People from Finland, Canada, the UK, France, Germany, Norway, etc...please chime in

[Pwnerer]

You have a right to health care. For example if I have a cut I have the right to clean it and bandage it. However, you do not have a right to force me to pay for you to hire someone to do your health care for you. The moment coercion enters charity leaves. Borg-minded collectivists advocate false charity: the coerced giving of other people's time and money --which is why it's so popular. Individualists advocate true charity: the voluntary giving of your own time and money. At the heart of collectivism is a desire to look good or feel good without getting up and doing it yourself.

 

[allhart]

You have a right to health care. For example if I have a cut I have the right to clean it and bandage it. However, you do not have a right to force me to pay for you to hire someone to do your health care for you. The moment coercion enters charity leaves. Borg-minded collectivists advocate false charity: the coerced giving of other people's time and money --which is why it's so popular. Individualists advocate true charity: the voluntary giving of your own time and money. At the heart of collectivism is a desire to look good or feel good without getting up and doing it yourself.

I totally agree here!

 

[DZoolander]

What irks me - as a taxpayer - is how other people address the issue of taxes. I simply don't see it as "I'm paying X amount...I don't want to pay any more"...which is apparently how other people in my party see it.

To me - it's an issue of priorities - and where my tax dollars are spent.

Does the idea that my tax dollars are going to pay for (ideally...although it doesn't exactly work out that way) the military, or the roads, etc...bother me? Absolutely not. Not in the slightest. On the same token - if someone said to me "Your tax dollars will be going to ensure that Susie down the street and her children can have access to decent medical care" - I would not have any problems with that either.

I do not see my ability to pay for private insurance (and the exhorbitant prices of it relative to other countries) as being some sort of medal on my chest of responsibility. I do not see her inability to pay those same prices as being some sort of testimony of her being a loser - nor do I desire to point a finger at her and say "That's what you get for the choices you've made".

I guess that's where we differ.

I have no loyalty to Humana or Aetna, nor Blue Cross, nor any of the other charlatains that run our insurance companies. In fact - I detest insurance companies. The simple fact of the matter is that they're simply in the business of trying to provide the least amount of service legally possible without becoming criminally liable. I've watched them too often deny legitimate claims, try to find loopholes in coverage that they sold in the first place, etc...to have any loyalty to them. I find it distasteful that healthcare is left in the hands of people that have a vested interest in the denial of claims - and base rewards to their agents on how successful they are in denying claims. When the health of the person is at stake - it's despicable.

I remember when my mom passed away from cancer. My mom and dad had great coverage. My father was a successful attorney - and they certainly did not do without. They tried their best to renig on coverage - and it was only through her dogged pursuit of them (and my father's knowledge of the law) that they acquiesced and gave her decent care at the end (although funny enough, most of the hospice care was taken care of by the state).

I also remember another friend of mine whose parents weren't as well off - that also had cancer. Her coverage wasn't nearly as good - and I remember how she was forced to make due. I remember the underlying feeling that she and her family had - which was that they deserved sub standard care and corner cutting - lack of care - etc - simply because they "didn't deserve it" - because the father was blue collar.

So yeah - I have no love for insurance companies. I don't think they do a good job. I think they're fundamentally corrupt - and I think that they utilize the dysfunction of our medical system (i.e., how private and public interact to act as artificial price supports) to their advantage - at our loss. Personally, I wouldn't mind a single payer system, just to drive those people out of business. IMHO - all things considered - they deserve it.

That's how I feel as a person who is a taxpayer - and as a person who pays for private medical insurance.

Does the idea of taxes bother me?

If it's going to ensure that Suzy and her kids down the street (or people like my friend's mom) don't face the kinds of things they did - or to be left with the feeling that they simply don't "deserve" quality care - then no. I don't mind that a bit.

It certainly irks me a lot less than the idea of my tax dollars going to subsidize some ill conceived folly in Iraq.

 

[allhart]

What irks me - as a taxpayer - is how other people address the issue of taxes. I simply don't see it as "I'm paying X amount...I don't want to pay any more"...which is apparently how other people in my party see it.

