Political/Government General Discussion : Healthcare- Welfare- and other things.

The Infidel Guy Show
The Debate Hour Show
Faith and Freethought
3 Podcasts, One Feed

or visit this page.

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Live Video and Chat Room

Freethought Videos

Blogs

Weblogs News

Embed Our Player

~ TIP JAR ~

Healthcare- Welfare- and other things.
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> Political/Government General Discussion

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Specus_Meretricis
Peddler of Bombast

Joined: 08 Mar 2007
Posts: 2754
Local time: 6:06 AM

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:39 pm Post subject:

Know what sucks the most about this thread? Is that it would be great if we had someone besides SJC here to discuss and argue private vs socialized health care. All he is going to do is call everyone retarded and delusional trolls for not backing up socialized heath care, and that is about it. I would love to see reasons why we might want to consider socialized health care, just so this argument isn't so slam dunk like it is. Oh, and AWESOME video Materialist. All the Canadians that I know (under 30 or 40) HATE the heath care system there. They know they are paying into something that will pretty much not be there for them when they get old or disabled. _________________ Fuck you bitch!!! I told you the asparagus is in the freezer! - William Shatner What do you call someone that doesn't laugh at asparagus jokes? A human being.

Ivan_Ivanov
Administrator

Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 3981
Local time: 12:06 PM
Location: Poland

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:44 pm Post subject:

Well, check out CET a couple of pages back. Tough his arguments weren't great, he did his best, and wasn't a dick about it like sjc is. _________________ It is as though your species' brain is too small to hold a simple thought such as, WE WILL KILL YOU FOR DISOBEYING! This is not a complex idea.

sjc
P.I.T.A.

Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 1603
Local time: 6:06 AM

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:29 pm Post subject:

I truly feel sorry for these retards and their delusional economic beliefs in a failed system. _________________ America is not worth the effort anymore. RIP. It was suicide.

Ophis
Royal Citizen

Joined: 15 Feb 2006
Posts: 470
Local time: 11:06 AM
Location: Manchester, UK

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:33 pm Post subject:

Specus_Meretricis wrote:

All he is going to do is call everyone retarded and delusional trolls for not backing up socialized heath care, and that is about it.

sjc wrote:

I truly feel sorry for these retards and their delusional economic beliefs in a failed system.

I hope you're being deliberately ironic here...

Jason_Harvestdancer
WonderMod Powers ACTIVATE!

Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 2538
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: Northern LA County, CA

Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 10:04 am Post subject:

Ophis wrote:

Specus_Meretricis wrote:

All he is going to do is call everyone retarded and delusional trolls for not backing up socialized heath care, and that is about it.

sjc wrote:

I truly feel sorry for these retards and their delusional economic beliefs in a failed system.

I hope you're being deliberately ironic here...

Hope is nice ... but misplaced. He's at his best right there.
_________________
Nos laetus edo qui votum opprimo nobis.

Visit my wife's art gallery

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject:

Materialist99 wrote:

CET wrote:

On a side note: Privatized medicine, schools (both are unethical), and roads (just plain dumb) are the only parts of the Libertarian platform I disagree with. Other then that, read the party platform and I fall in line with everything else pretty well.

I'm 56 years old, and my personal observations of what has happened to the health-care system (since the 1960's) in the United States is the best example (to me) for getting the government out of the marketplace. While I was growing up there were free clinics, where poor people could get free medical treatment. Few people had financial problem, because of medical care (it was so cheap), then the Federal Government started to massively intervene into the Health Care System in the mid 1960's, and now there is the chaos of today.

Here is a link to an article by the late Harry Browne, which shows a little bit of the history of health-care in the United States.
Why not real health-care reform

Here is an excerpt from the article.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So why are Republicans and Democrats arguing over ways to push government even further into health care? Why aren't they talking about real health-care reform? Why aren't the politicians trying to create a heath-care system in which:

* low-cost health insurance is available to virtually everyone -- including people with existing medical problems;
* doctors have the time to understand your problems and know you personally -- and even make house calls;
* a hospital stay costs only a few days' pay, rather than many months of your income;
* charity hospitals are available to take care of families that can't afford the low-cost hospitals; and
* free clinics take care of the everyday medical problems of people too poor to afford regular doctors.

