Economy is worse off than we thought.

[Larniavc]

You said to take Jesus Christ out of it. If you refuse to take communion with Christ, then your nation, and all nations will drink from the cup of communism.

That's nothing but a quixotic non sequitur. Entirely off topic.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The Anglo-American model is the model that is most focused on shareholders. It is also pro allowing workers to strike, but it is not very focused on providing social nets for the less fortunate.

" The only thing they insisted on was that we should remember to help the poor, as indeed I was anxious to do." Galatians 3.10

Social nets for the less fortunate.. We know they are a low priority for the Trump administration but how about the rest of us. Have we all adopted the "Let them take care of themselves" philosophy? Medicaid for example, how badly will we cut it?

 

[Laeomis]

" The only thing they insisted on was that we should remember to help the poor, as indeed I was anxious to do." Galatians 3.10

Social nets for the less fortunate.. We know they are a low priority for the Trump administration but how about the rest of us. Have we all adopted the "Let them take care of themselves" philosophy? Medicaid for example, how badly will we cut it?

This is not completely feasible. There are a number of problems with public healthcare. Public healthcare drives up the price of medical procedures. It also gives doctors incentives to conduct surgeries that are not necessary, and they especially take advantage of the elderly. When insurance covers large quantities of unnecessary cheap procedures, this lowers the quality of real necessary procedures. Public healthcare also encourages the public to not take care of their health, because healthcare is 'free anyway'. It is also not feasible because healthcare is more expensive in the U.S. than in other countries.

The U.S. spends the most money for healthcare among other countries. The price for healthcare is higher in the U.S., so people are getting less healthcare for more cost. In order to lower prices, drug companies would have to be regulated, doctors and nurses would have to be paid less. Public healthcare in the U.S. is seen as a market failure.

The public healthcare system is not feasible or even wanted. It is a market failure, and more money is leaving it than entering it. The rampant abuse by doctors of public insurance lowers the quality of medicine, and raises the price for anyone with private insurance. Many don't believe in public healthcare, because it lowers the quality of medicine, abuses the poor with unnecessary procedures, and encourages people to stay unhealthy.

Benham, B., & Scullin, R. (2019, January, 07). U.S. health care spending highest among developed countries. John Hopkins School of Public Health.

U.S. Health Care Spending Highest Among Developed Countries | Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

The United States, on a per capita basis, spends much more on health care than other developed countries; the chief reason is not greater health care utilization, but higher prices, according to a study from a team led by a JHSPH researcher.

publichealth.jhu.edu

 

[Larniavc]

and encourages people to stay unhealthy.

Too true! Who wants to be healthy when they could be ill all the time?

 

[The Barbarian]

The public healthcare system is not feasible or even wanted. It is a market failure, and more money is leaving it than entering it.

Countries with public healthcare systems generally offer better care at lower costs. I don't see what's wrong with that.

 

[Laeomis]

Too true! Who wants to be healthy when they could be ill all the time?

A lot of people think that if they are going to get subsidized healthcare, then they won't care about diet and exercise, but that they will just get healthcare once they get sick. This leads to a viscous cycle. Other problems are that there is a large portion of people receiving the subsidy who are actually very wealthy, hospitals taking advantage of the subsidy to conduct a large quantity of procedures that are not actually medically necessary, and the subsidy has a side effect of raising the equilibrium price for all medical procedures. All of these factors lowers the quality of healthcare, and raises the price of it. Medicare is known as a market failure, because there is more money leaving it than entering in. Medicare is funded through taxation, and the baby-boomer population is rapidly aging and weighing down on the system, while there are less workers in the younger population. This taxation will end up hurting the poor, and making the wealthy even richer. Public healthcare sounds nice, but upon further inspection it becomes a much more complicated problem.

 

[Laeomis]

Countries with public healthcare systems generally offer better care at lower costs. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Do people go to Canada to get a high class surgery done? No, they go to see a specialist in the United States.

 

[trophy33]

Do people go to Canada to get a high class surgery done? No, they go to see a specialist in the United States.

Provide numbers and your source, please.

 

[Laeomis]

From the view of the insurance agency partnering with doctors. Every minor procedure done on a patient means about $500. I would count how many of these procedures I need to do every year/month to even pay the rent on my medical office or hospital, which is very expensive. Since the operation is largely covered by insurance, I will jack the price up, because I know the consumer is willing to buy more procedures for less money (they might be paying $50 for a $500 procedure, the rest covered by insurance). In this case, the stomach still drives the laborer to work, and it becomes hard not to see patients as objects to bring in dinner.

