Socialized Healthcare

#41

I think the big problem here is what we define as “socialist”.

You wouldn’t pay out of pocket (or be billed) for things like the fire department or the police department. For example, there were neighbors of mine that were fighting (and I mean really fighting) and I called 911. The police came out, broke up the fight, arrested a couple people. What did I get charged for this service? $0.00. Sure, money was coming out of my paycheck for this and others had to pay for what I used, but I have to pay for what others use, too.

In a TRUE capitalist society, if I called 911, the police would send me the bill for gas, labor, and other associated costs, such as their usage of the private roads. This would be truly silly as, if you were poor and/or destitute (regardless of the reason why you’re poor/destitute), you wouldn’t have access to the police and fire departments.

I think that this “socialism” card is nothing but a boogeyman. We already have many socialized services in this country. Why not health care (which is just as, if not more, important than police departments, fire departments, food safety, military, and the thousands of other ‘socialized’ services that every American, resident alien, even illegal alien enjoys)?

And do these thousands of ‘socialized’ services lead us into dictatorship?

#42

Do any of you actually think a socialist, or simply government run option would actually be more effective?
Do you realize how ineffective that would be? Seriously?

#43

Because a line must be drawn. I personally draw the line at when it stops being my safety that is protected. It sounds selfish, but that is why charity exists. The police keep crime low for everyone just by being there. Everyone is affected. The fire department prevent fires that could spread to everyone’s houses. Health care is different. If someone breaks their leg, I am not affected at all if they are not treated. As such, I do not think that the government should force me to pay for it. That is where I draw the line. I do not believe in 100% capitalism, because that cannot be maintained. Companies would become government and then a dictatorship would form. Also, thanks for not being Mattemuse. He was starting to get annoying.

#44

redacted

#45

I personally don’t support medicare. I am paying for seniors health insurance with money I don’t have. It is popular because the elderly are going to die before the true costs arise, and they are getting free stuff.

#46

redacted

#47

Ah, mix those two up for some reason. In any case, no I don’t think the two alone lead to a dictator ship, it is the continuance of the concept. I do, however, believe that I am not to be held responsible by the government for others, and that charity is there to help the poor. As for the elderly, many of them have more than enough money. Frankly, I would trust a charity with my money much more than the government.

#48

If charity provided for everything, then there would be no need for any government whatsoever. However, you safety is not being protected when you can die because you can’t afford basic necessities. Charitable organizations just can’t do it.

You call health care “different” but it’s not. If someone breaks their leg, that actually ADDS to the cost of health care because it pulls doctors off from other emergencies and it takes necessary supplies from the available ‘pool’. We live in a society where everyone is interwoven with each other. What affects one indelibly affects us all. If you break your leg, my health care costs go up. Maybe by a micron, but they go up. Just like a house that burns down but doesn’t burn anyone else’s house. The fire department must use resources to stop a burning house. These resources are something we all pay for.

You and I are already forced to pay for health care and it’s the most expensive kind: You and I pay for emergency care.

I don’t know about you, but a treatment for an infected sore on leg is much cheaper for all involved than a leg that must be amputated because the infection was left untreated and led to gangrene and there are months of rehabilitative therapy where the patient must learn to walk on a prosthetic or use a wheelchair (in which case, his ability to interact with society is handicapped and we still suffer more).

There are many things in this country that I do not want socialized, such as department stores, video gaming companies, and things like that. But to say that health care crosses a line that fire departments, police departments, food safety, and the many other ‘socialized services’ do NOT cross is just unfathomable to me.

#49

redacted

#50

As I said, I consider the line drawn elsewhere because my safety is not put at risk by that person breaking his leg. And no matter who controls it, that man breaking his leg will still bring up costs. I’d rather it be in the hands of private comapnies. Also, at Mattemuse, we’ve gone over this, neither is going to convince the other, I will just end by saying my view are based upon a logical progression, one that has not taken place yet in this country and has been mostly stalled for the past 50 years. I cannot point to specific historical instances because our current world has never happened before. However, communism fell, and that is the extreme form of the socialism being discussed here.