Does this sound too good to be true? Does it sound like Al Gore, Teddy Kennedy, or George Bush on the campaign stump -- making promises you know will never come true?

Actually, the health-care system I've described is the one we had in America until the mid-1960s. It was then that the federal government moved in -- with Medicare, Medicaid, the HMO Act, and tens of thousands of regulations on doctors, hospitals, and health-insurance companies. That's when health care started going downhill.

How do you know you're not assigning false cause? Miniskirts and "mop top rock 'n roll" came into vogue in the 60's. The cost of health care has sharply risen just due to the advance in technology and all the devices that are now available, that didn't used to be. MRI machines, CAT scans, artificial hearts, etc. This stuff saves lives, but it's SUPER expensive to buy and operate.

There are WAY too many variables at play to be able to point to one thing and say, "That's what fucked it all up!"

Further, we all like to remember "the good old days". Generally speaking, "the good old days" never existed. "When I was a kid, politicians were honest, police officers were polite and helpful, and children were always well behaved and respected their elders." I don't know if this is what you're doing, but it looks like it's possible.

There ought to be a name for that fallacy, the "good old day" fallacy, or some such thing. I smell a new thread! Very Happy

_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

The Spiritual Atheist

"Much of the suffering in the world comes from the delusion that we are separate from one another." - Gautama Buddha

"Those who dance are considered insane by those who can't hear the music." - George Carlin

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:32 pm Post subject:

Materialist99 wrote:

Canada - A Short Course in Brain Surgery

Link

Why not have a system where someone can purchase private care if they want it? Why does it have to be illegal? More money would give better care, but at least we wouldn't be turning people away to slink off and die because they can't pay for a life saving treatment.

MOST of the medical bills accrued in a life time are in the last year of life. How about spending a few dollars earlier on prevention in order to avoid spending a lot more later on treatment?

There seems to be a whole bunch of "all or none", "black or white" dichotomies flying around. Black and white only ignores the existence of blue, yellow, and red.
_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:33 pm Post subject:

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

Well, check out CET a couple of pages back.
Tough his arguments weren't great, he did his best, and wasn't a dick about it like sjc is.

Fuck you too. Gives thy a finger

_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

Materialist99
Forum Plebian

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Posts: 176
Local time: 4:06 AM
Location: Chicago

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 8:03 am Post subject:

CET wrote:

Government pays about 50% of the funds in the health-care system, and has made thousands of regulations. It is obvious that it has had a large effect on what happens in health-care.

New technology can initially increase prices, but eventually it tends to bring prices down. That's what happens in other fields. Why is it that technology decreases prices in private enterprise, but supposedly increases prices when the government is heavily involved?
Milton Friedman - How to Cure Health Care

What are some other variables?

CET wrote:

Further, we all like to remember "the good old days". Generally speaking, "the good old days" never existed. "When I was a kid, politicians were honest, police officers were polite and helpful, and children were always well behaved and respected their elders." I don't know if this is what you're doing, but it looks like it's possible.

There ought to be a name for that fallacy, the "good old day" fallacy, or some such thing. I smell a new thread! Very Happy

Sometimes mistakes are made, and the new way of doing things should be thrown out.
_________________

Ivan_Ivanov
Administrator

Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 3981
Local time: 12:06 PM
Location: Poland

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 4:25 pm Post subject:

CET wrote:

There seems to be a whole bunch of "all or none", "black or white" dichotomies flying around. Black and white only ignores the existence of blue, yellow, and red.