 

[Laeomis]

Provide numbers and your source, please.

Provide numbers for your own.

 

[bèlla]

Social nets for the less fortunate.. We know they are a low priority for the Trump administration but how about the rest of us. Have we all adopted the "Let them take care of themselves" philosophy? Medicaid for example, how badly will we cut it?

Social nets aren’t the lone responsibility of the government. Nor does the bible give families a pass from supporting their loved ones. They’re the first people who should be assisting followed by helps from the government, church and charities. Families will have to step up to the plate because the need is great. We can’t carry everyone while loved ones watch from the sidelines. This is the one of problems with welfare. It doesn’t force you to work together because someone’s picking up the slack.

~bella

 

[Laeomis]

Also, welfare runs into the freeriding problem. This happens when only some people pitch in to pay for the cause. It is easy to take advantage of welfare. If the rich are taxed more, then they will be the main providers for welfare. If there are only a few corporations or people providing most of the funds, then that makes them the owners of it. Welfare becomes an oligarchy, and they will naturally be led to take advantage of the system. By raising taxes you either run into the problem of taking them from the poor, or handing over ownership to the rich, and they will be sure to take revenge on those who use the resource.

 

[trophy33]

Families will have to step up to the plate because the need is great. We can’t carry everyone while loved ones watch from the sidelines. This is the one of problems with welfare. It doesn’t force you to work together because someone’s picking up the slack.

I think you misunderstand that it is like an insurance. It is, in fact, called the mandatory social and healthcare insurance, here.

Do you know how insurance works?

 

[bèlla]

I think you misunderstand that it is like an insurance. It is, in fact, called the mandatory social and healthcare insurance, here.

Do you know how insurance works?

I think you misunderstood what I was replying to.

Have we all adopted the "Let them take care of themselves" philosophy?

~bella

 

[trophy33]

I think you misunderstood what I was replying to.

Have we all adopted the "Let them take care of themselves" philosophy?

~bella

How is it changing the meaning of your post?

 

[Laeomis]

Buying insurance is sort of like selling your soul to Satan. Some people might have the power to keep their soul intact, but many will lose it. Your soul can be sold, and diced up, and you can get money that you would otherwise not have been able to get. This is of course, at the expense of your soul.

 

[trophy33]

Buying insurance is sort of like selling your soul to Satan. Some people might have the power to keep their soul intact, but many will lose it. Your soul can be sold, and diced up, and you can get money that you would otherwise not have been able to get. This is of course, at the expense of your soul.

I think you just discredited yourself from this discussion.

 

[Laeomis]

I think you just discredited yourself from this discussion.

Well, we disagree. For these reasons there was a BREXIT. You want a Nordic system, while the UK and US want an Anglo-American system. We just don't see it in our best interest to partner with you.

 

[bèlla]

How is it changing the meaning of your post?

Are you unfamiliar with the scriptures related to that statement?!

If anyone fails to provide for his own, and especially for those of his own family, he has denied the faith [by disregarding its precepts] and is worse than an unbeliever [who fulfills his obligation in these matters].

If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows.

Now a woman who is really a widow and has been left [entirely] alone [without adequate income] trusts in God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day.

Honor and help those widows who are truly widowed [alone, and without support]. But if a widow has children or grandchildren [who are adults], see to it that these first learn to show great respect to their own family [as their religious duty and natural obligation], and to compensate their parents or grandparents [for their upbringing]; for this is acceptable and pleasing in the sight of God.

A widow is to be put on the list [to receive regular assistance] only if she is over sixty years of age, [having been] the wife of one man, and has a reputation for good deeds; [she is eligible] if she has brought up children, if she has shown hospitality to strangers, if she has washed the feet of the saints (God’s people), if she has assisted the distressed, and has devoted herself to doing good in every way.

There is a biblical pattern for support in scripture. Giving to the needy wasn’t the same as continual assistance. And the bible specifies the responsibilities families have to help their loved ones which allowed the church to support those who didn’t have the same.

We shouldn’t be placing the burden on taxpayers shoulders. And what is the limit? Do you keep raising taxes because needs increase so everyone’s covered? Most incomes don’t keep pace with the cost of living increases in America. And it isn’t sustainable.

~bella

 

[Larniavc]

A lot of people think that if they are going to get subsidized healthcare, then they won't care about diet and exercise, but that they will just get healthcare once they get sick.

Evidence please. That simple does not stand to reason.