Can the US afford socialized medicine?

[jarofthoughts]

Is this your experience? My experience with insurance companies differs.
I've found that they even cover me when there'd be wiggle room not to.

*Shrug*

I'm covered no matter what...

Hospital? Government picks up the bill.
Unemployed? Government will pay me 80% of my salary until I get on my feet.
Disabled? The government will support me and get me a suitable apartment as well as pay for my care.
Retirement funds? You guessed it...

Gotta love Norway.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm covered no matter what...

Experience here with insurance might not be what you read in the media.

 

[jarofthoughts]

Experience here with insurance might not be what you read in the media.

I'm sure it isn't, and for the record I do not consider Michael Moore to be a reliable source of information.

The thing is though, with a universal healthcare system you don't need to worry at all whether you are covered or not, or how much you need to pay for your insurance. All that stuff is taken care of and everyone is covered for everything.

As it stands the US is the only modern industrialised country that doesn't have universal healthcare and you're paying out of your nose for it. So you haven't covered everyone and you still have the most expensive system in the world.

Something is seriously screwed here.

And this comes from someone who not only wants the US to succeed, but who actually thinks it is necessary. Not only for you, but for the world in general.

I know this doesn't apply to everyone but it seems like there is a "looking out for #1" mentality among a lot of people in the US, something which seems strange to me. I mean, I'm perfectly fine with paying for other people's hospital bills, their disabilities, their unemployment, should they fall on hard times. I know some are afraid that people will just take advantage of such a system and exploit it, but having the lowest unemployment rate in Europe, almost the world, this just isn't so.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

Experience here with insurance might not be what you read in the media.

I live in the U.S. I know what health insurance is like here. It seems to me jarofthoughts has the right idea.

 

[cynic2005]

I'm disabled, I am a full time student (can't work anyways right now), I'm actually a veteran and the VA system sucks. I get tossed around a bunch of doctors, all of who don't want to give me a diagnosis nor run various tests to find out what I have (which is against my rights as a veteran). I can't afford a private doctor, and I don't have money for insurance.

I was actually medically discharged from the Army. They told me that whatever I had would go away. It didn't. I spent 9 months in a wheelchair and didn't receive any treatment from the Veteran's Affairs Medical system. I treated my self. I still have problems walking though.

Ya, f*** America, I f****** try to protect this country and this is how I am treated. This perception that people are too lazy and would take advantage of the system is ********, utter ********. Many people who are poor aren't poor because they don't want to work, they are poor because of uncontrollable reasons. 500,000+ veterans are homeless. This is how Americans really treat their veterans.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

I know this doesn't apply to everyone but it seems like there is a "looking out for #1" mentality among a lot of people in the US, something which seems strange to me. I mean, I'm perfectly fine with paying for other people's hospital bills, their disabilities, their unemployment, should they fall on hard times. I know some are afraid that people will just take advantage of such a system and exploit it, but having the lowest unemployment rate in Europe, almost the world, this just isn't so.

I think the mentality comes from the perception (reality?) that we don't reap many benefits from the taxes we pay. The perception is that we pay taxes, and yet our public schools stink, we don't get free or cheap health care, we don't get lots of vacation time, we don't have limited work hours, we don't get high wages, we don't have great job security, etc. So, if you raise my taxes, how am I going to afford my (private) health insurance? And what benefit will there really be? I think that's how many Americans feel.

I think a big driving force behind this is that so many tax dollars vanish down the well of military spending and aid to prop up friendly regimes around the globe. A Norwegian pays taxes but she also sees the benefits of those taxes, she walks into a hospital and gets free health treatment. An American pays taxes and the money is drained into Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, developing a new super-duper full-spectrum stealth bomber, etc.

So American taxpayers react with the mentality of, okay, just don't raise my taxes and let me take care of myself.

OTOH if you look at something that has become accepted by historical precedent, like the public funding of fire departments, unemployment benefits, public schools and libraries, people are happy (in general) to pay taxes which often benefit others. The idea of "free books and education for all" has simply become accepted due to historical precedent, whereas "free health insurance for all" is a novel concept and many Americans believe it would be expensive.

 

[Smoke]

As it stands the US is the only modern industrialised country that doesn't have universal healthcare and you're paying out of your nose for it. So you haven't covered everyone and you still have the most expensive system in the world.

Something is seriously screwed here.

Exactly.

 

[Magic Man]

I think the mentality comes from the perception (reality?) that we don't reap many benefits from the taxes we pay. The perception is that we pay taxes, and yet our public schools stink, we don't get free or cheap health care, we don't get lots of vacation time, we don't have limited work hours, we don't get high wages, we don't have great job security, etc. So, if you raise my taxes, how am I going to afford my (private) health insurance? And what benefit will there really be? I think that's how many Americans feel.

I think a big driving force behind this is that so many tax dollars vanish down the well of military spending and aid to prop up friendly regimes around the globe. A Norwegian pays taxes but she also sees the benefits of those taxes, she walks into a hospital and gets free health treatment. An American pays taxes and the money is drained into Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, developing a new super-duper full-spectrum stealth bomber, etc.

