an excuse. It’s easy to eat unhealthy and cheap, no argument there, but it’s also not that expensive, or really that time consuming if you plan. The cleanest diet I ever had was in college getting into competitive body building and living with whatever my ROTC stipend was ($400-$500? I don’t remember) for food, gas, beer and whatever else I was buying. Buying food in bulk, looking for sales, coupons, finding different seasonings, etc, it’s very doable. I was eating a very healthy (2500 ish daily calories) high protein diet for a $200, maybe $300 a month (it was while ago) and only cooking once a week, for about a hour to meal prep. Cut the proteins down for average Joes nutrition requirements and substitute in healthy carbs and there is some more savings. With different seasoning and flavors a lot of what I made was pretty tasty too, not greasy pizza or Chik Fil A good, but we still try to cook healthy ish using some of my old recipes and my young kids eat it without protest. 
 

As to the rest of the health care topic, I think it’s one of our most complex and totally messed up issues we face. A lot has been addressed here, but the American diet and our activity levels are a major player. 
 

Our insurance scam of system is totally f’d up. You ever look at those statements of what Tricare is billed and what they actually pay? (It’s not just Tricare, it’s all the insurances) How medical practices bill seems criminal to me. Price gouging and over inflated costs in the medical field absolutely blow my mind. 

 

The sociology/psychology/economics  is absolutely fascinating to observe as modern medicine has evolved. The human nature in us wants to keep our loved ones and ourselves alive as long as possible. But at what point is fiscally irresponsible? It’s not a easy topic to talk about, it’s easy to jump right to “money doesn’t matter, do whatever it takes” and that’s not necessarily wrong to think that way. It’s pretty understandable to think that way. On the flip side, does it make sense to keep yourself or grandma alive a extra couple years if it means it will take several generations for the family to fiscally recover? If you go down the socialized/mass subsidized route, how much can the tax payer coffers cover before it cripples the economy/government? Which leads to the discussion above about when Uncle Sam writes you off and wishes you luck. 
 

Regardless of who pays the bill, healthcare isn’t cheap. Even if we fix the “glitch” and get overall costs lower, they still are going to be expensive. Much like aviation, the operators are expensive, the equipment is complex/expensive in both initial cost, operating cost, and maintenance cost. 
 

Society as a whole is going to have to come to general consensus on this. In a lot of countries it seems government funded has been decided upon, and that works for them (there seems to be some regret depending on who you ask, example being the wait times in places like Canada and the EU) unfortunately the US system seems more jacked up than some of our first world friends. 
 

Disclaimer, I’m not here to start a internet fight, tell you my ideas are right and yours wrong, I have all the answers, or change your mind about your views (except the healthy eating one, totally doable on a budget). Just points/thoughts for everyone to ponder as we discuss the issue and move forward.  
 

🍻 Cheers 

[Negatory]

47 minutes ago, viper154 said:

Our insurance scam of system is totally f’d up. You ever look at those statements of what Tricare is billed and what they actually pay? (It’s not just Tricare, it’s all the insurances) How medical practices bill seems criminal to me. Price gouging and over inflated costs in the medical field absolutely blow my mind. 

The government probably couldn’t provide healthcare efficiently. I agree that the VA is probably a good indicator of what could happen if we put our faith in the government to save us.

But they could regulate and fix stuff like this. We pay more for everything than almost every other nation, even when we’re getting the same stuff. Get rid of the admins, make it criminal to price gouge on materials, encourage the production of generic drugs, and provide incentive to non profit insurance companies.

The unbridled free market is failing here and needs some regulation.

[FLEA]

5 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Put simply, because of the cost. Healthcare is inordinately expensive.

The majority doesn't determine what is and is not a "right." Rights pre-exist government - they're not things that we all agree we should collectively pay for.

Not necessarily, but I am ok with it when people don't take care of themselves and become a burden on society. What is the balance? Take a look at many other modern cultures in the world - or non-modern for that matter. They do not look like us. From google (1st hit via the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db360.htm#:~:text=Among men%2C the prevalence of,those aged 60 and over.😞

"Among men, the prevalence of obesity was 40.3% among those aged 20–39, 46.4% among those aged 40–59, and 42.2% among those aged 60 and over. Among women, the prevalence of obesity was 39.7% among those aged 20–39, 43.3% among those aged 40–59, and 43.3% among those aged 60 and over. None of the differences by age were significant."

