The Energon Pub

After reading through the Stem Cell thread, I'm just posing an open question for folks to answer:

With health care becoming an increasingly more important issue globally, where do you stand on policy? Does a socialized health care system, despite its bureaucratic risks, provide a reliable and fair approach in universal coverage? Or does the privatization of medicine, despite its motivation of profit, provide better coverage for a nation's citizens? Or is this a false dichotomy, and a blending of both systems--via subsidies, base coverage with the option to expand to third-party plans, or otherwise--being the best option of all?

Really it seems that in America, the privitisation does not work. They only provide to the wealthy, and not anyone else. So F**K them, i would love to overthrough that as soon as i could. The government needs to fear their citizens, and not the other way around. If you protest here in America, you get shot. So basically, this is a totalitarion nation, somthing needs to be done.

I'm of course biased to the socialization of health care seeing as I'm from Canada, but both sides have their pros and cons. On the socialization side. Everyone gets the help they need (in theory), though everyone pays for it in taxes. However I'm of the thought that continuous expected small payments are usually better than sometimes unexpected large payments. The cons are potentially long waiting lines for common surguries, and the system is really only as good as the money the government puts into it.

Privitization on the other hand usually sees shorter waiting lists and better technology because it's not limited to government spending. However they treat only those that can pay.

I've made my view apparent in both the Stem-Cell topic and the "Sicko" topic.

The pros of privitazation of healthcare far outwiegh the pros in socialized healthcare.

The profit motive of Privitazation is a non-issue, and will paint it in a bad light for some idiotic reason, Unfortunately, making money in this country has become an evil affront of humanity, somewhere along the way. Despite that making this country one of the most advanced countries on the planet, it's somehow bad to make money. I don't get it.
Profit motive is just another way of giving the best. After all, no one is going to spend their money on subpar product, not when someone else is willing to offer a better price for a better product.
With socialization, they have no such motive to give you the best. Hence not getting the best medicines, the best doctors, or even the best care. There is certainly no motive for what's in your best interest. And since its the government paying for it, the price tags will increase and bottom-line falls on the tax payers. So now that "free" healthcare, is not and has never been free. That, couple with the sheer number of people that it will cover (to be fair, it will even have to cover the rich - those who in their right mind would use it over their own insurance is beyond me) will collapse program.
More on my viewpoint and links to articiles that back up those views are on those other two topics. I really don't feel like tracking them down and copying them to here.

Loki120 wrote:The pros of privitazation of healthcare far outwiegh the pros in socialized healthcare.

The profit motive of Privitazation is a non-issue, and will paint it in a bad light for some idiotic reason,

Millions of poverty-level, working-class, and middle-class citizens of the United States will argue with you there, bub. In fact, profit is the precise issue with privatization: it's the driving force in any capitalistic system. The reason why people object to such a modus operandi is that it seemingly places the welfare of people in a lesser place than monetary gain, a seeming conflict-of-interest in regards to a field devoted to such a human field as health.

Unfortunately, making money in this country has become an evil affront of humanity, somewhere along the way. Despite that making this country one of the most advanced countries on the planet, it's somehow bad to make money. I don't get it.

A capitalist economic system supports few ideas: rugged individualism, competition, materialism, and division. Inherent in capitalism is a class divide, in which sections of a nation's population are separated into various socioeconomic strata based largely on wealth: despite the claims of Carlyle and his neo-Victorian descendants, this not only cripples an equality of opportunity as well as the basic civic equality promised by the Constituion, but also perpetuates in itself a gentrification that enables some of the wealthy to maintain position and rank through inheritance alone. In a nation that supposedly guarantees that equality of opportunity and universal civil rights, such a system works in opposition to those very principles.

Profit motive is just another way of giving the best. After all, no one is going to spend their money on subpar product, not when someone else is willing to offer a better price for a better product.

Unless tens of millions cannot afford said product...millions who may need it. Although I do agree that the capitalist for-profit system, through competition for profits, does promote innovation in distinct ways, the fact remains that it also creates a system that treats medical care as an exercise of privilege, as opposed to a basic human right.

why can't we have both?