So American taxpayers react with the mentality of, okay, just don't raise my taxes and let me take care of myself.

OTOH if you look at something that has become accepted by historical precedent, like the public funding of fire departments, unemployment benefits, public schools and libraries, people are happy (in general) to pay taxes which often benefit others. The idea of "free books and education for all" has simply become accepted due to historical precedent, whereas "free health insurance for all" is a novel concept and many Americans believe it would be expensive.

Exactly. I think this is a big obstacle for us. We don't see a great return on our tax dollars, and so we don't really understand the value of paying taxes. In many other countries they can see their tax dollars hard at work for them. They see the benefits, so they're much more likely to not think "taxes=bad". If we could make better use of our tax dollars by improving our schools and roads, and spending less on wars, I think people would be less inclined to simplify it as "taxes=bad".

 

[Revoltingest]

I live in the U.S. I know what health insurance is like here. It seems to me jarofthoughts has the right idea.

He had several ideas. Which do you find right?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

LOL oh.....hush yo mouth, Jeff. I was responding to the verbiage such as "flexibility", "do this because we love it", and basically how our field is simply different from other fields because of the people and the nature of the work. It wasn't specifically because of the comparison to writers (one of my closest girlfriends is a writer and is finishing two books as we speak, but the indexing and the use of footnotes isn't quite what the editors want, so she's facing some obstacles right now.)

Okay - yeah, I get that.

I remember my Dad (who had a home-based business with my Mom and they both worked like crazy to keep it going) always grumbled when Takin' Care of Business came on the radio ("If I ever get annoyed/I can become self-employed/I'd love to work at nothin' all day").

Oh, and for the record, I don't bristle. I either throw shoes or crack my whip depending on my mood.

I'll remember to be ready to duck.

 

[Revoltingest]

The thing is though, with a universal healthcare system you don't need to worry at all whether you are covered or not, or how much you need to pay for your insurance. All that stuff is taken care of and everyone is covered for everything.

I wouldn't trust the American voter with the power to give themselves everything their heart desires at someone else's expense.
We don't have enuf Norwegians here....just a few bachelor farmers.

As it stands the US is the only modern industrialised country that doesn't have universal healthcare and you're paying out of your nose for it. So you haven't covered everyone and you still have the most expensive system in the world.
Something is seriously screwed here.

No kidding. But I don't see the need to socialize it all just to improve it.
We have a whole host of problems needing to be addressed, perhaps the worst of which are dysfunctional regulation
& a glut of ambulance chasing attorneys.

I know this doesn't apply to everyone but it seems like there is a "looking out for #1" mentality among a lot of people in the US, something which seems strange to me. I mean, I'm perfectly fine with paying for other people's hospital bills, their disabilities, their unemployment, should they fall on hard times. I know some are afraid that people will just take advantage of such a system and exploit it, but having the lowest unemployment rate in Europe, almost the world, this just isn't so.

We have different cultures & gov'ts. What works for you, won't necessarily work here.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Exactly. I think this is a big obstacle for us. We don't see a great return on our tax dollars, and so we don't really understand the value of paying taxes. In many other countries they can see their tax dollars hard at work for them. They see the benefits, so they're much more likely to not think "taxes=bad". If we could make better use of our tax dollars by improving our schools and roads, and spending less on wars, I think people would be less inclined to simplify it as "taxes=bad".

GM is a big employer in the area where I live. A couple of years ago, they went through a huge round of closures. First, they closed the truck plant here, putting a thousand or more people out of work. Then, there were rumours that one of the car plants was being considered for closure as well. Apparently, GM had a "short list" of candidate plants and needed to close a certain number of them.

Reportedly, what saved our car plant was our lower labour cost, which was a direct result of the difference in the cost to GM for health insurance. Instead of closing the plant in Oshawa, another plant in the US got the axe.

So... my community is better off because your government hasn't got its act together on this issue. I guess I should say "thank you".

 

[Magic Man]

I wouldn't trust the American voter with the power to give themselves everything their heart desires at someone else's expense.
We don't have enuf Norwegians here....just a few bachelor farmers.

Who's talking about giving the American voter the power to give themselves everything their heart desires at someone else's expense? I haven't heard that idea come up before.

We have different cultures & gov'ts. What works for you, won't necessarily work here.

Yes, we have different cultures and governments, but we're also the only developed country that doesn't have universal healthcare. It's a pretty good bet it would be a good option for us considering the vast number of other countries that use some form of it and it works, considering all of those countries have different cultures and governments.

 

[Revoltingest]

Who's talking about giving the American voter the power to give themselves everything their heart desires at someone else's expense? I haven't heard that idea come up before.

I've covered this before on this forum. Consider that if a gov't provides health care, & that voters control that gov't, then the voters will
steer policy in a direction of increasing personal benefit. Of course, they'll want the wealthier segment of society to largely foot the bill.

Yes, we have different cultures and governments, but we're also the only developed country that doesn't have universal healthcare. It's a pretty good bet it would be a good option for us considering the vast number of other countries that use some form of it and it works, considering all of those countries have different cultures and governments.