To me - it's an issue of priorities - and where my tax dollars are spent.

Does the idea that my tax dollars are going to pay for (ideally...although it doesn't exactly work out that way) the military, or the roads, etc...bother me? Absolutely not. Not in the slightest. On the same token - if someone said to me "Your tax dollars will be going to ensure that Susie down the street and her children can have access to decent medical care" - I would not have any problems with that either.

I do not see my ability to pay for private insurance (and the exhorbitant prices of it relative to other countries) as being some sort of medal on my chest of responsibility. I do not see her inability to pay those same prices as being some sort of testimony of her being a loser - nor do I desire to point a finger at her and say "That's what you get for the choices you've made".

I guess that's where we differ.

I have no loyalty to Humana or Aetna, nor Blue Cross, nor any of the other charlatains that run our insurance companies. In fact - I detest insurance companies. The simple fact of the matter is that they're simply in the business of trying to provide the least amount of service legally possible without becoming criminally liable. I've watched them too often deny legitimate claims, try to find loopholes in coverage that they sold in the first place, etc...to have any loyalty to them. I find it distasteful that healthcare is left in the hands of people that have a vested interest in the denial of claims - and base rewards to their agents on how successful they are in denying claims. When the health of the person is at stake - it's despicable.

I remember when my mom passed away from cancer. My mom and dad had great coverage. My father was a successful attorney - and they certainly did not do without. They tried their best to renig on coverage - and it was only through her dogged pursuit of them (and my father's knowledge of the law) that they acquiesced and gave her decent care at the end (although funny enough, most of the hospice care was taken care of by the state).

I also remember another friend of mine whose parents weren't as well off - that also had cancer. Her coverage wasn't nearly as good - and I remember how she was forced to make due. I remember the underlying feeling that she and her family had - which was that they deserved sub standard care and corner cutting - lack of care - etc - simply because they "didn't deserve it" - because the father was blue collar.

So yeah - I have no love for insurance companies. I don't think they do a good job. I think they're fundamentally corrupt - and I think that they utilize the dysfunction of our medical system (i.e., how private and public interact to act as artificial price supports) to their advantage - at our loss. Personally, I wouldn't mind a single payer system, just to drive those people out of business. IMHO - all things considered - they deserve it.

That's how I feel as a person who is a taxpayer - and as a person who pays for private medical insurance.

Does the idea of taxes bother me?

If it's going to ensure that Suzy and her kids down the street (or people like my friend's mom) don't face the kinds of things they did - or to be left with the feeling that they simply don't "deserve" quality care - then no. I don't mind that a bit.

It certainly irks me a lot less than the idea of my tax dollars going to subsidize some ill conceived folly in Iraq.

What is,Soooo ludicrous about your irk me stuff. Is you are demanding my money for your cause (WHATEVERS)!
DEMANDING! It isn't your money, nor do deserve my money or is it owed to you. For the last time I checked "I" earned it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DZoolander]

(Un)fortunately that's part of living in society man!

As a group - we decide what policies we want to enact. If the majority go for it - then the minority are along for the ride. I didn't see anyone consulting with me about how my tax dollars were to be spent before going into Iraq either. I was carried along with the masses who at the time were supporting that endeavor.

That's how things work.

I support nationalized healthcare. You don't. If my side wins - then you get to go along for the ride. Same goes with other policies that you may favor that I don't.

 

[canukian]

Got any evidence that that life expectancy difference is primarily atributable to health care differences?


Could the fact that Canada has a far lower population density and therefore much less city associated violent crime have anything at all to do with it?

could the fact that usa has a large minority of impoverished people that are likely to die young in a violent manner matter to the stats?

 

[canukian]

Thanks for mentioning tiny Finland first! Sure tickles our rather poor self-esteem!

Now, personally and as an anecdotal evidence, I have tried & lived the "expatriate life" in places like Canada, Kosovo, Lebanon, and the United States of America. Good memories & good experience, wouldn't trade it for anything, but as the cliche goes, there is no place like home. If anything, these stints confirmed my conviction just how incredibly lucky, lucky I was to be born & carry a Finnish passport -- in Finland, we have this saying that to be born a Finn in Finland is like winning the jackpot in lottery, only better. I concur.