Tammuz wrote:why can't we have both?

Yeah, really! The govenment gives out universal health care, and pays extra funding to whoever to come up with a superior product or service!

The biggest fear with the privatisation of health care is that corners will be cut in the name of profit and that a hospital could close because it didn't make enough money.

The potential customers think that, basically, a regular company going Enron on you is bad enough but a hospital going Enron on you is worse.

Kjell wrote:The biggest fear with the privatisation of health care is that corners will be cut in the name of profit and that a hospital could close because it didn't make enough money.

The potential customers think that, basically, a regular company going Enron on you is bad enough but a hospital going Enron on you is worse.

And another fear is that the socialization of healthcare will result in cut corners with the patient care. Just because the money is coming from the government, doesn't change a hospital from being a business.

Loki120 wrote:

Kjell wrote:The biggest fear with the privatisation of health care is that corners will be cut in the name of profit and that a hospital could close because it didn't make enough money.

The potential customers think that, basically, a regular company going Enron on you is bad enough but a hospital going Enron on you is worse.

And another fear is that the socialization of healthcare will result in cut corners with the patient care. Just because the money is coming from the government, doesn't change a hospital from being a business.

Hospital's shouldn't be a business, but a service.

Health care is the right of all sentient beings!

But seriously..

Tammuz wrote:why can't we have both?

Exactly my rationale. By providing a socialized coverage to the populace of this country while offering a premium coverage plan, we can cover so many bases. Not only do we appear like we've caught up with the rest of the world by offering something which by common sense should be a basic right, but to those that seek a better service (and has the money to do so) has that option available. Thus fulfilling the money making, capitalist aspect of the insurance industry and pleasing everyone.

Tammuz wrote:

Loki120 wrote:

Kjell wrote:The biggest fear with the privatisation of health care is that corners will be cut in the name of profit and that a hospital could close because it didn't make enough money.

The potential customers think that, basically, a regular company going Enron on you is bad enough but a hospital going Enron on you is worse.

And another fear is that the socialization of healthcare will result in cut corners with the patient care. Just because the money is coming from the government, doesn't change a hospital from being a business.

Hospital's shouldn't be a business, but a service.

It is a service, but it's a business that supplies a service.

I've heard this same rational from people about public schools, and all I can say is if you're going to have the government pay for it all, be prepared for what you get. Given the state of the US education rate in public schools, do you really want those kinds of results from our hospitals as well?
I can see it now, "No patient left behind!".

Flamemaster Galvatron wrote:Health care is the right of all sentient beings!

But seriously..

Tammuz wrote:why can't we have both?

Exactly my rationale. By providing a socialized coverage to the populace of this country while offering a premium coverage plan, we can cover so many bases. Not only do we appear like we've caught up with the rest of the world by offering something which by common sense should be a basic right, but to those that seek a better service (and has the money to do so) has that option available. Thus fulfilling the money making, capitalist aspect of the insurance industry and pleasing everyone.

Hey, if you want socialized healthcare, be prepared for what you get...and keep it out of my home, that's all I'm saying. But the fact is, everyone screaming for it is also going to be complaining about how inadequete it is. What you're calling common sense, so am I. Show me one good model of socialization in the world...ever. Just one. That's not catching up with the rest of the world, that's pulling us back.

And I have news for you, everyone is a capitalist. You can't once tell me that if you hit upon a marketable idea, that you would just give it away. You'd sell it, and you know it. So let's not start throwing mud-slinging and something you would be willing to do yourself, just because you disagree with the politics and because you can't cut a slice for yourself. And I'm not talking about you in particular Flamemaster, I'm talking about everyone on this board who cries out against capitalism. There's a word for that, it's called hypocrisy.

Last time I checked Norway had it pretty good. Sure, maybe they don't have pure socialism but they aren't lacking it either.

The problem here is that socialization does not work, and in truth neither does capitalism. Oddly enough it's for the same reason; greed. Something that exists in the very nature of man and will likely be his downfall.

The fact that so many of you think the government is actually competent to pull off socialized health care frightens me.

The government can't even stop millions of people from streaming across an eight hundred mile long border. Honestly, if the government can't even figure out how to go about building something as simple as a fence how could you ever trust them with this?

