What do you believe is the fundamental problem with [American] government?

[undercovergrow]

Which is lower on the morality scale:

• Some socialistic policies?
• Allowing humans to die because they don't have coverage?

Don't be a fucking imbecile.

don't be rude.

where did i say it was acceptable to allow humans to die? it doesn't negate the fact that the problem with the government is corruption.

 

[dagwood45431]

where did i say it was acceptable to allow humans to die?

When you made the absolute statement that socialism is immoral. If a socialistic policy can save lives, your entire premise is fucked.

 

[undercovergrow]

When you made the absolute statement that socialism is immoral. If a socialistic policy can save lives, your entire premise is fucked.

how much of your money can i have?

 

[dagwood45431]

how much of your money can i have?

You can't have any of it. You are not providing the infrastructure or services required to live in a healthy and thriving society.

 

[sixstring2112]

When you made the absolute statement that socialism is immoral. If a socialistic policy can save lives, your entire premise is fucked.

if socialism is so damn good,why do all the wealthy canadiens come to the U.S. for any type of important heath care and/or surgeries ? and please do some fact checking before you give a random fake answer.really good doctors dont want to work in canada

 

[undercovergrow]

You can't have any of it. You are not providing the infrastructure or services required to live in a healthy and thriving society.

like the majority of people that would benefit from socialism would? right...

 

[dagwood45431]

like the majority of people that would benefit from socialism would? right...

Would what?

 

[dagwood45431]

please do some fact checking before you give a random fake answer.

Like this?

Myth: Canadians are paying out of pocket to come to the U.S. for medical care.Most patients who come from Canada to the U.S. for health care are those whose costs are covered by the Canadian governments. If a Canadian goes outside of the country to get services that are deemed medically necessary, not experimental, and are not available at home for whatever reason (e.g., shortage or absence of high tech medical equipment; a longer wait for service than is medically prudent; or lack of physician expertise), the provincial government where you live fully funds your care. Those patients who do come to the U.S. for care and pay out of pocket are those who perceive their care to be more urgent than it likely is.

http://www.denverpost.com/2009/06/04/debunking-canadian-health-care-myths/

You made an assertion without any evidence at all, dumdum, so drop the "random fake answer" nonsense. Fucking dipshit.

 

[Fogdog]

socialism is still morally wrong - it is theft.

in 1920s, a high tax rate was created for the rich. that amount was $100,000. i'm sure the people who voted to tax the rich then felt that the system would be equal...inflation has made the "middle class" in 2017 paying "make-the-rich-pay taxes" that the People probably never intended they would pay. for generations this country has been dealing with a system that is corrupt. you keep focusing on your Chomsky propaganda. there will always be inequality. there will always be someone that has worked hard and has $10 in their pocket, and someone who just gets by and has $4. while you might think it's okay to take from the first guy to give to the second to equal things out, it is most definitely not.

@Fogdog health care coverage is not a right. i have coverage because i've made decisions in my life to reflect its importance to me to have the coverage. should we as a society help our population? of course!! should our federal government (as opposed to local) be in charge of it--no. we haven't discussed the Muslim ban, ICE activities or fossil fuels... i do feel the federal government has a role to play in our daily lives-i just want it to be a limited-in-scope government. i suppose you believe that the carbon dioxide people breath out (and cannabis growers around the world desire to get more of it in their garden) is causing global warming and should be taxed?

As others are pointing out, your morality if taken to it's conclusion means tens of millions in this country living without health care. Less than ten years ago, a person who had an individual health care plan would be hit with extraordinary increases in coverage if they got sick. They lost coverage if it was more than they could pay. Not saying you should accept anybody else's morality but wondering why you would think that is OK.

 

[Grandpapy]

like the majority of people that would benefit from socialism would? right...

Removing the middleman in the Ins.Industry saves the country 10% GDP strengthens our population.

Why you so Anti American?