Look, enough with this hippie bullshit already.
I think HBA explained it best, you have shades of gray here, but only two basic directions: free market, and socialism.
Even tough you are not in favor of complete government control over healthare, you do lean in this direction more then the rest us, thus we can say that you're for socialized healthcare.
Beeing for something in between the two extremes doesn't make your thinking any less dichotomious.
_________________

It is as though your species' brain is too small to hold a simple thought such as, WE WILL KILL YOU FOR DISOBEYING!
This is not a complex idea.

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm Post subject:

CET wrote:

Materialist99 wrote:

Government pays about 50% of the funds in the health-care system, and has made thousands of regulations. It is obvious that it has had a large effect on what happens in health-care.

Whenever people use arguments like, "Isn't it obvious?" I go a little bit sideways. It comes off like, "I'm right, because I want to be right."

Materialist99 wrote:

New technology can initially increase prices, but eventually it tends to bring prices down. That's what happens in other fields. Why is it that technology decreases prices in private enterprise, but supposedly increases prices when the government is heavily involved?
Milton Friedman - How to Cure Health Care

What are some other variables?

Increased technology costs only bring long term prices down if there is a savings on man-power versus operations and materials. If operations and materials cost more then the replaced man-power, the price cannot come down. The service will ultimately be better, which will demand a price increase. How's that for another variable? Very Happy

You also have other considerations, like insurance companies colluding with hospitals to give patients medication, gadgets, and additional "testing" that is unnecessary simply to inflate the amount of money one can receive on a hospital visit. I've personally witnessed this several times. How do I know it happened? When advised that the patient didn't have insurance and would be paying cash, suddenly much of the medication, testing, and gadgets became "unnecessary".

Prescription drug commercials. Why do we have prescription drug commercials? "Tell your doctor you want our new wonder drug." Doctors offices are fully of prescription drug swag. Why? All to peddle a drug. If the drug is the best drug for a course of treatment, why do you need to peddle it to laymen? The ignorant shouldn't be self-diagnosing. This smells like money making collusion, at the cost of the patient's pocketbook and possibly health.

CET wrote:

Materialist99 wrote:

Sometimes mistakes are made, and the new way of doing things should be thrown out.

I don't like the idea of throwing the baby out with the bath water. If the ethics are sound, then find a way to make it work. Giving up too soon is the chicken way out.
_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject:

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

CET wrote:

There seems to be a whole bunch of "all or none", "black or white" dichotomies flying around. Black and white only ignores the existence of blue, yellow, and red.

Look, enough with this hippie bullshit already.
I think HBA explained it best, you have shades of gray here, but only two basic directions: free market, and socialism.

False dichotomy.

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

Even tough you are not in favor of complete government control over healthare, you do lean in this direction more then the rest us, thus we can say that you're for socialized healthcare.
Beeing for something in between the two extremes doesn't make your thinking any less dichotomious.

I'm not even suggesting an in between. We're all looking at the X axis, and not even considering a Y axis, let alone a Z axis. Break out of the "either/or" thinking and consider the possibility of something that doesn't resemble the current options in any way. It might not work, but at least we'll start being a little more creative instead of beating the same old dead horses over, and over, ad infinitum.
_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

Ivan_Ivanov
Administrator

Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 3981
Local time: 12:06 PM
Location: Poland

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 1:47 am Post subject:

CET wrote:

False dichotomy.

Quote:

Notice the fallacy is called "false dichotomy", which means not every dichotomy is false.
To call false dichotomy you have to show what other possibilities there are.
It's rediculous for you to have problems with our dichotomous thinking if you can't even give a hint of how a third option might look like.
_________________

It is as though your species' brain is too small to hold a simple thought such as, WE WILL KILL YOU FOR DISOBEYING!
This is not a complex idea.

Jason_Harvestdancer
WonderMod Powers ACTIVATE!

Joined: 23 Oct 2005
Posts: 2538
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: Northern LA County, CA

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:45 am Post subject:

CET wrote:

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

CET wrote:

There seems to be a whole bunch of "all or none", "black or white" dichotomies flying around. Black and white only ignores the existence of blue, yellow, and red.