For one thing -- perhaps my DH's perspective is slightly different, though -- but as a woman "of certain age", I am acutely aware that Finland is truly the forerunner of gender equality.

DH and I enjoyed our time in the States and Canada; however, when it came to the question of starting a family of our own, it was no contest, no debate, really -- then and there, we relocated back to Finland.

To me, that says it all; that's the bottom line.

Having tasted life both sides of the Big Pond, Finland was and is the best, most secure, with the best opportunities, health and education wise, place for a child to grow up.

I really, really appreciate the North American (Canadian and the USA) culture of "neighbourliness", if you like; we could certainly use some of that here in silent & taciturn everyone-just-mind-their-own-business Finland. I really appreciated the near Near East Kosovan and Lebanese culture of hospitality; families who had so little were still willing to share it all with near total strangers. And let's face it: no matter how the blonde Nordic woman in me tried, my Lebanese sisters are slated to steal the show regardless. I swear I don't know how they do it, but they look the way I could only wish, on a good day, 24/7!

But back to "real" politics.

As to the medical system, when I lived in the United States of America, I was lucky enough to be fully covered & insured by my DH's employer, so really, no complains there. However, I do recognize just how lucky and priviledged we were.

Here in Finland, I get to choose between public, private, and my employer (and in the past, University/Students' union) provided health care. I have used all systems rather eclectically, depending on my home adress, really. When we still lived in the immidiate downtown area, the public clinic was one block away, as was my (then) employer-paid private clinic in the opposite direction, so it was really just a matter of which system had available doctor appointment time when it suited me best.

As far as "policies" and statistics go, I know I am lucky. As a Finnish woman, my life expectancy is better than my US sisters', my expectancy of years lived in good health is better than my US sisters', my chance of surviving pregnancy & child-birth excels my US sisters', my childrens' health prospects are far better than the avarage US child's (not to mention my kids' educational opportunities!) and so forth. Our democracy is stronger and so are our "freedoms".

Sorry, maybe the United States of America was that lone beacon of freedom & democracy & all things enviable some ten or twenty years ago, but clearly, as we have entered this new century, the United States of America has stagnated or even worse, slid back, whereas countries like mine have taken progress in strides, actually surpassing the United States of America as that elusive "good life" goes.

Coupled with my personal experience of that "everyday life" both sides of the Atlantic, I look at those numbers and clearly, sorry you guys, the quality of our life is better here in Finland. That's why we decided to relocate back in Finland to raise our family here and not there. So there's your answer whether I "envy" your life. Because I know one thing no amount of money can buy your child is that profound sense of safety & security we have managed to create here in Finland. There is no substitute for that.

finland seems to be a very exeptional country, espesially when it comes to inovation, wich as far as i can tell, is because of its edecational system. this system should be emulated.

 

[explodingboy]

What is,Soooo ludicrous about your irk me stuff. Is you are demanding my money for your cause (WHATEVERS)!
DEMANDING! It isn't your money, nor do deserve my money or is it owed to you. For the last time I checked "I" earned it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Money isn't everything, and talk about being overly possessive of such a fickle commodity.

 

[Pwnerer]

Ezoolander, the difference is how you and I, collectivists and individualists, understand rights. The origin of rights, from an individualist perspective, is explained in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

So government derives its powers from the governed. That is, individuals delegate their power. A good analogy is a gated community that hires a security guard. That guard may use aggressive force to ward off attackers or stop burglars, since these are rights of the individuals. However, he may not do things such as force the residents to go to bed by a certain time, or to donate money to the Red Cross, since no individual has the right to do that to another member.

 

[DZoolander]

lol - no doubt.

It's amazing to me.

Going on about how it's "DEMANDING!!!!"

By the same token, the gov't DEMANDS all sorts of money from me to support projects that I disagree with - but that I'm of the minority opinion on. I, however, accept it as part of living in a group society. I don't always get my way.

