Someone explain how putting our country $800 billion in the hole will help us.

[40oz]

Yes but...without capitalism, we'd have to resort to another political theory..problem there is, the US hates all of them except capitalism.

Thats true, i mean after a country goes all military conquest mode on the rest of the world to protect and spread capitalism, its hard to say "right,maybe we fucked up"

[JaggedEdge]

Wouldn't denying an individual health care be the same as denying the right to life and liberty? Isn't that what our country was founded on? Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness for all?

Yes, we have a right to to life and liberty, however it does not say the government must provide it equally to everyone. Everyone has an equal right to go to school or get a minimum wage job that offers health coverage. What your talking about is like saying its unconstitutional to die.

Ok, but then you run into problems when that cure for cancer is discovered. Don't you think the people who discovered it would want to be compensated for it? If that's the case, which it defiantly will be under capitalism, then we will have a cure that only the wealthiest individuals in our society could afford. We can't just give the treatment away, because then the life work of all those scientists would have no gain (besides helping people). We can't charge outrageous sums to the upper class and smaller sums to the lower class for treatment, because that's not fair...and it's not capitalism

The wealthy would not be the only ones able to afford the new cure. That is why we pay for insurance. The majority of Americans would be able to get treatment and in a timely manner. Working 40 hours a week at Wal-mart is hardly wealthy, yet those employee's have have the option of being insured.

I would support SCHIP, however a 28 year old still living with mommy is no longer a child... Children should be insured, but SCHIP is a very bad program in that it covers more than just children.

Plus look where capitalism has gotten us in the pharmaceutical industry. We have doctors and psychiatrists doubling as drug dealers. I believe you will have a hard time finding a family that doesn't have at least one of its members caught up in some kind of "legal" drug addiction. Humans got along decent throughout the course of history without man made pain killers and anti depressant pills, and now they are a part of everyday life.

Where does personal responsibility come in? People have problems with all kinds of addictions: porn, illegal drugs, beer, pharmaceutical drugs, cigarettes. The dangers of medications are readily available. It is common knowledge that pain killers are highly addictive. So were exactly does personal responsibility enter in to your equation?

Not to mention, it isn't a "legal" addiction if you are getting pills from a friend. Yes, if a doctor gives you a prescription for pills you don't need, I suppose it would be "legal," but how many people do you know with these addictions who go to their pharmacy to get their fix. Most of them buy from friends or dealers.

I will however agree that many drugs are over prescribed in order for those in the medical profession to make a quick buck. ADD medications are ones that instantly come to my mind.

I don't believe that, look at Canada. Lots of healthy people up there.

By that argument our health care system works fine as well. There are a lot of healthy people here too.

If you feel waiting months for surgery, have your medical problems reviewed by bureaucrats and them deciding whether you "really" need treatment, and being told you can't receive cancer treatment because your to old and no longer contribute to society, than yes, socialized medicine is wonderful.

John Stossel : Socialized Medicine Is Broken and Can't Be Fixed - Townhall.com

A little research will show even more problems with socialized medicine, in particular, the number of Canadians and Europeans who pay to travel to America to get medical treatment.

I read in one article that in England it is required you go blind in one eye before you qualify for medical attention to cure a particular ailment. It hardly seems like an improvement.

If people want health coverage they can get a fucking job. The system is never going to be perfect, people need to stop being so idealistic. Yes, our current system could certainly use some improvements, but universal healthcare sure as hell is not the answer.

[JaggedEdge]

Thats true, i mean after a country goes all military conquest mode on the rest of the world to protect and spread capitalism, its hard to say "right,maybe we fucked up"

Capitalism is an economic idea, not political. Politically, our founding fathers set this country up on the political principles of a Republic. If you want to argue that our military aggressions are for spreading our ideals than we would be trying to spread democratic principles, not capitalistic ones.

[psychocat]

Hopefully people will realize capitalism is what we need before it's too late.

Capitalism is the cause of the current problem.

[5thHorseMan]

first off American health care is a wretched fucking joke. It's not healty and not caring. Insurance companies are able to deny treatment for some of the most absurd bullshit reasons out there. Secondly your average american will live a shorter lifespan than people in other countries, despite the fact that for all the fat and unhealthy shit in their diet, they still drink and smoke less, and still have less fat in their diet than other non european countries.

I would rather die waiting for care, than commit suicide despairing over being wholly unable to receive said care.

[JaggedEdge]

Secondly your average american will live a shorter lifespan than people in other countries, despite the fact that for all the fat and unhealthy shit in their diet, they still drink and smoke less, and still have less fat in their diet than other non european countries.

Can I see sources regarding life-spans? The fat and unhealthy shit in our diet causes many health risks. I would also like to see sources on where we rank with smokers compared to other nations. The Europeans were making things smoke-free and trying to eliminate smoking long before America did. In Ireland they have big stickers on the packs saying things like, "Smoking this could cause death," "Smoking Kills Babies," and "Smoking Kills People You Love." They may not be exact quotes, but you get the idea. You can't smoke anywhere, not even in bars.

My point is, I don't think our population actually drinks or smokes less than other nations.

I would rather die waiting for care, than commit suicide despairing over being wholly unable to receive said care.