Well over 1/3 (approaching 1/2) of Americans are medically obese. Let that sink in. Walk around Japan or Poland and you'll notice we do not look like them. They are thin. They are healthy. There is no way in hell I'm interested in paying for end of life care for approximately 1/2 of America, when it's visibly provable that they do not care about themselves. I'm not even interested in hearing arguments about it. I'm a hard "no." Now, we un-screw our food system and the way we eat and feed ourselves in this country and shape up our act, cool, let's start the conversation again.

Shack. You're 100% correct. Should the government pay for me to open a newspaper or buy me a bull horn? Freedom of speech is a right!! What about a gun. Right to bear arms!

"Should" they is a fine question - they don't have to. The argument is that they do because it makes a career in the service of your country more attractive. Take away that "right" (benefit) and you'll likely see recruiting and retention decline. Military healthcare is not a right - it's part of the compensation you're being given as part of the contract of your service. Same goes for your family.

Half of America is OBESE!!! This kid is 10!!!! (Edit - he's 4). Let's fix this first. No it's not all the problem of obesity, but this is only one (1) problem that contributes to the health crisis in our country - there are many others.

It is no until we fix some other underlying issues first. I'm not interested in forsaking people who truly lose the health lottery in life. But we MUST differentiate between those, and just blanket providing hundreds of thousands of dollars of care at the end of life for every American.

Regarding the point to the government subsidizing rights. This is not entirely true. We do force attorneys to represent clients who can't afford one. This is done differently in different states but often times if you are fostered to practice certain types of law in a whatever district you go into a lottery, or the state just retains a defense team. Either way, I think you can see the point. 

[jazzdude]

Get rid of the admins, make it criminal to price gouge on materials, encourage the production of generic drugs, and provide incentive to non profit insurance companies.

Part of the issue is that it's really hard to cost out care.

It's easy to say "a bandage plus some motrin is only a couple dollars at the store, why am I being charged $200+?! That's price gouging!" But there's a lot of overhead and indirect costs that have to be covered that are necessary to keep the hospital running. This isn't to say price gouging doesn't happen.

You need to pay the doctors and nursing staff, not just for contact time, but for their time on shift without patients, vacation time, sick leave time, and admin time (a simple 15 min contact can be 30-45 min of work for the doctor to review charts/record, and then update charts/record afterward). But you also need to pay for janitors, mx, appointment clerks, billing/finance, and managers. You also need money to pay for continuing education and training for the professional staff. And the building/electricity/water. Don't forget computers, and licenses for electronic health records software. Then there's equipment and supplies that's rarely used but needed on hand for emergencies. Then on top of all that, since we're a capitalist society, the hospital needs to be profitable (though investing for the long term would make this easier, most hedge funds and investment groups seem to value quarterly growth and short term profits).

But when you get the bill, there's no "overhead" charge. They build it into the prices for each billable line item.

It's essentially like buying a car-only suckers pay the full sticker price. But in addition to insurance being a means to pool resources to cover large expenses should they arise, it also puts insurance companies in a good negotiating position for the price of services compared to an individual (like collective bargaining), which drives down costs but only in-network where they've negotiated prices.

Some hospitals may elect to lower prices for people that can't afford to pay, heavily subsidizing the individuals costs. But that subsidy comes from somewhere, whether it's a wealthy donor, staff working pro bono, or by adjusting prices elsewhere for others.

I do agree on generic drugs, but how do you put that into practice? A generic still has to go through the approval process, which takes time and can be costly, and the g producing the generic also needs to turn a profit. Along those lines though, if the government invested in/funded a treatment's research (which again, the federal government already does invest a good chunk of change in medical research), then it's reasonable for the government to have a say in pricing the drug.

[brickhistory]

An interesting day yesterday.  I learned (no thanks to Facebook or Twitter which continue to either slow or completely block any info on this.):

- That the now infamous Hunter laptop - public because he left it there and didn't pay an $85 repair bill - was subpoenaed for a grand jury by an FBI agent who specializes in child porn cases.

- That Guiliani turned over to Delaware police photos of underage girls from the laptop.  True, it is unknown to me if those images are of the gross, illegal kind.

- Emails to/from Hunter about inappropriate situations regarding underage girls.

- That a former business associate of Hunter's was removed from the general population of the prison he was incarcerated in yesterday.  Same guy who is, apparently, providing information about Hunter and others regarding some Indian casino tax scam.  The one where two of the three partners went to jail, but only Hunter wasn't charged.

- That the pictures of Joe and Hunter with Kazakh business partners of Hunter's puts paid to the Joe claim "of I knew nothing of his business dealings."  As did the numerous Air Force Two accompanied trips.  As well as the numerous pay-offs to "The Big Guy."