You go make your argument - I'll go make mine. The one that convinces the most people wins...and the minority (losers) come along for the ride. Sometimes I win, sometimes you win. It certainly ain't "unfair"

 

[DZoolander]

Ezoolander, the difference is how you and I, collectivists and individualists, understand rights. The origin of rights, from an individualist perspective, is explained in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

So government derives its powers from the governed. That is, individuals delegate their power. A good analogy is a gated community that hires a security guard. That guard may use aggressive force to ward off attackers or stop burglars, since these are rights of the individuals. However, he may not do things such as force the residents to go to bed by a certain time, or to donate money to the Red Cross, since no individual has the right to do that to another member.

Of course.

And I am saying that I, as the individual, want to empower the government, with my consent, to tax my fellow citizens for the sake of universal healthcare. I am saying that I want to empower (have Government derive it's power from my will) to do so - because I believe it to be a necessity.

How is that in any way incompatible with the declaration of independence? lol

The government derives it's power from me, and the majority, to do as we want it to.

 

[Pwnerer]

Of course.

And I am saying that I, as the individual, want to empower the government, with my consent, to tax my fellow citizens for the sake of universal healthcare. I am saying that I want to empower (have Government derive it's power from my will) to do so - because I believe it to be a necessity.

Yes, indeed, that is what you are saying. You want the government to forcibly take money from your fellow man to suit your ideas about how society should look. You fit the definition of a collectivist perfectly. You believe that violating the rights of others is a necessity because you believe the end justify the means. You see it as OK to use coercion to violate others' rights since the cause is just so noble.

How is that in any way incompatible with the declaration of independence? lol

The government derives it's power from me, and the majority, to do as we want it to.

If you do not have the right to forcibly take money from another person to go to charity then you cannot delegate that right to the government. If no one can do that then the majority cannot either. It does not matter if there are 10, 100, or 100.000 people. If they do not have that right as individuals then they cannot delegate it to the government.

 

[DZoolander]

If you do not have the right to forcibly take money from another person to go to charity then you cannot delegate that right to the government. If no one can do that then the majority cannot either. It does not matter if there are 10, 100, or 100.000 people. If they do not have that right as individuals then they cannot delegate it to the government.

What are you talking about? lol

The government takes all sorts of monies from me - because the "collective" (i.e., majority) believes it to be a good idea - even though I as the "individual" disagree.

Why is this any different?

For example... I disagreed with Iraq from the first day. The "collective" didn't. So - there goes my individual money on a policy that I disagree with. Would you argue the same way for that one - that government had no right to take my money for a policy that I was in disagreement with?

 

[7thKeeper]

Yes, indeed, that is what you are saying. You want the government to forcibly take money from your fellow man to suit your ideas about how society should look.

If you do not have the right to forcibly take money from another person to go to charity then you cannot delegate that right to the government.

I wonder why you keep using the word "force" to describe taxes. The power to do so is in the law, there is no force involved. People have agreed that the government should have this power to fund itself, ergo there is no forcing anyone involved, as this has been agreed to.

 

[allhart]

(Un)fortunately that's part of living in society man!

As a group - we decide what policies we want to enact. If the majority go for it - then the minority are along for the ride. I didn't see anyone consulting with me about how my tax dollars were to be spent before going into Iraq either. I was carried along with the masses who at the time were supporting that endeavor.

That's how things work.

I support nationalized healthcare. You don't. If my side wins - then you get to go along for the ride. Same goes with other policies that you may favor that I don't.

Well when you are over reaching to the prosperity beyond the now , more towards the future. I tend to have a problem with it! Gambling on other peoples money As an addicted alcoholic, you first have to user them and yourself out of the bar. You first have to Dry out before you can come to some logical conclusion on the future. To get your mind around all of your expenditures. You can't easy my mind any better than what, spend faster than you can make it, break it. Especially as the economy is receding
As it stands we are broke..... I am living in Calif. I do know about high Taxes and over reaching. One of the forth/eighth largest economy's in the world and we can't balance our budget. The more you make the more you think you have to spend. I can't live anymore modest without taking from my family and giving the equality I have to yours!!!!! Hay you want my checks and my bills or just the checks? I would like to meet you and be kissed before you dump me! Money isn't everything, yes! Until you have none! All my blood, sweat and tears! Mean nothing to ya'll. The incentive to the poverty is to bring our standard of living to them My mom is living below the poverty level by choice. By choosing to not live with me, living free,So me and my sister take food, money whatever needs she has to her, because she is bipolar!