Are we really the only developed country without universal health care? But even so, the popularity of an idea doesn't alone convince me
that it's a good idea. If that method of divining truth worked, I'd believe in a god.

 

[Magic Man]

I've covered this before on this forum. Consider that if a gov't provides health care, & that voters control that gov't, then the voters will
steer policy in a direction of increasing personal benefit. Of course, they'll want the wealthier segment of society to largely foot the bill.

That's not exactly what you said, though. And we control the government, but only to a point. But yes, I'd expect the wealthier segment of society to largely foot the bill. If they're holding 84% of the wealth, why shouldn't they pay 84% of the taxes?

I'm not sure why this would be any different from anything else, though. Should we have no social programs at all? Should we have no law enforcement? I mean you could use this argument against anything.

Are we really the only developed country without universal health care? But even so, the popularity of an idea doesn't alone convince me
that it's a good idea. If that method of divining truth worked, I'd believe in a god.

As far as I know, we're the only one. It's not the popularity of the idea. It's the fact that it works in so many other diverse places. You said the fact that our culture and government are different from Norway's was a good enough reason to assume it probably won't work here. I'm saying it's not. I'm saying there are a lot of places with many different cultures and governments where the system works and works well.

And comparing this to the question of God is silly. I'm not saying you should believe something because a lot of other people do. I'm saying it's reasonable to assume a certain healthcare system will work for us because we can see through objective data that it works in so many other places.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not exactly what you said, though. And we control the government, but only to a point. But yes, I'd expect the wealthier segment of society to largely foot the bill. If they're holding 84% of the wealth, why shouldn't they pay 84% of the taxes?

I'm not addressing who should or shouldn't pay taxes, only the effect of voters voting themselves ever more largess.

I'm not sure why this would be any different from anything else, though. Should we have no social programs at all? Should we have no law enforcement? I mean you could use this argument against anything.

Not just anything....only against benefits which are perceived as accruing directly to individual voters.

As far as I know, we're the only one.

I doubt that we're the only one. There are an awful lotta countries out there.
It's your claim, so I'll let you support it.

It's not the popularity of the idea. It's the fact that it works in so many other diverse places. You said the fact that our culture and government are different from Norway's was a good enough reason to assume it probably won't work here.

That's your interpretation of what I said, not what I said.

And comparing this to the question of God is silly. I'm not saying you should believe something because a lot of other people do. I'm saying it's reasonable to assume a certain healthcare system will work for us because we can see through objective data that it works in so many other places.

The US is a very different place from where it works well. I'm skeptical that it would work well here long term.

 

[Magic Man]

I'm not addressing who should or shouldn't pay taxes, only the effect of voters voting themselves ever more largess.

But the point is rich people are going to pay for most services. They pay the most for any public service we have. That's not a reason not to have public services.

Not just anything....only against benefits which are perceived as accruing directly to individual voters.

See above. You could use this argument against any public service.

I doubt that we're the only one. There are an awful lotta countries out there.
It's your claim, so I'll let you support it.

The only developed country, yes. There are an awful lot of them out there, and yet we're the only one without universal healthcare of some kind. Of course, in the interest of not debating a point that doesn't matter, let's just assume we're not the only one. We're definitely one of the few. The more important point is that there are dozens of developed countries that have it, but we don't.

That's your interpretation of what I said, not what I said.

Nope, that's what you said. If you meant something else, you should have said something else.

The US is a very different place from where it works well. I'm skeptical that it would work well here long term.

I'm not sure how else to get this through to you. It works well in dozens of countries. those countries are all different from each other and from us. If it works in such a diverse set of places, chances are we can make it work here. The main problem here is that you just have to look at what it is. Once you do that, you realize we can easily institute a system based on other countries' versions of it that would work here.

 

[Reverend Rick]

If they're holding 84% of the wealth, why shouldn't they pay 84% of the taxes?

Allright Matt, I can get on board with this if the other 16% pay their taxes too.

 

[Magic Man]

Allright Matt, I can get on board with this if the other 16% pay their taxes too.

You mean the other 80%? The top 20% of earners hold 84% of the wealth. The other 80% hold 16%, and they do pay their taxes. Unfortunately the top 20% pay much less than 84% of the taxes, which means the other 80% has to pay significantly more than their share. So, I'm glad you're on board for fair taxes.

 

[Reverend Rick]

You mean the other 80%? The top 20% of earners hold 84% of the wealth. The other 80% hold 16%, and they do pay their taxes. Unfortunately the top 20% pay much less than 84% of the taxes, which means the other 80% has to pay significantly more than their share. So, I'm glad you're on board for fair taxes.

Are you done cramming words into my mouth? If you want to have a health care system where everyone enjoys the same service like other countries, America needs to have unemployment figures and tax participation like other countries.

The reason it works over there is because they are all in it together.

Over here, almost 50% of our citizens have a lousy education and no work ethic.

There are very few freeloaders in their system.

You want the few to pay for the many, that is not copying other systems, that is having your cake and eat it too.

If we where to remove programs that promote freeloading, (5th generation welfare) I have a feeling these freeloaders would get off their butts and produce something other than more dependant children.