 

[undercovergrow]

As others are pointing out, your morality if taken to it's conclusion means tens of millions in this country living without health care. Less than ten years ago, a person who had an individual health care plan would be hit with extraordinary increases in coverage if they got sick. They lost coverage if it was more than they could pay. Not saying you should accept anybody else's morality but wondering why you would think that is OK.

why is it that you think your position is so moral? what is so moral about the government becoming involved in healthcare? a person who has individual health care getting hit with extraordinary increases is due to corruption and the many people who do not pay for services. you seem to be under the impression that i do not care about sick people but i do. the hospitals are legally obligated to provide medical care to people in emergency situations. if someone gets a cold that's on them. if someone gets cancer and they cannot afford services, i want to live in a society where we take care of our fellow man. but i want charities and local churches and peoples via their local government to take care of those peoples' needs. what is immoral about that line of thinking? nothing, it is just immoral to you because i do not agree with your opinion.

Removing the middleman in the Ins.Industry saves the country 10% GDP strengthens our population.

Why you so Anti American?

i am not anti-American. so you're saying that we should "remove the middleman" and put the government in his place? i'd rather see health care not in the government's hands.

 

[Grandpapy]

why is it that you think your position is so moral? what is so moral about the government becoming involved in healthcare? a person who has individual health care getting hit with extraordinary increases is due to corruption and the many people who do not pay for services. you seem to be under the impression that i do not care about sick people but i do. the hospitals are legally obligated to provide medical care to people in emergency situations. if someone gets a cold that's on them. if someone gets cancer and they cannot afford services, i want to live in a society where we take care of our fellow man. but i want charities and local churches and peoples via their local government to take care of those peoples' needs. what is immoral about that line of thinking? nothing, it is just immoral to you because i do not agree with your opinion.



i am not anti-American. so you're saying that we should "remove the middleman" and put the government in his place? i'd rather see health care not in the government's hands.

But why support middle management??? All corps have gutted theirs.
Looks like Mafia protection. (jmo)

 

[undercovergrow]

But why support middle management??? All corps have gutted theirs.
Looks like Mafia protection. (jmo)

i'm sorry, what?

 

[dagwood45431]

the hospitals are legally obligated to provide medical care to people in emergency situations.

Great healthcare plan. Expensive and ineffective. Who eats the costs? The hospitals? You and I do, while getting far less bang for our buck than we'd be getting paying into a real health care system. You'd rather pay $10 for $5 worth of services just because the $5 would be taken as taxes while the $10 wasn't? Explain.

but i want charities and local churches and peoples via their local government to take care of those peoples' needs. what is immoral about that line of thinking?

Since stupidity isn't immoral, nothing. Since you mentioned "local churches", their "services" frequently come at the cost of some form of religious indoctrination. Fuck ulterior motives. Tax the churches, while we're at it.

 

[Padawanbater2]

My fundamental problem with American government atm, is everything.

But, the thing that struck me the hardest, was the lack of support from the group who are convinced democrats deserve the current administration's partisan/and political attacks. The one's, who voted outside of the party, arguing that that their vote would have brought some kind of semblance of control to the opposition with radical/extreme left idealism. Their line of reasoning seems to have been that we deserve an autocratic, racist, sexist shit-stain for a leader because we were not honest with ourselves, and the way we ran the campaign.

So, instead of having a figurehead who we could of disagreed with on when it comes to a few policies, and still have some sort of progress, we all will have to endure 4 years of playing obstruction games with everything this orange shit-bag throws up onto us. Health care, tax cuts, all those things the right are so cavalier about. I do not know about you, but I do not want to become the party of "No". I never have. But, since they have set the precedent for this sort of thing when it comes to our ideas, I would sincerely hate to let them down.

I am not sure if that even makes sense, but, imho, it is still such a bummer that we couldn't get together as a party and keep these fascist cunts from trolling us for the next four years.

