It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why vote for a socialist? Re: Sen. Obama

page: 5
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   
the health insurance thing was directed at someone else who keeps asking what is wrong with hillary's national insurance plan. But anyway, onto your questions. The whole basis of society is people being individuals yes, but working in common to help each other through those extenuating instances that we cant get through alone. our government was originally supposed to be very limited in scope, (fed, that is) it was there to handle inter-state relations, as well as providing for common defense, and that is all. Thats not where we are now, and there are naturally many problems we all see with this. The reason we need socialized medicine is this... its not a matter of us being able to take care of ourselves and having personal responsibility ...social medicine would act as a protective barrier between us and the greed of american marketing. What i mean by this is that medicine in america is no longer a simple matter of a doctor telling you what caused your illness andyou make changes to avoid it.... now there is marketing telling you untruths like "we dont know what causes diabetes" or "we dont know what causes cancer" and instead of your doctor telling you to never eat sugar or processed refined carbs ever again, they put you on drugs and slowly let your body deteriorate over time and then charge you to manage that deterioration as well. This is all pervasive, americans have no clue of healthy eating practices the food pyramid is bought and paid for by the dairy and grain industries, so its crap. And even if you do understand basic nutrition (only fresh unprocessed meat veggies and fruit are food, everything else is crap) its almost impossible to eat right for most people because almost everything you get in restaurants, fast food, and even most groceries is processed garbage. The whole system here is set up to SELL people, and they are very good at it, so we have the deck stacked against us. and then when we get sick from the standard american diet and lifestyle (as everyone does hence the rampant heart disease and diabetes and obesity) then we turn to our massively marketed and marked up healthcare system to save us, and take all our money from us at the same time. insurance covers most basic stuff, but the moment something major comes along (and it will with the american lifestyle) then all our savings and ownings are gone. you can read all you want but theres so much conflicting info out there (due to marketing crap and bs) that its hard to know whats true. Are eggs good or bad? should we use butter or margerine? is milk good or bad? is cholesterol good or bad? Are fats bad for you and should you avoid them? are carbs a good choice for energy?? is sun good or bad?most people think the answers to these questions are simple because we are constantly inundated with the "answers" that the people selling them want you to have...but you might be surprised at some of the answers. That is why i think we need national health. Our government has allowed us to be tricked and lied to by our health industries, by our food industries, by the chemical consortiums and our big pharma, and when we are seriously injured by these things, its only fair that our injuries are taken care of. We pay taxes for many things, things most of us would GREATLY protest if we knew. We pay for new walmarts to be built. we pay for their utilities! we pay for oil subsidies. Our taxes go to buy weapons for other countries (80% of our foreign aid is used to buy weapons from US arms manufacturers), we pay for wars in other countries. I think paying for our healthcare and our education (two things that certainly deserve to be "rights" in this world of incredible productivity) are certainly nobler than the aforementioned things. This wouldnt necessarily be the case if our medical system was successful but its not. 40mil citizens have NO insurance and even if your one that does, as i said, a single serious event can still put you out of house and home.




posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by pexx421
 


And you think handing the system to both senators who are lobbied by pharm companies, and hospital admin and doctors who are lobbied by the same? National health insurance, whatever clothing you put on that wolf, amounts to the same thing, and the same question you have ot answered. How is it my responsibility to take care of those that do not lead a healthy lifestyle?

Do we ban certain products? Tobacco and alcohol? And what about when we can detect birth defects and diseases in the early stages of a pregnancy? Will they have forced abortions so as not to strain the system? Don't you see all the bad outcomes that could result?

Why doesn't hillary take the $100 million she got to campaign and put it into health education instead? Or force through a P.E.bill in all schools? Or put our farmers to work and ship vegetables to our schools? No, it's much easier to blame the med industry that was only evolving to deal with the consequences of our lifestyles.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:14 AM
link   
it seems to me that EVERY OTHER INDUSTRIALIZED NATION in the world has state healthcare, and they seem to have managed to avoid all the issues you are concerned with.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Can I ask the pro-Repulicans here, a question?

I know that Repulicans have a long tradition of being proud to express their Christian roots. So do you consider yourselves to be good Christians?