- That Joe Biden considers Poland and Hungary as "totalitarian regimes."

As a double hypothetical, if Biden wins, does he immediately pardon Hunter or wait until his last day as other Presidents did before helping out family?  It's certainly legal to do so, but I wonder if Kamala would like that?

 

I admit I'm not contributing to the healthcare in America theme running, but I also try not to tilt at windmills.  It has never ended well either in fiction or in real life.

Edited October 21, 2020 by brickhistory

[M2]

11 hours ago, Negatory said:

The government probably couldn’t provide healthcare efficiently. I agree that the VA is probably a good indicator of what could happen if we put our faith in the government to save us.

But they could regulate and fix stuff like this. We pay more for everything than almost every other nation, even when we’re getting the same stuff. Get rid of the admins, make it criminal to price gouge on materials, encourage the production of generic drugs, and provide incentive to non profit insurance companies.

The unbridled free market is failing here and needs some regulation.

Sorry, increased government involvement is not the answer either.

Implement your suggestions ("Get rid of the admins, make it criminal to price gouge on materials, encourage the production of generic drugs, and provide incentive to non profit insurance companies") then sit back and watch our health system crumble. 

It's an industry, and one that requires money to flourish.  In my six decades on this planet I have seen great medical advances that have extended and better the lives of many people.  In the 1970s, cancer was pretty much a death sentence; now the majority of people survive it.  The progress took a lot of money, but it also saved a lot of lives.

I have seen socialized societies work.  Germany is a great example.  The roads are perfect, the air clean, and the quality of life is high (I would say higher than this country).  All it cost the Germans was a large percentage of their income and many rights and liberties.   If you want to pay up to 45% in income tax, you too could enjoy the benefits of the government spending your money as it wishes.

But that is not how this country was founded.  It was built on the inalienable rights of the individual.  Our government, especially at the Federal level, needs to be less involved in our lives, not more.

If Biden wins the presidency, that will not be the trend...

[kaputt]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

I have seen socialized societies work.  Germany is a great example.  The roads are perfect, the air clean, and the quality of life is high (I would say higher than this country).  All it cost the Germans was a large percentage of their income and many rights and liberties.   If you want to pay up to 45% in income tax, you too could enjoy the benefits of the government spending your money as it wishes.
 

The Germans also have had the benefit of a large portion of their national defense being provided directly by the United States and paid out of our taxpayers pockets. 
 

Spending little on defense and still living in a relatively secure environment probably frees up a lot of money to try and build a semi socialist paradise. 

[lloyd christmas]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

But that is not how this country was founded.  It was built on the inalienable rights of the individual.  Our government, especially at the Federal level, needs to be less involved in our lives, not more.

If Biden wins the presidency, that will not be the trend...

It seems to be a given now that the federal government has all of the answers.  We have completely lost sight of the fact that we are a nation of States and the States have rights.  We see that in the response to the Rona.  Each State is different and has it's own unique challenges.  Health care is no different.  That means that some States will win and some will lose if the feds end up running health care.  

Edited October 21, 2020 by lloyd christmas

[Guardian]

Socialist paradise. Oxymoron?

[slackline]

Socialist paradise. Oxymoron?

I don’t understand our need to act so superior to this. I’m not saying you specifically here, but comments like this pop up so much. Clearly, that style government doesn’t work for us, and wouldn’t be well received. I’m on the same page as you for that.

My issue with this is, those people living in Germany, Scandinavian countries, etc. are extremely happy. If it works for them, who are we to hate on it. We have problems they don’t, they have problems we don’t. Paying those taxes doesn’t seem to really hurt them a whole bunch, and they seem to have just as many toys as us from expendable income. I just don’t get it.

For most of Europe, I’ll grant you 1000% the fact that they are able to save a significant chunk of change on defense because of Uncle Sam...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[DosXX]

6 hours ago, brickhistory said:

That Guiliani turned over to Delaware police photos of underage girls from the laptop.  True, it is unknown to me if those images are of the gross, illegal kind.

Apparently Borat 2 features a clip of Giuliani  reaching in his pants after flirting with Borat's "15" year old daughter after an interview, the irony is almost too good to be true.

[Negatory]

5 hours ago, M2 said:

Sorry, increased government involvement is not the answer either.

Implement your suggestions ("Get rid of the admins, make it criminal to price gouge on materials, encourage the production of generic drugs, and provide incentive to non profit insurance companies") then sit back and watch our health system crumble. 

