On Healthcare in the U.S.

[El Blanco]

and blanco.. you think that might makes right? you think that if you are stronger than me you have the right to boss me around?

Never said anything like that. I just don't see how you ca demand that health care providers change when we are the main reason the system got to where it is.

People not taking care of themselves.

Doctors getting kick backs for sending people in for expensive procedures like MRIs and such when it is totally unnessacery.

People who want magic pills to fix all their problems instead of preventing them in the first place.

I do believe that the government should put a leash on companies, especially in the health care industry, but who the hell honestly believes that federalizing the industry would improve a damn thing?

i'm sorry but America is nearly professional at blaming the victim

Bullshit. We are 100x better at playing the victim.

"What do you mean liting a stick on fire and inhaling its exhaust is bad for you. So what the box has a warning from the nation's #1 doctor that these things are dangerous. I'm suing"

"What do you mean a vehicle with an 18' wheelbase flips over on 20 degree turnat 80 mph? I'm suing!"

"what do you mean eating meat that been soaking in beef for eight hours for my lunch and dinner every day for the last 20 years is bad for me and my kids? I'm suing!"

Fuck. When did litigation take over for our common sense?

And one more thing: 60% of insurance costs go to lawyers. Hmmm, wonder how that happened.

[ranxer]

alrighty, yes i can agree that! too many do play the victim and blame others for thier problems.

i thought you had been referring to americans not taking care of corporate abuse.. now i get that you were referring to health.

/salute um, yes my anti-corporate views tend to jump out a bit fast. :/

[Preechr]

Major differences in opinion on how economics is supposed to function, I suppose. I think I see where you're coming from, but I guess I just view that as a less efficient path.

No matter who gets the job done, we are talking about the efforts of individuals. If every individual works as hard and effectively as possible, the job will get done well in either situation. The only difference between my way and your way is the motivation of those individuals to do the work well.

I agree that the goal should be Health, but I don't trust people to be motivated by unselfish goals. They should be, but they aren't ever in any reliable way. I would not set out to build a structure as important as Healthcare on a foundation of trust in something I don't believe exists.

Don't get me wrong... If you and I were to be solely responsible for Healthcare, and somehow were able to get the job done, we would have pure motivation and I'm sure everything would be just peachy. Most people aren't wonderful like us. They don't get out of bed every morning because they can't wait to lend a helping hand. They get up to get to work so they can sell their time yet another day, in hopes of one day being able to buy a jetski.

Profit motivates people. Lack of Profit is a clear indication your methods for attaining it are flawed. Bankruptcy is the last step for stubborn and prideful companies. There are no negative consequences for the Healthcare system in your Social plan. My Capitalist plan forces the companies that participate to constantly tailor their methods to fit consumer demand better than their competition.

I understand all the old reasons why we should be scared to death of cold, heartless Capitalism. Here's a link to an incomplete concept you might appreciate. http://www.4ranters.com/detail.php?id=20

The problems we associate with Capitalism do not stem from it's application. The problem is that we won't let it be fully applied. It's just too scary, I guess.

That's a whole nuther discussion, however... As I said above: I see your point, but I disagree that government control of anything that can be handled privately is in any way good or better. The closer the solution is to the problem, the more appropriate the solution is to that particular problem. The furthest thing from any of your problems within America is the Federal Government.

I'm going to go re-evaluate the beginnings of this thread. I'm starting to think that if I were to stop reading "Socialism" into everything I might be close to agreeing with whomever started this thing...

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Do me a favor and remind me that act. I think there were a few specifics I was opposed to, but understood the spirit of the law.

I opposed it on libertarian grounds. Ya know, as of July 19th(?), no more smoking in bars, diners, various restaurants, etc...?

But my point is this: The bill was half assed in one way that it didn't extend to REALLY clean "indoor air" in NY. It still left plant workers and other labor types exposed to polluted air in the work place. On the other hand, before the bill was proposed, it allowed diners and bars to expose their workers to such conditions. People like waitresses at diners accept this, b/c they need to pay the bills and feed their kids.

So, do THOSE people not deserve the benefits of a single-payer system, or do they deserve to suffer for making poor "lifestyle choices"???

[El Blanco]

For some odd reason, I thought that was the one that banned smoking in government buildings. Brain lock.

YA, I do oppose that. Mainly because I frequent NYC bars and flipping out the Zippo to light a girl's smoke was my main ice breaker. Fucking cock blocking lawmakers.

Seriously, my main issue with this is the timing. We are in the middle of a budget crisis. Bloomberg is cutting firehouses, police, sanitation, and the schools are floundering. Somehow, he is finding the funding to enforce this law which does nothing than tell grown adults how to behave.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Originally Posted by El Blanco

Seriously, my main issue with this is the timing. We are in the middle of a budget crisis. Bloomberg is cutting firehouses, police, sanitation, and the schools are floundering. Somehow, he is finding the funding to enforce this law which does nothing than tell grown adults how to behave.

Well, in Bloomberg's defense, he was left a city budget in 2001 that left him few options but to cut services AND raise fees. I oppose the fair hike, I can agree to a commuter tax, though.

I don't see his justification for this act, other than a moral crusade. However, since the state is already persuing it themselves as well, he may have been left with little choice. Maybe he wanted to install his own version, thus having more of a say over it. I dunno.

But I digress....

[El Blanco]

I think he is just a disgruntled Red Sox fan who is doing everything he can to flush the City down the crapper.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Well, the state of NYC, post-Giuliani, is another topic in its entierty (sp?). Just read Newfield's book "the Full Rudy". Very interesting, although abstract.

Anyway, in corelation to the topic at hand, do you not justify your tax dollars going towards the health of those who work in such conditions? Did they too simply make bad choices? If that's so, how many "choices" do Americans have these days???