Not to mention socialized health care will lead to sub par training and equipment over time as well create an absolutely enormous tax burden. I know the socialists around here may be perfectly comfortable handing over half of their income so the government can run their lives from cradle to grave but I certainly do not. Plus it's the government. You socialize health care and you can actually expect health costs to soar because people don't give a crap about overcharging Uncle Sam and guess who lines Uncle Sam's pockets? The taxpayer.

I don't blame the socialists around here for being proponents of this. You've simply never lived and worked in a nation that doesn't steal half of your income from you and the only people in America crying about this are liberals trying to appeal to poor voters. The sad thing is that this same group of people and their constituents would be the first in line to file and prosecute frivolous lawsuits against HMOs if they ever got the chance.

Besides, I don't see a right to health care in the Bill of Rights. People need to understand that government is not responsible for running their entire lives. Frankly, the less government we have the better off we all are.

It's F***ing funny how all you anti-people getting healthcare posters are either Decepticons or Quintissons. What an evil group!!!! Join the Autobots or be prepared to face a fight!!!! We Autobots believe in the right for all sentiate beings to have freedome, and that also means the freedom to LIVE!! Not just the ones who can steal money or any sort of currency to be able to flourish, THAT IS EVIL!!! Or don't you understand that concept? Prepare to battle any rightous being on this planet!!!

Duo Prime wrote:It's F***ing funny how all you anti-people getting healthcare posters are either Decepticons or Quintissons. What an evil group!!!! Join the Autobots or be prepared to face a fight!!!! We Autobots believe in the right for all sentiate beings to have freedome, and that also means the freedom to LIVE!! Not just the ones who can steal money or any sort of currency to be able to flourish, THAT IS EVIL!!! Or don't you understand that concept? Prepare to battle any rightous being on this planet!!!

It's posts like these that make me wonder if you're joking around or I'm arguing with a ten year old. Either way, I'm no longer interested. I'll be more than happy to debate the issues when you grow up a bit and are fully informed about what's truly at stake about your personal freedoms.

The fact that so many of you think the government is actually competent to pull off socialized health care frightens me.

I don't buy this argument. The people that are in charge of socialising health care won't be the same making the idiotic decisions that bizarrely many right wingers who use this line of illogical argument support anyway. A government is not necessarily a singular entity.

Would you rather trust soulless corporations to do it, who's only interest in profit? Governments have some vested interest in keeping their people happy - they are under scrutiny constantly. Corporations can get a way with a lot more in the world of health care.

Not to mention which is better, good health care for some, or decent health care for all? Where are all the doctors going to flee to like when they supposedly fled Canada, also? Mexico? Come on.

A mix of socialised and privatised might be best, if it's handled right.

you will see a change in the sentament of Americans toward socialism if we do not adress the "CLASS WAR"......you can not have w/ out someone not having. make sense. keep money were it belongs, in banks not hospitals. STOP WAGERING BETS AGAINST YOUR FUTURE! GAMBELERS LOSE MORE THAN THEY WIN!!!!

backulon wrote:you will see a change in the sentament of Americans toward socialism if we do not adress the "CLASS WAR"......you can not have w/ out someone not having. make sense. keep money were it belongs, in banks not hospitals. STOP WAGERING BETS AGAINST YOUR FUTURE! GAMBELERS LOSE MORE THAN THEY WIN!!!!

It's not a gamble. It's a proven fact that the free market and competition causes advances in technology. It's also a proven fact that socialization breeds inflation and stagnation. It also widens the gap between the haves and the have-nots, only purpetuating that class-war you all keep going on about. I haven't heard a single argument which will go against these truths that hasn't been an uninformed myth and propaganda.
So what your saying is keep the money with the government and not in your pocket. Got ya.

I think the real victory the British NHS system has over the American medical system is that they don't put old men is ass-less gowns.

The markets are gambling and the more impunity you have in the courts the more you can hedge those bets.... thus corperate lawyers.