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:17 AM
link   
in fact, whenever i ask anyone from europe or canada if they would trade health systems with america, they seem horrified by the idea. we dont have a health system, we have a managed illness system. I dont go to doctors unless i have a emergency such as a car accident or fracture, other than that i go to naturopaths and use vitamins and herbs to cure my illnesses, but due to our system its exorbitantly expensive to seek alternative medicine, just as its exorbitantly expensive to seek healthy food or raw milk or many other things that are natural and should be cheaper than processed junk.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by pexx421
 


You yourself have admitted that Americans lead a uniquely unhealthy lifestyle. This makes our situation unique. And BTW, the level of treatment for many diseases is better in this country, and most of the socialized healthcare programs are going BROKE! look it up, I have to go to bed.

And to the poster who asked about compassion? You have also neglected to answer my original question about the validity of me being responsible for others who make bad life style choices. Notice that I did not mention prenatal, infant, disabled or special needs care. As I believe that to be humanitarian.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:38 AM
link   
yes, many of the social medicine programs ARE going broke, but at least that doesnt leave a bunch of citizens with no homes. Here in america its the PEOPLE going broke. Much of that has to do with the corruption and greed of the pharmeceutical industries. But its not just our people. We have a massive crisis of Dr's and nurses, and its only going to get worse as education costs keep shooting up and less and less dr's believe its worth it to become one. Just the money the people pay for the insurance industry alone should be enough to massively offset the cost of national health as i think 40% of each dollar paid a doc goes to the insurance industry. And then we'd need to reform lawsuit practices and that might make a big difference too. Bottom line is theres no single solution for the issues, any change will take broad and sweeping reforms, but CHANGE NEEDS TO BE MADE. Insurance.....is usery, an inhumane crime, and state mandated unsurance is corruption and fascism of the worst sort. An example...i am moving to new orleans and got a quote from my auto policy (off topic). I now pay 700/6 months with a perfect driving record...not too unreasonable. When i move to N.O. its going up to 1890/6 months. How can a government FORCE people to pay an exorbitant 300 dollars a month for INSURANCE??!!! thats a car note!! this is rediculous the whole industry is a scam and it makes me angry. And then when you file a claim they do everything they can to NOT pay you for the service you have been paying into all that time. GRRRrrr. ah well, im done.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by grover
 


Grover, answer my points, would you? I see that you think we are dependent on each other, while I contend that we are dependent on ourselves and our families. This other matrix was created to foster a socialist ideal that will never exist. The truth is, I can't depend on my neighbor to go to work and support me and my choices.


All of us are interdependent with each other... it is the nature of all societies. IF one part of society suffers the rest do as well whether you want to admit it or not... just as surely as if one part of the economy suffers it echos through the rest of the economy as well.

Even the ancient Egyptians under the Pharoh's had national health care... everyone, rich and poor alike paid a doctor's tax which supported the doctor's and allowed everyone freeman, serf, slave and noble access to health care. It worked so well the Poltmies continued it, as did the Romans.

Not all socialized systems are totaliterian as you seem to think... the Scandinavian countries are a good example.

The last I knew the United States and South Africa were the only two first world nations that did not supply some form of national health care for their citizens... AND for your information in terms of first world, second world, third world etc.... the first world nations are capitalist democracies.

[edit on 2-6-2008 by grover]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:50 AM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 

I don't have time to read all the replies, so bear with me. You are all talking about the UHC (if you want to call it that) as if it is socialized medicine because of your definition, which is by the way your opinion. The program is nothing like the socialized medicine in Canada or anywhere else, so you a falsely calling it something it is not. It is not free and it does not cover everyone. You obviously are not going to agree and that is fine. I will move on.

You still have not explained any other reason than UHC, to accuse Barack of being a Socialist because you said you would provide an e-mail reply from him or something. Have I missed it somewhere? If so please link to your post.

One last thing about the benefit of mandatory health care insurance that everyone should know is it is a way to help reduce the increase in health care costs, and if you didn't know you are already paying for health services provided to the uninsured.