Whatever she can't afford we buy equally! Now where is your checks people? You should be morally obligated to my mom? More than me? Donations to the poor please, No,NOT!, just give it to me! For that is what your demanding of me!

 

[allhart]

So this coming week, there is a roof job in high heat and 4/10, 1/8 (overtime). Ahhh, I shouldn't take it, because I'm covered by ya'll. No drive to strive mannnn! My mom will be fine on your account! And everyone is contributing to society even my mom right, not! Is everyone working. The last I heard we are still losing Jobs and we have 6 million unemployed,that's accounted for. Not including the ones that have given up or are working part-time?

 

[canukian]

Originally Posted by canukian

poor people in the states get free care too.
​

Of sorts, if it's an emergency. Chronic problems are not treated.

you mean in the usa if you have cancer and you are poor, you dont get care? if you are in a socialized country like canada or the uk, you have doctors who must act as resorce alocators. in other words their first concern is not your heath, but how to best spend the money that is alocated to the system. on the other hand, if you are rich in canada, you can go to the usa, where the exelence of care has no comparison in canada.
do you think we here in canada should not allow the rich to go to the usa for the best care because that would be unfair to the poor in canada who must endure rediculous waits?

if you can afford care in the usa, you are free to take a chance and save your money. its called freedom from nanny state.
​

And if you can't afford it, you are free to die.

does the usa let people who are poor languish in leprosy camps?
does the usa shuffle a person who is poor and has been mangled by a truck off to the side of the road to die? the poor are pretty lucky in the usa imo.

imo the best thing governments can do is get out of the way and let people take care of themselves. if you want your money to go to a witch doctor, ooga booga, be free.
​

And if you want decent care, then if you can afford it, it yours and if you can't, well, too bad.

who says wich doctors wouldnt comand the most money? give people the freedom to decide, what are you scared of? why do rich people live in mansions and poor people live in dumps? what if yoiu took the rich peoples wealth and gave it to the poor? then everyone would be equally miserable? look at the poor in the usa. they are way better off than the poor in africa. lets make things fair by taxing the poor in the usa and giving it to the poor in africa. by your way of thinking anything eltse would stink of hipocratsy.

why should a doc go to shcool for 8 years to deliver babies? or do any specialized proceedure?
​

Midwives don't have to go to school for 8 years, but they are not doctors and cannot handle problematic deliveries except by luck or with the help of a real doctor.

midwives are an great example of saving lots of money. if they are at the hospital, and help is nearby if needed ,safety is not a concern. people can specialize in proceedure like colonoscopies, stitches (a person has to go to medical school for 8 years to give stitches?), the list of things people could do would fill a book. this would reduce costs so much, that health care would become cheaper for all, including the poor most of all.

Sometimes specialized proceedures are either inappropriate and sometimes proceedures go awry.

ya, well you must have knowticed the world is not perfect, good for you.

people could be trained in short order to do specific proceedures and save the health system tones of money.
​

The healthcare system perhaps, but what of the patients?

i dont know what you mean.

even specialaists, who have school fror 16 years, could instead be trained for specific procedures, with oversight, and save a bundle.

these specialists would aquior track records, good and bad, wich would be a basis for how much they could charge.
​

Yes, let the poor be guinea pigs and training cases for the rich.

let the rich live in dumps and the poor live in mansions. the world of bizzaro is surely coming to the usa as it did to the rest of the world.

the biggest single problem as i see it, is over regulation by the nanny state.
​

You must be young and in good health.

you must be old and sick. by your logic. i am 51 and poor and in poor health. i love the truth.

