Obama vs. McCain: Thoughts?

[collegestudent22]

Re: Socialized health care - I'm all for this. I've visited other countries where they've had this for ages, and it's not the financial drain it's made out to be, nor is it some horrible cancer on society.

However, neither is it the glamorous world it is made out to be to tourists. As you say, you have visited these countries. Not lived in them. If you had lived in them, you would have known that in most of them, at least in the more populated areas, it becomes difficult to see your doctor because EVERYONE can come in for free. This means everything from a stuffy nose to a crack addict can come in without paying and see the doc. Frankly, while this may not be such a financial drain, I don't want to see it. I do not like being forced to give my money to charity. (and that's what this is. Giving money so that others can reap the benefits without choosing to do so.)

Now, I completely DISagree with Obama on social security - while I may make a mistake investing my money (hey, it's possible), the Social Security Administration has SHOWN to be well on its way to bankruptcy. It seems to me a crapshoot is better than a proven failure. If someone wants to take a crack at fixing social security without privatizing it, I say more power to 'em... but the way it is now, I'm gonna have jack shit when I get older.

Agreed. Although, I am not sure that privatization would be such a bad thing here. It is at least preferable to the government run method, although I would be infinitely happier with ther removal of the SSA.

Republicans - Democrats are not theiving bleeding hearts who want to take all your money and give it to crackheads and alcoholics.

Well, not all of them anyway.

When you contribute to help a mother with 2 children to get healthcare, for you, you have impression you waste your money?

Not if I do it through charity instead of taxes. I do NOT like forced charity. That is essentially stealing.

If you are on minimum wage, I am not convinced that you give a very big part of your money to government. I do not know the numbers but taxes you pay must be very very low.

So that makes it better to force them to pay for something they do not want to pay for? Because you are stealing less of their money? And you mention the Iraq War is costing billions, but most of that cost is just the general cost of keeping the military ready to defend the country. Almost all of that money is spent on soldier's salaries, new fighters (which would be bought anyway), new armored vehicles (again, bought anyway), and upkeep of military installations. A small percentage of those billions is due to the war in Iraq. (mostly just slightly increased ammo costs, and hazard pay) So you say the war costs billions, but so does a standing army. Just look at where most of the money goes. It goes to basic military functions, not war-specific items.

Don't you think if we spent the money we use on healthcare right now, we can create a great national health program in the states? We already spend more as a percentage of GDP.

No. No, I don't think the government can do anything well. Look at how it ran the SSA. Why should I trust it to do a better job with my money because it is for healthcare. Also, is the smoking, obese, high blood pressure, family history of stroke person going to pay more taxes for this national health care? Because if they don't, I am essentially paying for their care, because the only thing that happens to me in that time is getiing flu shots or something. This is the same reason I am not happy about Medicare.

And does no one even care about the fact that they would be putting an ENTIRE INDUSTRY out of work? Talk about bad for the economy.

I DO NOT APPROVE OF OUR ATTEMPTS TO EXPORT DEMOCRACY. As such I believe most of our operations in Iraq should be stopped.

Really? Export democracy? And here I thought we took down Saddam because he was funding terrorists and killing his own people because they didn't agree with him. I just figured that democracy was the easiest way to ensure that the new leader wouldn't do the same. Tell me spikegirl, what do you think on the Darfur issue, then?

[ShahinVahdat]

Yes, but those same people pay taxes on their income, right? So, although they spend their net income foolishly, they still paid the taxes and are contributing to that pool of money. So, they are paying for the roads, schools etc., just like you. And if they're homeless or on welfare or something, then everybody pays for that, not just you.

When I was working two jobs to put myself through college, I still supported these measures, and still support them even though as middle class I would be paying a good chunk of the bill. The point is to not think about it that you're paying for other people, but that everyone who pays taxes puts their money into the service and are also paying for you. Same way with the roads you drive on, or the school you went to or your children will go to, or the police. If you are really living below the poverty line, then that means I pay more for these services than you do, and I still have no problem with it b/c it improves society as a whole.

Collegestudent, I have no problem putting the healthcare industry out of business. When I'm sick and need healthcare, I don't want an insurance executive thinking on how he can save money on me or bump up my rights. I want to get better. Again, why do people think of it as I'm paying for their care? If you'd look at the percentage you'd pay for someone else's care, much the same way that everyone would pay for your care, it is very little.

You talk about forced charity is stealing? Since I don't use the legal system often as other people do, should I feel bad for paying for courts of law? Should I feel bad for paying for the fire department b/c I've never called them for a fire? Since I don't drive as much, should I feel as bad for paying the same amount in car registration as someone who drives extensively?