I don't know about anywhere else, but here in Ohio we have mandatory automobile insurance. No one can drive without it and risk suspending their license. So since it was implemented, guess what? Part of everyone's car insurance is as we know to cover uninsured motorists right? Well this cost goes down when everyone is required to have it. It did not reduce the cost but it helped keep insurance premiums from rising.

The same thing would hopefully happen if everyone was covered with heath care insurance. We all know that hospitals are required to provide emergency services to anyone that needs it whether they are covered or not. Some people aren't covered and can't pay a huge hospital bill, and the hospitals cannot get paid for it. So what do they do? They spread this cost in other services that we pay for in the form of higher premiums. So we are already paying for those services already. Now I don't think we would see a reduction in premiums if UHC is passed, but it should help reduce the double digit rate of increase that we have.

I can see from the point of view of some here and have legitimate arguments against it, but you are all talking about being against socialized medicine, so it is hard to even begin a reasonable discussion about this.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Lads,
I am a european and lived in the states for a number of years. I love americans as people but have a lot of distain for your government, but thats beside the point. One thing that always puzzled me was how on one hand americans are the most helpful friendly people I have ever met yet on the other hand you get so crazy at the thought of your tax dollars helping your fellow country men. I am now back living in Ireland and do miss the states, but i'm at a stage in my life were i'm about to start a family. When I weighed up the pro's and con's I found that living in a country that won't backrupt me if I get sick and will provide free education to my children was my only choice. You may be paying tax dollars to help people you feel are lazy or live an unhealthy life but this is an investment in the future. I am from a upper working class family and if I was born in the states I would not of had the education I recieved in Ireland. My government paid me to go to college, not alot but enough not to be a burden on my parents. My fellow country men made an investment in me by paying for my education. When I finished college I got a good job and started paying my tax to help the next generation coming up. I know this might sound wishy washy liberal talk to some of you but the fact of the matter is it worked. Ireland was dirt poor less than 30 years ago, but through free education we pulled ourselves out of the dirt and are now one of the most prosperous nations in europe.
Our health service has its problems, more than many other european nation but I know no matter what my financial circumstances I will always be cared for. I can't see why certain people and from my experience that is the majority of americans get so vexed on this issue. Can you honestly tell me that you would not like to have free education?? Really?? Can you not tell me that you would not like free health?? I also don't get tagged nor am i made get vacinations...If nations with only a small percentage of the GDP that the states have can do it, why can't you.
I've lived under both systems and I can tell you I would always pick my Irish health care, with all its problems over a health care system that is based on profit



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
OK, I found the post were the OP promised an explanation on why Barack is a socialist back on page 2.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So this e-mail reply was after you donated to his campaign? Did you originally support him and changed your mind after receiving this e-mail? Why don't you post it?



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   
To those that dont want health care for the poorer members of society I really hope your insurance company doesnt go under and you get sick!
It's a huge peace of mind to not have to worry about something as trivial as bills when it comes to health care as you might have a few more things on your mind!



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


Can we all agree that a healthy population is an efficient one? How do we get there? Why don't we see the howls of protests when the government bails out farmers, automakers, bankers, airlines etc all with our tax dollars? Isn't the health of our population just as valuable as our economic health? Government interference in economics is just as socialistic as its interference in procuring our health. Why are we so adamantly opposed to one and not the other? Why this " anti helping people" bias? This is not really a debate about Socialism but a debate about the type and extent of assistance government can extend to individuals. It is true that government can be quite inefficient especially because of politics but it doesn't have to be so. We just need to come up with the right formula.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   
I am getting tired of saying this but Obama is no socialist... if he were he would have never been allowed to proceed this far... the powers that be would have nuked his campaign far earlier than this if he were, just like they did Howard Dean in 04. The powers that be... aka the status quo or the monied class vote their interests first and the rest of us are allowed to play along for appearances sake... and it is not in their interest to have a bonified socialist anywhere near as close to the white house as he is now.

BTW I am not suggesting Howard Dean is a socialist either, the powers that be simply decided that he wasn't the one they wanted... how else can you explain the mountain out of a molehill that little pep rally cheer became?