"There comes a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon all the apparatus, and you've got to make it stop. And you've got to indicate to the people who run it, the people who own it, that unless you're free the machine will be prevented from working at all." - Savio

To play devil's advocate for a moment, what do you think of the current progressive wave rolling over the country in response to the Trump regime's actions? People are mobilizing everywhere, even in deep red states and some of the reddest districts in the country. I just watched a lecture by Richard Wolff about legitimate criticisms of capitalism. He said he'd given a lecture the night before in a room filled with 600-700 people who all paid money to understand this situation better and that would have been virtually unimaginable just 5 years ago. Progressive pockets of citizens are popping up everywhere and even life long Republicans who self-identify as conservative support some of the most progressive policies put forth like universal healthcare and college.

So were they onto something? Where would we be right now if Hillary Clinton were the president instead of Donald Trump? The results of the Obama administration were good in many respects, but in an economic sense, pretty terrible. Would a hypothetical Clinton administration have been a continuation of that?

 

[Grandpapy]

i'm sorry, what?

Following the commerce business model,

i'd rather see health care not in the government's hands.

AIG has your back.

 

[Fogdog]

why is it that you think your position is so moral? what is so moral about the government becoming involved in healthcare? a person who has individual health care getting hit with extraordinary increases is due to corruption and the many people who do not pay for services. you seem to be under the impression that i do not care about sick people but i do. the hospitals are legally obligated to provide medical care to people in emergency situations. if someone gets a cold that's on them. if someone gets cancer and they cannot afford services, i want to live in a society where we take care of our fellow man. but i want charities and local churches and peoples via their local government to take care of those peoples' needs. what is immoral about that line of thinking? nothing, it is just immoral to you because i do not agree with your opinion.



i am not anti-American. so you're saying that we should "remove the middleman" and put the government in his place? i'd rather see health care not in the government's hands.

We are just talking about facts, not morality. You are advocating a private healthcare system that looks a lot like the one we had before the ACA, although I infer that you would also cancel Medicare and Medicaid. Before the ACA, many people could not afford coverage. If a person was getting coverage under an individually purchased plan, if they got sick, their rates went up and they lost coverage when they couldn't afford it. About half of all our elders are living in assisted living facilities paid for by Medicaid. Nearly all of our elders depend on Medicare. What happens to them? I am under the impression that you don't care because this is what you are advocating. This isn't morality, it is fact.

 

[Padawanbater2]

if someone gets a cold that's on them. if someone gets cancer and they cannot afford services, i want to live in a society where we take care of our fellow man. but i want charities and local churches and peoples via their local government to take care of those peoples' needs. what is immoral about that line of thinking?

Charities, local churches and peoples via their local government don't/can't take care of those people's needs

So what then? Let em die?

i'd rather see health care not in the government's hands.

Why when other countries with universal healthcare do it better than we do for less money, and citizens of those countries report higher levels of happiness and satisfaction to healthcare?

 

[whitebb2727]

if socialism is so damn good,why do all the wealthy canadiens come to the U.S. for any type of important heath care and/or surgeries ? and please do some fact checking before you give a random fake answer.really good doctors dont want to work in canada

Only for something like elective cosmetic surgery.

Other than that people in Canada have better health care at a lower cost.

Pull your head out of your ass. Just go to the Canada patient section and ask them if they like their health care.

"Sicko" is a good documentary to watch.


The US ranks highest in cost but way down the list for access, quality and efficiency.

 

[undercovergrow]

Great healthcare plan. Expensive and ineffective. Who eats the costs? The hospitals? You and I do, while getting far less bang for our buck than we'd be getting paying into a real health care system. You'd rather pay $10 for $5 worth of services just because the $5 would be taken as taxes while the $10 wasn't? Explain.


Since stupidity isn't immoral, nothing. Since you mentioned "local churches", their "services" frequently come at the cost of some form of religious indoctrination. Fuck ulterior motives. Tax the churches, while we're at it.

i agree it is an expensive and ineffective system! i am in agreement that the system needs to be changed. i would love to see a Star Trek everyone-is-taken-care-of scenario! but a little socialism always leads to a lot of socialism and i am just stating that we are where we are today because of all of the corruption.