Just in the last several days, the chances of govt help to solve the problem you cite have shot up dramatically. This exposure of the right wing/free market scam has, as about everyone knows now, set most Americans afire with resentment. More progressive taxation and the safety nets it can pay for are a whole lot closer today than you might believe. Because of that, right now, I imagine the folks most upset with Dick Cheney and Bush et al are whose high incomes are in the cross hairs. Betcha Dick's Dubai charter is booked full! I hear Michael Jackson is providing the in flight, live and in person no less.
Why is universal healthcare such a controversial subject in the US? We have Universal (and free) K-12 education. What can be more common sense than having a healthy population? An ill worker is not an efficient worker (or creative one...) Back in the day, there used to be a "free market" solution to education, the end result was that it was very expensive and only children of "worthy" individuals were educated. Then it was decided that an educated population is beneficial to the state in the long run and literacy rates (and economic growth) went through the roof. Healthcare by its very nature cannot be predicated on profit. "Do no harm" is directly in conflict with profit incentive. If you base it on profit, the end result will be denied life saving procedures/drugs or those procedures/drugs deemed "experimental" Fact of the matter is, US as a percentage of GDP spends MORE on healthcare than any industrialized nation. If you spend a lot of money on the private sector why can't you channel that money that would be spent anyway through taxes to the public sector. You would not be financing health insurance profits but simply getting the job done. It is all a matter of priorities: a nation can spend its wealth "bringing democracies to the rest of the world" (21st century version of "white man's burden") and other worthless projects (such as supporting people like saakashvili, an insanely high military budget, etc) OR it can invest in its own citizens. One of the things that contributed mightily to US post war economic growth was the GI Bill that empowerd a lot of WWII vets to get college education. Governments helping people realize their potential is NOT socialism, it is common sense. An illustrative film on the topic would be Sicko. And before anyone tells me how it is all BS I have some real life (first hand) experiences with health care companies that illustrate their M.O perfectly. Remember, it is not about supporting "gang bangers" "babies born in the hood" it is about helping people across the board concentrate on more important things (such as getting an education or opening up a business)
IShopAtPublix, the health care services and products have had a much stronger price increase than many other sectors - that makes for some uncanny future in geriatrics.
Because we cant pay our bills now without going further into debt more and more everyday. Nothing is more expensive than free. "Back in the day, there used to be a "free market" solution to education" When was this???? BEFORE the continental congress?? I guess the fact that many schools (and I mean MANY) are total failures by just about any standard you want to pick doesnt mean much to someone who ignores the facts. As a husband of a school teacher I can say its great that the govt urinates as much money on it as they do. As a husband of a school teacher I can say that for every dollar taxed about 30 cents its totally wasted and would not be spent with a voucher program. Do you know that illegals can get free or reduced lunch at my local school ( I believe that's everywhere). What the hell kinda crap is that?? Governments helping people realize their potential is NOT socialism, it is common sense. NOOO its still socialism This whole argument on "FREE" health care for those that can't afford it is based that someone else can afford it. Furthermore its based on current pricing. Prices would go sky high if everyone could just run down to the doctor and they had no direct costs. Read yoru history, read about the plight of the commons, after reading it understand it. lastly, using a movie by mike moore to make your point does not give you credibility but rather shows how little you actually know about the subject. (sorry if that sounds mean but come on, put some real thought into your opinions and understand what will happen besides the initial feel good of another half baked idea) The socialists and spenders had their run, you gave us a medicare and medicaid problem that no one running for office dares to talk about much less attempt to solve. You gave us social security which was never to go beyond 3%. You gave us fanny and freddie which was pushed to make homes available for all Your great society really sounds good for the emotional non thinker but the rest of the pack has to figure out how to get out of this mess. In the mean time the socialists bury their heads and ask for more and more never to end the asking.
Point by point. Mandatory education was not introduced in the USA until the LATER part of the 19th century... So way beyond continental congress. Many schools suck but do you honestly believe every private school or charter school is perfect? People that oppose public education always look at the poorest inner city schools attended by poorest of students. Those students are predisposed to not excel anywhere. And when they are taught by underpaid teachers in underpaid districts they are still better off than not being educated at all (which is what would happen in a 100% free market system)There are strong magnet public schools that push students to achieve their best (IB/AP programs) I am a product of such a school. Illegals getting free/reduced lunch is a whole separate issue altogether that is derived from USA's desire for cheaply built houses/produce pickers, hotel maids etc. One of the ways to solve it is make it so children of illegals born here are not US citizens. You can take that complaint to the supreme court. The only reason health care is so expensive is because HMO's jack it up so. That is what happens when you introduce profits where they don't belong. Preventive health care reduces medical costs by not going into chronic treatment. HMOs f*ck the system by squeezing every dime from doctors, hospitals and passing it to shareholders (not you the policy holder). How do I know? I have 3 relatives working in health care in the US (1 M.D and 2 nurses) The simple reality is that one needs to look at health care systems beyond US borders. Places like Norway, Iceland, Ireland, Switzerland, Austria, Japan, etc. Lots of people praise Japan/German manufacturing yet those countries have national health care coverages for their workers too. Are they socialists too? Or is it common sense? Btw Germany is number 1 exporter in the world... For someone who did not even know when compulsory US public education took hold I suggest you don't patronize me. You need to get out of the idea that everyone that somehow is not born into a wealthy family is automatically a welfare queen/king sitting at home collecting welfare/food stamps and watching jerry springer 24/7. There are plenty of educated people in the USA that either work 2 jobs or work odd jobs SIMPLY for benefits. Health care is expensive and people other than lazy bums dont have access to it. There are certain priorities where profit is simply not the primary consideration. Certain things simply have to be done. You would not expect your police department to try to make a profit off of you or the fire department or the postal service, etc.
I have no idea if you are profitable trader, but you sure make a lot of sense sir when it come to health care. I tip my hat to you.
The US Gov't already spends, per capita, more on healthcare for its people than Canada does. We have universal health already, every illegal alien and welfare mother already knows that.
Unfortunately that's not really true, and the unavailability of prenatal care is why parts of the US have infant mortality rates that are worse than parts of Africa. Adopt the Canadian system, pay less per capita. Simple as that.
No, wrong again Obama. When comparing infant mortality rates, it is necessary to compare like demographics. I am confident that the rate for our demographic that mirrors canada is equal to or better than their rate. Our demographic that mirrors parts of africa has a similar rate. It has little to do with who pays for care. It has everything to do with dysfunctional lifestyles, mothers using drugs during pregnancy,etc. My sister in law runs an inner city prenatal program. All care is free, but the mothers will not even come in for it. Many are using. Of course, they then deliver babies who require a zillion dollars in taxpayer funded care. I cannot comment on the cost of the Canadian system, but I can safely say that it is a fallacy to assume that our costs would mirror theirs. All of mexico would flock here for free health care.