Why? Dying while waiting for care is the government saying, "Your life is not important enough, but we'll save you if we have time." I'd rather commit suicide. Assuming I had a terminal illness and was in serious pain. That or I would look on the black market for what I need. You can find the pain medication, livers, spleens, blood transfusions, etc right there on the streets. It may not be safe, but if your dying anyway, what difference does it make.

Sometimes life deals shitty hands, but the tax payers should not be responsible for paying it.

[5thHorseMan]

In a country like ours that throws tax dollars away on some very futile shit, the lest they could do, would be to spend that money on something worthwhile, like my health. If you care so little about dying, go ahead and do yourself in. But some of us have better things to do, than sit around and commit suicide.

French drinking
The French Paradox, Health and Alcohol Use in France

French smoking
http://gofrance.about/com/cs/travelb.../a/smoking.htm



World Expected Lifespans. Notice that France and Canada both clock in with an average of over 80, we're stuck just below that.

en.wikipeida.org [5]

Aside from being less effective at just keeping us alive, the US on average spends significantly more on healthcare than other countries. Yes that's right you can even though you'll die earlier, have no insurance, on average more money was spent on you than a canadian. The US system has few if any advantages, moeny for research is the same as Canada, and wait times while shorter are still existence in the US. So for all the money spent on you, you get away with a shorter life, slightly less time waiting, denials of service, and dealing with your jackass insurance companies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadia...stems_compared

And you only get the benefits of those shorter wait times, if you can actually get coverage. If you have a chronic condition prior to applying for insurance, your fucked. When I turn 25 my current plan will run out, because of my antiphospholipid syndrome, no one will cover me, I will either be forced to pony up 5000 dollars a month for lovanox, get declared disabled and hope that medicare helps with some of the cost, and even then I will likely still be paying an exuberant price. Or I can go to Canada, pay slightly higher taxes, and learn to deal with a fucking line. Look at that, hmm, give up all sense of dignity and beg for care, or deal with a line in country that thinks living in one of the wealthiest nations should come with some kind of benefit.

Oh and Lovanox, the primary drug I'm on, made from pig intestines. Now you tell me why a drug produced from a throw away animal byproduct product, harvested millions of times a year in the US, costs 100 dollars per 1 mili liter.

[Stemis516]

first off its not the idea of capitalism itself that got us in this mess, its a few terrible people under this system who ruined things for everyone and why would marx and the russians be turning over in their graves and laughing? their idea to compete with capitalism failed miserably years ago and has been proven not to be effective at all for long term economic growth

for all those bashing capitalism, i would sure like to hear your proposal for a better economic system

in my opinion capitalism with a minimal amount of government oversight is ideal but i mean you cant expect the government to control the free wills of everyone making economic decisions each day unless you advocate socialism

thats the problem its that with capitalism comes a degree of freedom for businesses and individuals alike and with freedom you will have a percentage (albeit not the majority in my opinion) of bad people making bad decisions and thats just a consequence of the system we live in...the government has to decide how much or how little oversight to provide without undermining the system

[FreshNugz]

why would marx and the russians be turning over in their graves and laughing? their idea to compete with capitalism failed miserably years ago and has been proven not to be effective at all for long term economic growth

for all those bashing capitalism, i would sure like to hear your proposal for a better economic system

you cant expect the government to control the free wills of everyone making economic decisions each day unless you advocate socialism

..the government has to decide how much or how little oversight to provide without undermining the system

1. Because Marx was not all that far off sometimes. We do have class struggle. We have oppression of the poor - causes negativity between classes. And chill before you say I'm not advocating capitalism. I'm saying someday they argued, the US and its greed and capitalism would squander itself because of internal struggle. What's happening now....and in every form - political, social, economic.
2. Nobody is proposing a better solution. Other than how about living without money. Everything still happens...goes on..
every part of the day. Just no money. You go get your groceries, and leave. You drive for free. everything is free.
One might say, well we can't do that because then we can't fund production of goods...or fund the drilling of oil..if there is no price..blah blah. Well you don't need it cause there is no money.
3. The government is controlling the free will of the people economically. And nobody is advocating socialism, but the bailouts and the complete government intervention in the economy is socialist. Just they haven't called it that. They just say you need it. Although you seem to think it isn't?
4. The government shouldn't be telling us how to run everything, you should be telling it how. For the people, by the people, of the people...remember any of that?

[Stemis516]

yes, the bailouts were socialist, as is this idea of universal healthcare im not denying that....any form of government oversight then can be labeled as socialist in nature....thats fine, i said in my first post that in my opinion SOME, albeit very little, government oversight is needed....bailout out companies when the market says they should fail is TOO MUCH oversight and too socialist in my opinion


and your whole idea about "no money" is at its core socialism....because either people will just take as many groceries from the store as they want in which case we will run out, or some form of government as to regulate how many groceries we can take and there you have socialism which has been proven to be unsuccessful in the long run

so yes, let us agree that there is much much grey area here....pure capitalism would basically be the free markets and im not advocating that but im just saying in 97% (just a high number but you get my point) of the circumstances the markets should be allowed to run thier course which includes (in my opinion) that bear stearns, aig, and the american automakers should FAIL

and in response to numbers 3 and 4, im not gonna argue with you much there except to say that those arent problems with capitalism per se, but instead with the people running and/or participating in the system

in a perfect world, everyone in a capitalist economic system would make ethical and sound economic decisions everytime and things would be fine...but there are bad greedy people out there who like to ruin it for everyone else