Contemporary American Conservatism: an international perspective

Stitch on 27/8/2009 at 22:54

Quote Posted by D'Juhn Keep

Sorry but if you're against UHC then you are pretty crazy.

I know :(

Following this health care debacle from inside the States is both infuriating and depressing. Just read ZymeAddict's post above as a reminder of the idiocy we're fighting against here, and in the sliding scale of proud anti-intellectualism that has possessed the conservative side he's really not that bad.

CCCToad on 27/8/2009 at 23:01

Quote:

"This is socialism."
It is not socialist to recognise that there is a service the free market is inefficient at providing, and to decide it should better be provided by the government. Even the most staunch libertarian admits that there are some services in this category, such as national defence

The most valid counter argument is, in my opinion, concern over whether the US government is capable of providing it more efficiently, given that the efficiency of the US government is abysmal when compared to those other developed nations.

Fafhrd on 27/8/2009 at 23:16

Quote Posted by ZymeAddict

Also, given the fact that the government has already managed to fuck up ...the VA hospital system

By turning it into (http://health.usnews.com/usnews/health/articles/050718/18va.htm) the best hospital system in the country? The reason vets don't get the care they need is because most don't live within easy access of VA hospitals and are dependent on the military paying their benefits for private care, which runs out after a set amount of time dependant on the care they need.

If an eligible veteran (which is most) can get to a VA hospital, he's practically guaranteed better care than he'd get in any private hospital.

CCCToad on 27/8/2009 at 23:19

The article also says that they have improved massively. It isn't unreasonable to infer that the improvement was a direct result of the political fallout surrounding the negative coverage of Walter Rood.

SubJeff on 27/8/2009 at 23:23

Quote:

"It is immoral to force me to pay for others' healthcare."
You are already paying for others' healthcare. Furthermore, you are paying far more than you would be under UHC. The U.S. government incurs massive costs from paying hospital fees when ER visitors have no money, and from the limited coverage that it provides, which cannot take advantage of economies of scale and which has to subsidise corporate profit.

As demonstrated above, U.S. taxes devoted to healthcare are the highest in the world. Even if you choose not to have health insurance, under the current system, you are still paying more for others' healthcare than you would be paying for theirs plus your own under UHC.

Whilst this is true payment is also optional, and that makes a difference to some.

In the UK we have no choice but to pay for our healthcare in NHS contributions which are just another tax after all.

But here is the rub. The more you earn the more you pay (since it's a proportion of your pay) and, and I know this bites some people, the people who use the service the most are those that contribute the least. They are the less well off (or unemployed) who smoke lots, drink lots, have poor diets and then don't want/can't be bother to keep follow up appointments/take their medication when they get diseases related to their lifestyle. Then there are the harder working people who don't abuse themselves, don't abuse the system, and tend to have less health issues, use less health services yet pay much more.

Now I love the idea of the NHS and tbh I would never, ever become a 100% private doc, but there is something about this financial model that's just a little messed up.

Thief13x on 27/8/2009 at 23:29

Quote Posted by CCCToad

I would just like for someone to tell me just one fucking thing the federal government hasn't completely failed at.

medicare?
medicade?
education?
tax reform?
border security?
cyber security?
social security?
The war on terror?
H1N1?
Stimulus?
the postal service?
The fucking DMV?

please, someone....even the tap water I fucking drink 2 gallons of a day (yes I'm a "heavy drinker") is supposedly now tainted with anti depressants and viagra...thanks uncle sam! Let me give you my health care decisions because I'm a dee dee dee!

I need a cigarette...oh wait, the governments fucked that for my broke ass too!

CCCToad on 27/8/2009 at 23:45

This is a change of topic, but I've also thought of another explanation for the rage: a widening wealth gap in the United States. The top 10% control a larger share of the economy than other similiar countries: 69.8% versus 53% in Canada and 56% in the UK. Another link of interest:
(http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7190876)

I can't link the PDF because I found it behind an academic article search engine( you can't get in without a code from university), but I discovered an article this spring describing how the ratio of wealth controlled by the top 1% versus everyone else is getting great enough to be near unrest, with a score of 4.5(over 5 means a country has a good risk of civil disturbances).

CCCToad on 28/8/2009 at 00:01

Quote Posted by Thief13x

I would just like for someone to tell me just one fucking thing the federal government hasn't completely failed at.

The fire department does its job pretty well.

Tonamel on 28/8/2009 at 00:29

For $0.41, a guy will come to my house, take a piece of paper, put it on a plane, and fly it to Wyoming.

/dailyshow

Muzman on 28/8/2009 at 00:32

Quote Posted by ZymeAddict

Socialized health care might work fairly well in a small, homogeneous country with a fairly equal standard of living across the board (e.g. Sweden), but if you seriously think it would work in the the US, which has something on the order of 15-20,000,000 illegal immigrants to take advantage of the system, not to mention the extremely large numbers of old-fashioned deadbeats, you are a fucking moron.

Such self loathing. As if you've got more deadbeats than anywhere else.
I have trouble following the counter arguments that spring up; one minute its "Socialism promotes weakness and unfreedom!" "But it works in Sweden" "Well they're terrifying vikings who never get sick and then hybernate for half the year anyway! But we're still the greatest country in the world and can do anything!!" (not that you're saying this exactly)
Anyway, I accept scale is one of the problems an American NHS would face. No one's really talking about that though, are they. You realise people arguing for the current system often point out that inner city areas have a good deal of free options for people thanks to large institutions setting things up a la House.
I don't know the details but heathcare reform isn't about the very worst off in a lot of cases. If illegals and deadbeats aren't brining things to their knees now a new system ought to be able to handle them.

Quote:

Oh yeah. Also, in case you hadn't noticed - WE CAN'T FUCKING AFFORD IT RIGHT NOW!

Times of crisis are exactly when this sort of thing should be done. When things are hovering around surplus and pollies start trying to get re-elected by tossing around tax cuts, do you think the political will is going to be there then?

Quote:

So, in answer to the OP: Stop getting all your news information about the situation from one (extremely biased) comedian. Not everyone who opposes the Dear Leader's wonderful plans is automatically a nutjob. And given the utter contempt with which our politicians have been treating the electorate, I think they have every right to be pissed off.

You might think Stewart is biased, and, y'know, whatever; but how is he wrong?
If the people opposing the plans are not automatically nutjobs, where are they? Why isn't Fox putting them on the air? Even Gingrich is talking utter garbage these days.
Do you think town hall crashing is reasonable behaviour? Does it speak of an opposition with sensible civics and a good counter argument to obsess over Death Panels rather than some actual issue the bill presents?

Anyway, since this could turn into a sensible heathcare debate I'll post some stuff that might be remarked upon;

(http://dansdata.blogsome.com/2009/07/31/authoritarianism-its-bad-for-your-health/) Dan's Data turned his nerdy obsessing to this issue a little while ago, running into similar stuff as Iggs posted. The cost and tax stats are weird. I don't know how anyone could justify them, but I haven't heard any argument that they're incorrect yet.

These led to/incorporated stuff from Techskeptic about (http://techskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/07/down-our-throats.html) a conservative's favourite epithet and something on (http://techskeptic.blogspot.com/2009/08/yes-tort-reform-is-needed.html) torts and medicine, which as Starry pointed out people have some very funny ideas about.