Look, enough with this hippie bullshit already.
I think HBA explained it best, you have shades of gray here, but only two basic directions: free market, and socialism.

False dichotomy.

Not at all. The two basic economic structures are the free economy and the command economy, the free market or the controlled market, capitalism or communism. All the others, such as Monetarism, Georgianism, Keynesianism, Mercantilism, Fascism, Welfarism, and Socialism are all "shades of grey" partaking of a little of one pole and a little of the other pole. Every "Third Way" economy is nothing more special than a mix of the two poles, hoping that this time you've gotten the mix right. All the others can be defined in terms of "how much of capitalism and how much of communism".

Code:

______________ ___________________
/ Welfarism \
Communism *---Socialism-------------------Georgism-----* Capitalism
\__Fascism_____Keynesianism____Monetarism__/
Mercantilism

On one end would be full fledged communism, where all goods are owned and controlled by the government, and at the other end would be full fledged capitalism where all goods are privately owned and controlled. One of those three threads would be economic interventionism through taxation and wealth redistribution, most commonly known as welfarism. A second of those three threads would be economic intervention through regulation, which fits the Keynesian and Fascist models. The third is outright ownership of goods.

Capitalism: No restrictions on what can be bought and sold. Money is selected by consumers in the market.

Monetarism: Government produces and maintains the money supply. The state also attempts to manipulate the money supply, ostensibly to ensure full employment and supposedly mitigate the business cycle.

Georgism (taxation): Government heavily taxes all revenues from real estate removing any profit from owning real estate. The state also attempts to manipulate the use of land, obstensibly to ensure full productive use of the land.

Georgism (regulation): Government controls all real estate. The state also attempts to manipulate the use of land, obstensibly to ensure full productive use of the land.

Georgism (ownership): Government owns all real estatt. The state also attempts to manipulate the use of land, obstensibly to ensure full productive use of the land.

Mercantilism: A market system, also refered to as "protectionism." The state attempts to protect domestic industries from foreign competition, promote exports, and reduce imports through the use of tariffs and quotas. Can be in terms of general trade balance (light) or specific protected industries (heavy).

Welfarism: A market system identified by high taxes and large-scale wealth redistribution.

Keynesianism: A market system identified by extensive government intervention in the economy through taxation and spending obsensibly to ensure full employment and supposedly mitigate the business cycle through government deficit spending during times of economic recession and high taxes during times of economic expansion. Left Keynesianism has the deficit spending benefit the lower classes and shares common traits with welfarism, while Right Keynesianism has the deficit spending benefit the upper classes and shares common traits with Mercantilism.

Fascism: A market system identified by strict controls of all aspects of the economy. While property is still nominally privately owned, the owners do not control the property.

True Socialism: An economic system identified by full state ownership of all the means of production.

Communism: An economic system identified by full state ownership of all goods. There is a tendency among advocates of the economic system of communism to assume it automatically means a political system of anarcism. Now whie as libertarian I think they are speaking in contadictions, objectivity demands that I consider only the economics of the economic system of communism. The economics of communism is communal ownership, and that generally means government is the owner unless there is no government.

Note that it is possible to have more than one economic system when not at the extremes. The US economy is a mixed economy of Monetarism, Keynesianism, Welfarism, and Mercantilism.
_________________
Nos laetus edo qui votum opprimo nobis.

Visit my wife's art gallery

CET
The Spiritual Atheist

Joined: 02 Apr 2003
Posts: 12865
Local time: 2:06 AM
Location: SoCal, USA

Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 9:57 am Post subject:

Ivan_Ivanov wrote:

CET wrote:

False dichotomy.

Quote:

Then consider if there may be other possibilities. You don't even seem willing to try to consider the possibility. If you don't consider the possibility, you will never find out.
_________________
Namaste,
CET Cool

Display posts from previous:

	AtheistForums.com Forum Index -> Political/Government General Discussion	All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Page 6 of 7

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Credit Cards - Free Ringtones - Car Loan - Car Loan - African Cichlids
phpBB SEO