LET PEOPLE BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEMSELVES, AKA GIVE THEM FREEDOM.
​

Free to be sick without treatment and free to die early, how wonderful.

free to not have the tyrany of the nanny state wreck havock, as happend in the comunist countries of russia and china, resulting in the murder of 10s of millions of inocent people. freedom to worry about puncuation and really important things like that while civilization collapses, if it pleases you. here is the usa, get your freedom while you still can.

 

[Pommer]

I wonder why you keep using the word "force" to describe taxes. The power to do so is in the law, there is no force involved. People have agreed that the government should have this power to fund itself, ergo there is no forcing anyone involved, as this has been agreed to.

I don't think you understand: the "force" is a libertarian "talking point".

Usually it's about money and how it is being pried from their hands by the big bad gummint to do BAD things with it, like feed orphans or something.

They like to cry "charity" usually thinking of the change from their morning coffee that goes to the homeless guy on the corner, though to be fair I know of at least one who does substantially more (ranging in the thousands of dollars per month) for charities.

What is odd about libertarian politics is that to work, (like any other party or movement), people have to come together and agree on how things ought to be run. Having a movement based on "I do what I want!" doesn't seem to be the best of strategies.

 

[DZoolander]

Well when you are over reaching to the prosperity beyond the now , more towards the future. I tend to have a problem with it! Gambling on other peoples money As an addicted alcoholic, you first have to user them and yourself out of the bar. You first have to Dry out before you can come to some logical conclusion on the future. To get your mind around all of your expenditures. You can't easy my mind any better than what, spend faster than you can make it, break it. Especially as the economy is receding
As it stands we are broke..... I am living in Calif. I do know about high Taxes and over reaching. One of the forth/eighth largest economy's in the world and we can't balance our budget. The more you make the more you think you have to spend. I can't live anymore modest without taking from my family and giving the equality I have to yours!!!!! Hay you want my checks and my bills or just the checks? I would like to meet you and be kissed before you dump me! Money isn't everything, yes! Until you have none! All my blood, sweat and tears! Mean nothing to ya'll. The incentive to the poverty is to bring our standard of living to them My mom is living below the poverty level by choice. By choosing to not live with me,So me and my sister take food, money whatever needs she has to her, because she is bipolar!

Whatever she can't afford we buy equally! Now where is your checks people? You should be morally obligated to my mom? More than me? Donations to the poor please, No,NOT!, just give it to me! For that is what your demanding of me!

lol - well this post is getting further and further away from the original intent...which was to have people outside of the US that live under nationalized insurance tell what they've experienced - relative to what people here in the US say they are experiencing.

As for California - ehhh - it's a dysfunctional state when it comes to taxation.

For example - my parents bought their home in 1970s for $40,000. Due to Prop 13...the same piece of property which is now worth $1.5+ mil was still assessed at the $40k level up until their deaths - and they paid only around $1300 or so per year on property tax.

When they passed away - they bequeathed the property to us children. As inherited property - we continue to pay the same tax rate on it.

I'd venture to say that you - if you own your home - probably pay vastly more taxes yearly on your property (which is probably worth considerably less) than we do. We pay taxes for an assessed value (as I recall...because it does go up slightly every year) of around $60k. I think our total tax bill last year was like $1800 or so. If your property is worth $400k, you're paying around 7 times as much taxes as we are - for a home almost 1/4 the value.

California is rife with stuff like that...and while yeah - they can't decide on a budget (largely due to partisan manuevering) - the income stream is just insane.

 

[allhart]

I don't think you understand: the "force" is a libertarian "talking point".

Usually it's about money and how it is being pried from their hands by the big bad gummint to do BAD things with it, like feed orphans or something.

They like to cry "charity" usually thinking of the change from their morning coffee that goes to the homeless guy on the corner, though to be fair I know of at least one who does substantially more (ranging in the thousands of dollars per month) for charities.

What is odd about libertarian politics is that to work, (like any other party or movement), people have to come together and agree on how things ought to be run. Having a movement based on "I do what I want!" doesn't seem to be the best of strategies.

No but you will over power the weak and dictate to the people. How they are to live. By controlling wealth,health,food and transportation. The Constitution first has to be destroyed, because it isn't Constitutional to redistribute the wealth.