It's an industry, and one that requires money to flourish.  In my six decades on this planet I have seen great medical advances that have extended and better the lives of many people.  In the 1970s, cancer was pretty much a death sentence; now the majority of people survive it.  The progress took a lot of money, but it also saved a lot of lives.

I have seen socialized societies work.  Germany is a great example.  The roads are perfect, the air clean, and the quality of life is high (I would say higher than this country).  All it cost the Germans was a large percentage of their income and many rights and liberties.   If you want to pay up to 45% in income tax, you too could enjoy the benefits of the government spending your money as it wishes.

But that is not how this country was founded.  It was built on the inalienable rights of the individual.  Our government, especially at the Federal level, needs to be less involved in our lives, not more.

If Biden wins the presidency, that will not be the trend...

Pure unbridled economic libertarianism has been demonstrated a failure dozens of times as far back as steel or railroads. If you think the free market always works in America - just because that’s how it “was founded” - I’ve got news for you.

Edited October 21, 2020 by Negatory

[Guardian]

How does my pointing out hat socialism and paradise don’t belong together allows you to assume I’m trying to act superior?

Then you continue on and agree with me.....what?

Now are you implying those countries are socialist? They aren’t. Like was previously pointed out if you want the government to run more aspects of citizens daily lives then they lose freedoms. And the government decides a lot of things for individuals in socialist countries. I like my freedoms. I seriously don’t get why people want our country to change into something it’s not because some other country may have it. Our country is amazing. Why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better instead of trying to change people and a system that doesn’t want to change?

I don’t care if it hurts or helps as a whole in your opinion. That’s just it, I don’t want you or others deciding what’s best for me.

Are their socialist countries in Europe? If so which ones?

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

[Negatory]

5 minutes ago, Guardian said:

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

Antitrust judgments aren’t consensual and are often forced upon people and businesses who have acted within the bounds of the free market. The point is not that everything should be regulated, but some things should.

[slackline]

How does my pointing out hat socialism and paradise don’t belong together allows you to assume I’m trying to act superior?

Then you continue on and agree with me.....what?

Now are you implying those countries are socialist? They aren’t. Like was previously pointed out if you want the government to run more aspects of citizens daily lives then they lose freedoms. And the government decides a lot of things for individuals in socialist countries. I like my freedoms. I seriously don’t get why people want our country to change into something it’s not because some other country may have it. Our country is amazing. Why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better instead of trying to change people and a system that doesn’t want to change?

I don’t care if it hurts or helps as a whole in your opinion. That’s just it, I don’t want you or others deciding what’s best for me.

Are their socialist countries in Europe? If so which ones?

Also (for negatory) no system is free from infallible humans. It just happens to be a better system because for the most part it is founded upon consensual agreements and freedoms. Which is a large reason it is completely unique in the world and another reason we live in the best country in the world.

You seriously can’t see how making the comment you made can come off as superior? Can’t help you then.

Those are not socialist countries, but they have socialist tendencies that you guys keep pointing out for goodness sake. Come on man, do better.

As I have said many, many, many times, I’m not advocating for universal healthcare. How are you still saying things like, “why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better?” Quite honestly, you’re not putting your best foot forward here man.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Sua Sponte]

 

9 hours ago, brickhistory said:

An interesting day yesterday.  I learned (no thanks to Facebook or Twitter which continue to either slow or completely block any info on this.):

- That the now infamous Hunter laptop - public because he left it there and didn't pay an $85 repair bill - was subpoenaed for a grand jury by an FBI agent who specializes in child porn cases.

- That Guiliani turned over to Delaware police photos of underage girls from the laptop.  True, it is unknown to me if those images are of the gross, illegal kind.

- Emails to/from Hunter about inappropriate situations regarding underage girls.

- That a former business associate of Hunter's was removed from the general population of the prison he was incarcerated in yesterday.  Same guy who is, apparently, providing information about Hunter and others regarding some Indian casino tax scam.  The one where two of the three partners went to jail, but only Hunter wasn't charged.

- That the pictures of Joe and Hunter with Kazakh business partners of Hunter's puts paid to the Joe claim "of I knew nothing of his business dealings."  As did the numerous Air Force Two accompanied trips.  As well as the numerous pay-offs to "The Big Guy."

- That Joe Biden considers Poland and Hungary as "totalitarian regimes."

As a double hypothetical, if Biden wins, does he immediately pardon Hunter or wait until his last day as other Presidents did before helping out family?  It's certainly legal to do so, but I wonder if Kamala would like that?