#51

I, personally, don’t want my health and well-being in the hands of private for-profit industry (I’m through a private company right now, though not by choice), but that’s where we differ.

Extreme forms (pure) forms of communism, socialism, capitalism, fascism, and corporatism do not work. We need a blend. We just argue over the percentage blend needed.

Socializing health care is not a “slippery slope” into totalitarian fascism, socialism or anything goofy like that. Because, if “slippery slope” was an actual logical argument to make, anything good could lead to anything bad so why do good if it could lead to bad?

Take the issue of gun control as a perfect example. If you’re for regulating guns, then the slippery slope leads to total and outright bans on all weapons and thought-policing (such as criminalizing nonweapons). If you’re not for regulating guns, then the slippery slope leads to a your next door neighbor having a thermonuclear device capable of ripping a spacetime hole connecting our dimension with Xen, leading to a police state after a global war. …oh, sorry…[/SIZE] :wink:

Or allowing gays to marry leads to sex with horses or disallowing gays to marry leads to total theocratic rule.

Either way, I find the “slippery slope” argument to the bastion of fools and of the ill-prepared.

I do not find socializing health care to be a slippery slope to totalitarianism.

#52

The main flaw with the slippery slope argument is indeed that such extremes are never fully carried out. But, looking at the way our country works, I worry that socialized medicine is a particularly slippery slope. Healthcare gives people a sense of entitlement. This sense of entitlement makes them vote for people who are willing to give them what they believe they deserve. People gradually begin to believe they deserve more as more is given to them through their elected presidents. As such, people will continue being people, wanting more, and while with gun control people don’t get money out of it, with this they do. I would like to not that my absolute tone of previous posts was exaggerated. What I post above is what I see as a likely culmination of events, but it is by no means the only way I see us emerging from this debate. It all depends on whether the American people see what is happening in time, which, come to think of it, I think they will. Also, thanks for actually arguing with me. Unlike mattemuse, you actually treated my points as thought out and in doing so, made me realize the extremism of my views and adjust them. View get more and more extreme without debate, I believe.
So, ultimately, I still don’t support health care at all, but I don’t believe as strongly that it would be the start of a slippery slope, but that is still a possibility to me.
As for your trust of the government for health care, consider New Orleans. Charities and Aid organization have done well over ten times more than the government simply because of the bureaucracy. Here, look at this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuL8teeuJD8&feature=related
It shows the government at its worst, and I don’t want to risk my Health Care by allowing them to run it.

#53

This argument is pissing me off. I think there should be no Medicare, only scattered medkits that are regularly replaced.

#54

I find this sentence to be without merit, to be honest. It’d be like saying that the existence of a fire department gives people a sense of entitlement. And that’s just silly.

Pardon me for saying so, but I don’t see it likely at all. Your argument makes many leaps in logic that aren’t in evidence

You’re right. When run poorly, the government is its own worst enemy. That’s why eternal vigilance must be done. Whether it’s a Republican, a Democrat, a conservative, a liberal, a socialist, a fascist, a communist, a corporatist, or any other label you want to slap on, we the people are in control of the government. That’s why I love our Founding Fathers. They were smart to make US in control of the government, not the government in control of us. We ultimately have a say.

However, what has caused much of the problems in this country is complacency, in my humble opinion. It is caused by turning the government into this separate entity–one to be feared. Every single person in government is there because we say they can be there. We are the “shareholders” of the “corporation”, as it were. Our word is, ultimately, law (certain restrictions imposed by the Constitution, but even that can be changed if we get enough people behind it).

And therein lies the rub: When government ceases being our “employee” and becomes an “it”. And when government becomes an “it”, it’s very easy to separate ourselves from our political responsibility and corruption is soon to follow.

At least, that’s my take on it. Like you, I treat others as they treat me. Too often shouting matches happen and that’s no good for anyone. I’m a Mao-lover and you’re a Hitler-lover. That’s silly and doesn’t advance the conversation at all.