[collegestudent22]

Collegestudent, I have no problem putting the healthcare industry out of business. When I'm sick and need healthcare, I don't want an insurance executive thinking on how he can save money on me or bump up my rights.

And what about those under that exec that need that job to stay afloat economically? And the damage to the overall economy an entire industry going out of business would cause?

Since I don't use the legal system often as other people do, should I feel bad for paying for courts of law?

Yes, I think that those using that legal system should pay (collectively) the judges salary. The rest of the cost is nothing more than administrative salaries (which should be paid as they are government employees) and the building, which is just part of a town/city.

Should I feel bad for paying for the fire department b/c I've never called them for a fire?

But they are also working to prevent wildfires from reaching your house, etc. They do more than come if your house catches on fire. And both of these are at a local level, so you can move if you feel you are paying too much or don't want to pay for the fire department, move out of the city.

Since I don't drive as much, should I feel as bad for paying the same amount in car registration as someone who drives extensively?

Ummmm.... what? You pay registration per car, not per mile. The amount you pay in car registration is mostly used to pay salaries at the DMV. Gas taxes are what cover the cost of road repair/constructions. Which is fair, because the more you drive, the more you pay.

[JermCool]

Then do people who pay for their own health insurance have to pay taxes into the government health insurance pool too? Because then it stops being a service that you are paying for and starts being a wealth re-distribution tool again.

If it's like New Zealand, then no. It's federally paid and everyone contributes.

[ShahinVahdat]

Although I dislike the private healthcare industry, they wouldn't go out of business. Even in countries with national healthcare, private healthcare accounts for 10-15 percent of people's healthcare.

Secondly, if we were to create a comprehensive national healthcare system, someone would have to administer it. It'll create thousands of government jobs. Creating all those jobs added to the fact that private healthcare would still be around wouldn't destroy as much as you think.

If someone drives 40,000 miles a year on a car as opposed to 10,000 miles a year on a car, doesn't the person who drives more get more out of their car registration? You're not allowed to drive unless you're registered.

[JermCool]

Again with my New Zealand analogy (and please don't get me wrong - there were benefits to public healthcare, but these are some major pitfalls):

1) 20% of every dollar I earned went to the government before I even got my paycheck - and we were in the lowest tax bracket.
2) Sales tax was 12.5%
3) Interest rates on our ARM were at 12% because the government kept trying to curb inflation (granted, the inflation was due to increasing gas prices even back then).
4) All of this didn't include the local rates (kinda like state tax).

After all of that, there was no way in hell for the majority of the public to afford privatized healthcare. So, according to your own numbers (which seem to be reasonable), 85-90% of the population had to use public.

This means that no matter where you were, waiting lists for elective surgeries (and I think the word "elective" could be taken with a grain of salt) were insane. So the government said to the health boards, "Find a way to reduce the numbers on your waiting lists." The health boards said "Okay" and simply told people they could not have their surgery and crossed their names off the lists.

Then there were nurses' strikes due to the pittance the government was paying those poor people. And then the doctors' strikes which happened because they hadn't had a raise in years thanks to Parliament dicking around with the healthcare budget. Side note: my wife went from needing minor keyhole surgery to a major laporotomy because of the doctors' strike. Instead of being able to leave the same day, they had to keep her in hospital for nearly a week.

We're talking about a population of 4 million people and that was the mess that was made. Can you imagine our population of 300 million and with a bunch of idiots in Washington holding the purse strings?

[ShahinVahdat]

Jermcool, we also spend more of our GDP on healthcare without national healthcare than countries with national healthcare.

[Mae Dean]

Re: Socialized health care - I'm all for this. I've visited other countries where they've had this for ages, and it's not the financial drain it's made out to be, nor is it some horrible cancer on society.

However, neither is it the glamorous world it is made out to be to tourists. As you say, you have visited these countries. Not lived in them. If you had lived in them, you would have known that in most of them, at least in the more populated areas, it becomes difficult to see your doctor because EVERYONE can come in for free. This means everything from a stuffy nose to a crack addict can come in without paying and see the doc. Frankly, while this may not be such a financial drain, I don't want to see it. I do not like being forced to give my money to charity. (and that's what this is. Giving money so that others can reap the benefits without choosing to do so.)

First off, I didn't just go to England and Canada and pick up the brochure "Socialized Health Insurance and You!" or something - I visited with friends and regular people. I asked them what it was like. The reactions were fairly positive. This is first-hand information from the people who actually USE this particular health care system.