 

I admit I'm not contributing to the healthcare in America theme running, but I also try not to tilt at windmills.  It has never ended well either in fiction or in real life.

You learned from where other than Fox News, NY Post, etc.?

[brickhistory]

6 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

 

You learned from where other than Fox News, NY Post, etc.?

From a variety of venues but let's just go with "anonymous sources."

I understand those are all the rage and most folks are good with them...

[Guardian]

You seriously can’t see how making the comment you made can come off as superior? Can’t help you then.

Those are not socialist countries, but they have socialist tendencies that you guys keep pointing out for goodness sake. Come on man, do better.

As I have said many, many, many times, I’m not advocating for universal healthcare. How are you still saying things like, “why wouldn’t you go there if you think it’s better?” Quite honestly, you’re not putting your best foot forward here man.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I wasn’t trying to be superior. Just pointing out that socialism and paradise don’t equate.

Do better at what? I just asked you if they were socialist. And look to the Scandinavian countries Bernie likes to quote as being socialist or having social policy. They readily admit that they aren’t socialist and the policies of socialism they in acted in the past failed and they went back to a more free market economy.

I’m asking you very simple questions man. Sorry you can’t answer them and only point the finger back at me and claim I’m dumb for not seeing your unexplained points. Plus if you aren’t advocating for those programs, then why bring them up? Seriously. Answer some questions. Take them at face value. And don’t just assume I’m trying to be dumb. I’m not. Genuinely trying to understand why you are bringing this stuff up. And if you aren’t advocating for the stuff you are bringing up then what is your point. Having trouble following you.

[ViperMan]

21 hours ago, slackline said:

I get it, you don’t want to subsidize the healthcare of fat people. It pisses me off as well. The military has destroyed my body, back and neck are 10 kinds of jacked, but I take care of myself. I believe a lot more people should and could do a lot of the same thing. I eat right, and I exercise a ton. That takes care of a lot of my issues and keeps my QoL higher than it would be. If I can do that, they can do that... to an extent. Food that is healthy is waaay harder to get for low income families. Not just the prices (healthy food is more expensive than garbage food) are messed up, but there’s the time aspect. People working multiple min wage jobs often times have very little free time, so popping in the microwave dinner is faster than preparing healthy food.

That doesn’t excuse a gross neglect of your own health on the part of many fat people. I’m simply making the point that it isn’t as simple as “fat people should all die of diabetes because they’re lazy” which seems like what you’re advocating (heavy on the sarcasm there in case you were unsure). Oh, and guess what, there’s tons of fat people in the military driving up our healthcare costs. Fix that problem for us while you’re on your high horse (again, sarcasm meter should be in the ON position).

BL: we can do better, and if fat people get to go along for the ride, so be it... Again, people other than fat people need healthcare.

Maybe it is more difficult to get healthy food. But there are a lot of things that are more difficult when you don't have money. One solution I advocate for is that EBT cards should not work in convenience stores or should be able to purchase "processed" items. They should be allowed to purchase raw produce only. Buying a chicken and some salad and rice is not more expensive than eating out for a whole family. It just isn't.

On the other note, I don't mind the sarcasm and I appreciate how direct we can be in this forum. I appreciate the fray. It's hard to have these conversations in person with large parts of the populace at this point.

17 hours ago, FLEA said:

Regarding the point to the government subsidizing rights. This is not entirely true. We do force attorneys to represent clients who can't afford one. This is done differently in different states but often times if you are fostered to practice certain types of law in a whatever district you go into a lottery, or the state just retains a defense team. Either way, I think you can see the point. 

That is true, but it's also a "right" you are given in response to the government attempting to take something from you - so in the case of the court/justice system, they are going to deprive you of one of your rights, it's only reasonable that they provide you with a "defense." So in that light, it is categorically different and the original point is still that the government doesn't subsidize your other rights, so why is healthcare elevated to a privileged status? Maybe I could see it if the government was causing your ill health, but in the majority of cases it is due to lifestyle choices.

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

Pure unbridled economic libertarianism has been demonstrated a failure dozens of times as far back as steel or railroads. If you think the free market always works in America - just because that’s how it “was founded” - I’ve got news for you.

I think one of the most persistent tropes that operates in our discourse is that we actually have a truly "free" market. Nothing could be further from the truth. So when I hear about all the failings of capitalism I just laugh. We have a very mixed economy. We have actual monopolies. Regulatory capture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture) is rampant. And there are all sorts of other factors in our economic system that work against free market principles. All that is to say that I dismiss arguments that point at what we currently have to say "look, capitalism doesn't work."