Can democratic Socialism save America?

[Postvieww]

That's like asking if a man with a bullet wound to the chest if he should be saved from cancer.
The US economy is already dying, but it's not from socialism.

One thing is sure! Socialism will not save or improve this nation.

 

[Job 33:6]

Can we all just agree that America's private insurance company led healthcare system is absurdly expensive, and yields worse healthcare results, in comparison to European nation's government regulated universal healthcare?

We are all paying 25-50% more for healthcare than our European counterparts, though our life expectancy is lower in age, and medical professionals in the US are getting paid 2-3x more than European counterparts for the same services.

And the UK, Canada, France, Germany, and Japan are not socialist countries. But their social programs such as universal healthcare, are vastly superior to America's current system.

 

[RDKirk]

Can we all just agree that America's private insurance company led healthcare system is absurdly expensive, and yields worse healthcare results, in comparison to European nation's government regulated universal healthcare?

The reason it's expensive is because it has unnecessary operations, and again, I'm pointing out the billing industry as one of them.

We can also transition back to non-profit health insurance...which was the case prior to the early 70s. All health insurance was non-profit until the Nixon administration. That's not a "bad thing"...there are non-profit (mutual) home and auto insurance companies that are doing very well.

But that would merely be a transition or an adjunct to health care, because the real problem with health care "insurance" is that it is not and cannot be true "insurance."

The cost of true insurance is a matter of spreading the cost of dealing with an unlikely catastrophe. For instance, it would cost about $700,000, all told, to replace my house if it burned down tonight. That's very unlikely because I take careful steps to prevent my house from burning down.

But I don't have $700,000 in my checking account. Truth is, I will never have $700,000 in my checking account. But I can pay a couple of hundred dollars a month to a company that will step in and pay that $700,000 in the unlikely event my house does burn down tonight. So, they get $200 this month, and I get another month of not worrying about sleeping under a bridge if my house burns down. And they're getting $200 a month from thousands of people, paying out $700,000 relatively rarely. It's a win for them, and it's a win for me if I consider a month of peace of mind worth $200.

Health insurance can't operate that way because I know I'm going to have medical bills every month (my wife and I being old). Medical bills are not unlikely catastrophes.

What we call "health insurance" is really kind of a Frankenstein group purchase plan, like Cosco or Sam's Club, except with a whole lot of middlemen collecting their take between the shelves and the cash registers.

Health insurance can function as real insurance at the catastrophic end. Catastrophic events do exist for health. There are genuine catastrophes like ICU stays, cancer treatments, and Transplants. The problem is: the U.S. system bundles catastrophic coverage with routine prepayment, turning everything into an expensive hybrid.

 

[ralliann]

Why would there be a warning for speaking a truth that is proudly and openly admitted by many democratic leaders in our government?

That was basically what my response to the mod was. I was told to make a complaint.

 

[ralliann]

As usual, people just don't understand just what Socialism is. They love many socialist programs, such as the military, police, border patrol, schools, libraries, highway systems, dams, bridges, space program, etc...

And you don't understand what it is either.

but hate corporate welfare, international welfare, social welfare, medicade, etc...

What we need to do is look at all nations that have a form of Socialism in some manner. There are bad countries such as Venezuela, and good countries such as Iceland. We should learn to make our country better, not worse.

Paying taxes for services is not socialism

Rom 13:1 ¶ Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. {ordained: or, ordered }
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7 ¶ Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.

Corruption is the main problem with any form of government.

This why socialism is terrible. It simply puts all our money in the control of a select few. The few who did not earn it. It appeals to a covetous desire.

 

[johansen]

Robin hood socialism doesn't work, because giving the government more power to steal from certain rich corporations but not others is not going to end well.

rather, what would work is to change back to a hard money standard, to reverse all of these problems:

WTF Happened In 1971?

https://inflationdata.com/articles/2022/08/10/u-s-cumulative-inflation-since-1913/ "I don't believe we shall ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government, that is, we can't take it violently out of the hands of government, all we can do is by some sly...

wtfhappenedin1971.com

 

[RDKirk]

This why socialism is terrible. It simply puts all our money in the control of a select few. The few who did not earn it. It appeals to a covetous desire.

You mean like corporatism has already largely accomplished in the US?

 

[Bob Crowley]

Can we all just agree that America's private insurance company led healthcare system is absurdly expensive, and yields worse healthcare results, in comparison to European nation's government regulated universal healthcare?

We are all paying 25-50% more for healthcare than our European counterparts, though our life expectancy is lower in age, and medical professionals in the US are getting paid 2-3x more than European counterparts for the same services.

A friend (whom I haven't seen for a long time) was sent on a trip to check some European and US hospital systems. This was nearly 30 years ago i might add. He was then an architect working in a Queensland state government department concerned with government building programs.

I later asked him what he thought.

He wasn't impressed with the US hospital system. He said he would walk into a five star foyer while out the back the overworked and underpaid navvies kept the system going.

He thought the best systems were in Germany and Holland, which have socialised medicine. They were far more efficient and equitable.

I sometimes get a bit cynical about the US fear of "socialism". The socialised systems of government in most European countries deliver better health care, lower crime rates, and longer life spans than the US system. But as soon as someone mentions "socialism" in a US context, they're likely to be pounced upon by quasi McCartyist demagogues, and labelled "communist".

 

[RDKirk]

A friend (whom I haven't seen for a long time) was sent on a trip to check some European and US hospital systems. This was nearly 30 years ago i might add. He was then an architect working in a Queensland state government department concerned with government building programs.

I later asked him what he thought.

He wasn't impressed with the US hospital system. He said he would walk into a five star foyer while out the back the overworked and underpaid navvies kept the system going.

He thought the best systems were in Germany and Holland, which have socialised medicine. They were far more efficient and equitable.

I sometimes get a bit cynical about the US fear of "socialism". The socialised systems of government in most European countries deliver better health care, lower crime rates, and longer life spans than the US system. But as soon as someone mentions "socialism" in a US context, they're likely to be pounced upon by quasi McCartyist demagogues, and labelled "communist".

There are certainly other "socialized" areas of American life, such as national and state defense, infrastructure maintenance, fire and police protection, public schools, and such.

I don't really understand why healthcare invokes such a particularly vicious Pavlovian response.

 

[Fervent]

There are certainly other "socialized" areas of American life, such as national and state defense, infrastructure maintenance, fire and police protection, public schools, and such.

I don't really understand why healthcare invokes such a particularly vicious Pavlovian response.

We've been conditioned to believe that somehow the market will fix the issues that it created, if we just let the insurance companies have free reign.

that and socialized health care will make us more European