Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
While this is very important and I wish more Americans who deride socialism knew this, I don't have much confidence that the US would be any better at running an entirely socialist healthcare system than we are at supporting our current system.Capitalism has the very same problem. The difference is that the capitalist driven US healthcare system is costing the American twice as much money as the socialist healthcare systems in comparable countries.
I'm glad you're happy with your system! I have no desire to change it or convince you that it's wrong. Why can't you Euro-Socialists let us American's be happy with ours?
It's 45% over here.
And I don't mind it at all.
Few years ago, I required surgery.
First house doc visit on thursday. Went into surgery 6 days later on wednesday. Followed by 30-ish sessions of fysiotherapy for revalidation.
6 weeks paid sick leave (first 10 sick days of the year are paid for by the employer, all subsequent sick days for that year are paid by the government social security services).
Total cost: 216 bucks. And that was because I did an additional 10 sessions of fysiotherapy which I didn't really require, I just needed to speed up the recovery because I couldn't play the drums anymore for 100% and that was killing me.
If I wouldn't have done that, the total cost for me would have been 40-ish bucks.
You don't hear horror stories over here of people who went bankrupt because they broke their leg at the wrong time.
In the US, I would have ended up in a quagmire of insurances, would have to wait for weeks on my surgery and would have cost me thousands of dollars - all the while paying for private insurance every month (which are private companies out to make a profit... meaning that they earn money by NOT PAYING THE BILL).
2 years ago, my other half had a nasty illness. She was unable to work for 5 months.
During those 5 months, we received 80% of her net pay check from social security.
I went to university for 4 years.
Total cost of those 4 years: 800 euro - and that was primarily for books.
I didn't require to get monster loans, nore did I require to get several jobs to pay for school. Nore did my parents require to scratch pennies together to pay for school.
Life is good.
To each his own I guess.
I just can't stand it when people start to yap about how these systems are "terrible" and how they "don't work". Clearly, they do work. Very well. So good, in fact, that 7 of the top 10 best nations in the world to live in are social secular democracies in Europe.
When someone is being conned, I feel duty bound to try to alert them to it.
And also to point out those who it fails, who aren't happy with it, who don't get the healthcare they need.
You are confusing socialism with communism.
They are not the same thing.
And lots of other people work the same number of hours on minimum wage just to get by and have done for 40 years or so. Are you suggesting that they deserve to be poor because they don't work as hard as you boss did once, long ago?
Socialism has various shades of meaning. We more have issues with socialism as a close similarity to communism. I have never heard anyone have an issue with the UK formAs a Brit living in (what America would call a socialist country) the UK I'm very happy with this style of government.
Where's the beef, here?
Working Hard is only one aspect...working smart is the other aspect.
2 people could work with the same level of steadfastness and intensity for 10 years...and the end of the 10 years, one guy made a pile of lamp posts...the other made a car that runs on water that revolutionizes the industry...they both worked equally hard (in terms of the 'sweat of the brow' metric), however, the latter of the two is definitely going to end up with far more money, and it probably going to be in a position where he can make money without having to work very hard anymore in the very near future... and rightfully so.
...or another way of wording it, rarity.
In the 'sweat of the brow' sense, a McDonald's employee works harder than I do in an average day. They're on their feet, making food over a hot fryer for 8 hours. I sit at a desk, writing .net code for 8 hours in a comfortable chair in my office...yet, I make far more than a McDonald's employee, and here's why: 99% of the population could do that job. If you look at the demographics of software engineers (wiki has a good link that goes into the numbers), only 1 out of every 200 workers has the qualifications to do my job. That makes us more rare, and thus, allows us to demand a higher level of compensation from our employers.
If what I do, or what a CEO does is so easy, then why don't the McDonald's employees scrap their current jobs and start their own companies and start earning the big bucks?
It seems an incomprehensible case of ideology trumping sense.It's also worth pointing out that many of us Americans who _have_ insurance are unhappy with it. We're in the unenviable position of being afraid of losing terrible service. It's kind of like our internet service providers, except life and physical well-being are on the line.
Some of us hear stories like that of DogmaHunter and wonder why we can't have nice things, too? I appreciate that a lot of people, here, want to ensure that any way they help the poor doesn't involve the government, but here's a self-interested argument for being a developed country (I won't call it "socialist" since that's apparently incorrect).
Soooo... who are all these countries in Europe where one isn't able to own them privately?I understand that, however...an individual not being able to own the means of production at a private level is a common trait shared by both.
Socialism = social ownership of the means of production
Communism = owned by the state
So, there is a difference...
However, both equate to me not being able to own them privately.
Soooo... who are all these countries in Europe where one isn't able to own them privately?
yes, however it should be the case that people give freely. Otherwise, in the law it is out and out ROBBERY. By law, in most cases that is the FORCEFUL taking of something as opposed to simple theft. Either by means of violentence or threats of voleience. That and would you rather someone help because they HAD to or because they WANTED to which means more? For that matter, which would GOD want?
I prefer a solution where men and women have incentive to save and invest real, honest money (not fiat bills and notes).
What type of solution do you prefer?
I disagree.
I find it much more repugnant for the rich to groe richer from the exploitation of the poor.
I think God wants me to help the poor. A big help would be the establishment of social safety nets that reduce or eliminate homelessness and make normal medical care accessible to them. I'll use my vote to that end.
When I meet God on the last day, if He faults me for abusing the wealthy, then I will throw myself on His mercy. But in the Bible, God never destroyed a society because its wealthiest members were oppressed. The poor, on the other hand...
Because of course, Brits, Europeans, Australians, are obviously massively more covetous and ungrateful than Americans.I would much rather face God after opposing policies that devastated and destroyed families and harmed the poor spiritually by making them envious, entitled and ungrateful. Good intentions don't count. You are the ones harming the poor.
Not proud, ashamed. She caused huge unemployment and a larger gap between the rich and the poor. I remember the riots, the poverty and my school being closed down.But helped save the world. You should be proud!
So you want to punish people for a lack of intelligence?Working Hard is only one aspect...working smart is the other aspect.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?