And to reiterate a point made by Shahin, it's not charity. Everyone pays, everyone benefits.

[JermCool]

Jermcool, we also spend more of our GDP on healthcare without national healthcare than countries with national healthcare.

And you want to throw more money at this and expect Washington to get it right?

[Thorsman]

Re: Socialized health care - I'm all for this. I've visited other countries where they've had this for ages, and it's not the financial drain it's made out to be, nor is it some horrible cancer on society.

However, neither is it the glamorous world it is made out to be to tourists. As you say, you have visited these countries. Not lived in them. If you had lived in them, you would have known that in most of them, at least in the more populated areas, it becomes difficult to see your doctor because EVERYONE can come in for free.

Well gee, CS22, I DO live in one of these countries - namely Britain. It's not difficult at all to see your GP/doctor. You just have to wait your turn, just like people in the US seeing a doctor wait their turn. It's not all that different actually.

Oh, and one more thing: I'd appreciate it if you stopped talking about countries you've never lived in and pretending to be more of an expert than someone who's either visited (Greg) or lived in (myself) said countries.

This means everything from a stuffy nose to a crack addict can come in without paying and see the doc.

Funny, I've not seen many crack addicts bothering to go to a GP in the first place.

Frankly, while this may not be such a financial drain, I don't want to see it. I do not like being forced to give my money to charity. (and that's what this is. Giving money so that others can reap the benefits without choosing to do so.)

It's actuall NOT "giving money to charity," but rather paying into a national system from which you yourself will benefit. Everyone (well, not everyone, but a vast majority of the British public) chips in and everyone is able to reap the benefits. It's a lot better than paying for medical insurance which, quite frankly, is covering progressively less and less as time goes on.

[adciv]

Since this has turned into one on health care, how about the government does this:
The government should set up a company that offers health care to people. However, the company must break even and can not receive any tax revenue to subsidize the premiums people pay. The company is a not-for-profit and is 'owned' by the people who buy insurance from them. Say they get an initial starting fund, but beyond that no more public money.

They have done this before with other companies, such as USAA. In this manner, only the people who use the service pay for it and the government is not forcing everyone to use it. This is as currently compared to medicare/medicaid that costs several hundred billion at the federal level alone source and is heavily subsidized
by taxes and not mostly paid for by premiums.

Provided, as stated above, that they get not government money beyond an initial seed package, I don't think any of us who are against nationalized health care would have a problem with it.

Well gee, CS22, I DO live in one of these countries - namely Britain. It's not difficult at all to see your GP/doctor. You just have to wait your turn, just like people in the US seeing a doctor wait their turn. It's not all that different actually.

Thorsman, I'm curious. How long do you usually have to wait?

[Thorsman]

Adciv, it's been a long time since I've needed to visit a GP (about two years), but last I was there I wasn't waiting too much longer after my appointment with him was to start - perhaps 10 minutes at the most. I wasn't waiting there for hours on end, like the bullshit stories the more rabid of the anti-national health care crowd in America like to tell.

[BtEO]

An educated populace is necessary for the economic growth and development of this country. Some day I will send my kids to public schools. I will directly benefit from taxes I am paying towards education.

Surely a healthy populace is also necessary?

[ShahinVahdat]

BTW, Greg if you haven't picked up that pamphlet "Socialized Health Insurance and You!" It's an awesome read!! I think they depicted in a documentary in the States called Sicko! or something.

[Mae Dean]

Heh.

For a quick clarification, I was not speaking as someone who was afraid health insurance wouldn't take care of me - I'm speaking as someone who, until this coming Saturday, has been unable to afford ANY health insurance. Even then, after my first 6 office visits, (the particular package we found allowed us to make 6 initial office visits for just the copay amount) I'm out-of-pocket until I reach $5000. I go to the doctor MAYBE once a year for a checkup or something. Who the hell has an extra $5000 just laying around? I'm paying $160 a month so that IF I spend over $5000 a year, they'll cover it? What the hell kind of system is that?!

The point I'm trying to make is that, as it stands, health insurance is pretty useless for most people. Unless you get it through your job, which I'd say is where the MAJORITY of people who are insured get it, it's pointless. This is why I think it's one of those things that should be nationalized. Now, on the one hand, I'm loathe to trust the government to do anything right - but on the other hand, the private companies are CURRENTLY fucking me over, so it's between the evil I know, and the potential evil on the other side of the coin. I'm a betting man.