…though that bald head… :jizz:

#55

I would argue that the Fire Department does give people a sense of entitlement, but that is not a bad thing. Again, unless the slippery slope is stopped, we end up a dictatorship, but I can see many ways it can be stopped, although, ultimately, countries end, and this may be one way it could happen. I don’t see that as a dooms day prophecy as much as reality. But i suppose ultimately all this is pointless. An issue should be debated by its effects in the near future, not by hypothetical situation that could arise. And so we get back to the issue at hand, health care. And its almost 11: 30, I have school tomorrow, and I need some sleep.

#56

Personally, here’s how I see the slippery slope argument:

If A leads to B and B leads to C, then, eventually, Rick Astley will never give you up.

It’s essentially a non-sequitur argument because one doesn’t come from the other (though it is possible to have a convoluted path from anything to anything and, as the Internet shows, a game of telephone can lead to some pretty wild outcomes).

Have a good sleep, Someonerandm. I think your argument is deeply flawed, but that’s okay.

:wink:

#57

I’m against it.
I don’t want to post my many, many reasons (that have yet to be tackled in this thread) because I don’t have the will to debate them.
I just wanted to at leas say that I am opposed to government-run health care.

#58

Its like America an the metric system all over again.

Oh shit ! someones arived at the door to take me to a Golag in the yorkshire dales, Little did I realises the true cost of healthcare!

Nooooooo!!!

#59

Hmmmmm…

#60

If I may…

I am from Czechia. A small, 10-million people country in the heart of Europe. Communists seized power in 1948. By 1958, they were already so deep in trouble that they were executing many opponents of the regime just to keep at power. In 1965, a sort of a meltdown was going on, reform-communists were rising through the communist-party structure and people were slowly rejoicing that the terror might end and that we might start building something “social” (as in societial). Then, in spring of 1968, these reform communists came to power and started liberating people, but during the night of 20th-21st of August, 1968, armies of 5 surrounding socialistic countries under the command of Red Army (Soviet Union’s army) invaded us, officially “to help the poor nation from usurpers infected with capitalistic thoughts” and ended all reform attempts. Many intelligent people fled the country on the day of 21st of August (and the few days after, before the “curtain fell” and the borders were locked).

For the next 21 years, the hard communist rule (of 1948-65) was back at power.

When the Berlin Wall fell and the Communist regime in Russia start falling apart because it has starved itself to death economically, there was another slow meltdown in our country as well. In November 1989, it was students who started protesting while they were recollecting the self-immolation of Jan Palach who ultimately brought the regime down.

But for the topic of healthcare: During the communism era as well as after it, we do have the “system of public healthcare”, financed from mandatory health insurance (it’s automatically deducted from your salary/wage, unless you are self-employed, in which case it is your duty to pay this).

If you are officially unemployed, pregnant, on maternity leave, a day-time student, or a child, the state pays the insurance for you.
From this insurance, our healthcare is paid for.

Now, there is a allegorical story about healthcare that goes like this:

[i]3 witches gathered around the infant healthcare and started having visions about its future.
One says: You will be “for free”.
Second says: You will be of high quality.
Third one says: You will be available (promptly) for everyone.

While they were happy with their premonitions, a fourth, evil witch approached, and cursed the infant: “I curse you with this – of those three wishes they gave you, only two will ever be true at the same time.”

Everyone was shocked, but there was nothing they could do with it.

And so, the curse lasts from that day onward.
There are countries with high quality healthcare for everyone, but you have to pay for it.
There are countries with high quality healthcare for free, but only select few get it, all others have to wait endlessly for it.
And finally, there are countries where you don’t have to wait, and it’s free, but it’s so poor, without newest technologies and medicaments, that you are usually better off just drinking warm tea and staying in bed.[/i]

We have the second case – the waiting lists for difficult surgeries are so long that many die before they get it.

The thing is, if something is free and good, people want more and more of it. It’s a human nature to stockpile what is stockpileable and abuse charity as much as possible. We have old people who just go to the doctor even when they have no problems, simply because there is a chance he will prescribe some vitamins to them and then they will get them cheaper than if they had to buy them for full commercial price. There are people who intentionally harm themselves or get sick, so that they can lie in hospital beds for free and be cared about, because they are perhaps lonely or unemployed and don’t want to pay for everything themselves.

Etc.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.