Loki120 wrote:

backulon wrote:you will see a change in the sentament of Americans toward socialism if we do not adress the "CLASS WAR"......you can not have w/ out someone not having. make sense. keep money were it belongs, in banks not hospitals. STOP WAGERING BETS AGAINST YOUR FUTURE! GAMBELERS LOSE MORE THAN THEY WIN!!!!

It's not a gamble. It's a proven fact that the free market and competition causes advances in technology. It's also a proven fact that socialization breeds inflation and stagnation. It also widens the gap between the haves and the have-nots, only purpetuating that class-war you all keep going on about. I haven't heard a single argument which will go against these truths that hasn't been an uninformed myth and propaganda.
So what your saying is keep the money with the government and not in your pocket. Got ya.

Then please demonstrate to me where these are proven. Your whole post is taken out of the "Right Winger's Manual to Not Entirely Terrible Debating", right down to the bullshit "LIBERAL PROPOGANDA". You don't prove anything

The only truth we can say straight out without even citing statistics is that Socialised medical care is the only way to ensure that everyone gets treated fairly. With privatised health care, this will not occur. Some people cannot afford insurance, and insurance does not cover many things it's meant to.

Would you privatise the police, the fire brigade? No. So why Health care?

You probably think Sweden is a shithole, don't you? You are the only one succumbing to propoganda here - socialised health care has it's problems(mostly down to bad planning), but it's still utilised in many countries, and it still works better than your quite frankly, insane, dumbshit system, that insane, dumbshit people support.

Spark Light wrote:

Loki120 wrote:

backulon wrote:you will see a change in the sentament of Americans toward socialism if we do not adress the "CLASS WAR"......you can not have w/ out someone not having. make sense. keep money were it belongs, in banks not hospitals. STOP WAGERING BETS AGAINST YOUR FUTURE! GAMBELERS LOSE MORE THAN THEY WIN!!!!

It's not a gamble. It's a proven fact that the free market and competition causes advances in technology. It's also a proven fact that socialization breeds inflation and stagnation. It also widens the gap between the haves and the have-nots, only purpetuating that class-war you all keep going on about. I haven't heard a single argument which will go against these truths that hasn't been an uninformed myth and propaganda.
So what your saying is keep the money with the government and not in your pocket. Got ya.

Then please demonstrate to me where these are proven. Your whole post is taken out of the "Right Winger's Manual to Not Entirely Terrible Debating", right down to the bullshit "LIBERAL PROPOGANDA". You don't prove anything

The only truth we can say straight out without even citing statistics is that Socialised medical care is the only way to ensure that everyone gets treated fairly. With privatised health care, this will not occur. Some people cannot afford insurance, and insurance does not cover many things it's meant to.

Would you privatise the police, the fire brigade? No. So why Health care?

You probably think Sweden is a shithole, don't you? You are the only one succumbing to propoganda here - socialised health care has it's problems(mostly down to bad planning), but it's still utilised in many countries, and it still works better than your quite frankly, insane, dumbshit system, that insane, dumbshit people support.

1) Why should I be the one to have to prove it and cite statistics? You're all the ones who want to make the change, you are all the ones who have to prove your way is better. It's not my fault you can't see what's perfectly obvious. It's been proven time after time that open market is better for the economy, technological advances, and better overall service. That's simply economics 101, if you are unaware of this basic principle, maybe you should take it up in school. That's assuming you can open a book instead of burning them (see what's it's like when other people make assumptions about you?)

2) When the F-bomb did I ever pull up Sweden? I don't give a rat's ass about Sweden. Is this is the gist of all you're people's arguements? You don't like what you hear so you throw a below the belt fastball? Jesus, you people are f'in idiotic scary, you know that? So far I've been called a gay-basher, and I look down on Sweden, and I've never once mentioned either one.
Maybe if you can put together an intelligent arguement for once then maybe people will look past your views as something more than a 10 year olds rant.

3) Despite what most people my thing, I'm not a right wing nut. If anything, I'm a libertarian, who just wants government to stay out his home as much as possible. That same government you all go on about as not trusting, you want to run your lives, your health, your education. Socialization doesn't give you anything for free, if forces others to pay what you take for granted, and it takes away your personal liberties of choice.