[edit on 2-6-2008 by grover]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


You and I obviously are arguing semantics. I have a view of what classifies socialism and it's generals, based on my interpretation of what is socialism. Sorry if using archaic Marxist terms renders my argument obtuse and unappreciable in your eyes. However, I will have to find the fair wge bill that he was supporting, the one that said I could sue to have my wages equal to what I believed my work was worth, based on other jobs? I have to look it up again. As for my e-mail from the campaign? I don't know how to post it, but if you u2u me an e-mail address I will forward it to you. As a libertarian, I supported Sen. Obama, and made donations and a vote in the primary. And then I was awakened to Ron Paul, a conservative that I could vote for. This made me really dig in good into Obama. P.S. I have met him twice, btw, and he is very pleasant, but a little patronizing...



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Ameneter
 


I never supported a farm buyout. Grow hemp.
I never supported an airline buyout, the unions ruined those companies.
I never supported a home owners bailout. Those people were all making bad decisions, and is the ebb and flow of our economy.
I do not support a medical bailout until others begin to lead healthier lifestyles, and we protect our borders.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
You and I obviously are arguing semantics. I have a view of what classifies socialism and it's generals, based on my interpretation of what is socialism. Sorry if using archaic Marxist terms renders my argument obtuse and unappreciable in your eyes.

Your right that the definition of socialized medicine is so broad that it is a matter of semantics. However, judging by the title of this thread and using the term socialized medicine, it is clear that you have an agenda to try to persuade others with half truths by using these terms. Do you deny this? I am merely pointing out that the UHC that is proposed by the democrats is not the socialized medicine that other countries have. Fair enough?



However, I will have to find the fair wge bill that he was supporting, the one that said I could sue to have my wages equal to what I believed my work was worth, based on other jobs? I have to look it up again.

I have not heard of this so I would be interested in it. A quick search brought up nothing but the bill on minimum wage that democrats passed in 2006.



As for my e-mail from the campaign? I don't know how to post it, but if you u2u me an e-mail address I will forward it to you.

Just open the e-mail and use your mouse to highlight the text and do a copy and paste into the post editor. Be sure to remove any personal info and use external tags and site your source as an e-mail reply from Obama's website.



As a libertarian, I supported Sen. Obama, and made donations and a vote in the primary. And then I was awakened to Ron Paul, a conservative that I could vote for.

I also consider myself libertarian and believe in small government and individual rights. I am however going to vote in any way against the republican party, and I think Barack if anything is inspiring. Lately, as you have probably noticed there has been a barrage of anti-Obama discussions started by pro-republicans. Are you part of this invasion?

As far as the UHC proposal, I think mandatory health care coverage might be one way to help bring the high cost of health care in control. Something has to be done, so why not try it? If it doesn't work, look for another solution. Till then, it is the best I have heard. It certainly is not enough to accuse Obama of being a socialist, nor does it open the door to socialism in America.

BTW, Ron Paul is a libertarian and not conservative. He only ran as a republican to get into the debates. If it were he that was opposing John McCain, I would be voting for him.

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Hal9000]

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Hal9000]



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I see your fair argument, however I disagree that the point of the title was to bring in people with half truths. The fact of the matter is, we long ago crossed into the area of social programs.


Congratulations! Your donation was matched by S F. in New York, NY (cyclejunky@hotmail.com), and they decided to include a note to you.

Here's what S F. in New York, NY (cyclejunky@hotmail.com) had to say:

YEAH! The race is heating up and I want to show my support for Obama. He has such an uphill battle that he needs our support now, more than ever! AND I'd like to get a T-shirt for my girl!


This is one of the two messages I got from the Obama campaign following my donation.

I concede that in my archives I cannot find the bill I am speaking of, as he supported it openly, but did not author it. Statement retracted at this time.

And you still, STILL, have not answered my query as to my responsibility for those that lead unhealthy lifestyles.



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 

I don't get it. What does this e-mail have to do with anything?



And you still, STILL, have not answered my query as to my responsibility for those that lead unhealthy lifestyles.

I had no idea that was directed at me and find it shortsighted, but I will answer it anyway. Some of those that are uninsured and cannot afford health care may have unhealthy life styles, but even they would benefit from being able to go to the doctor once in a while. I am sure you have heard that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. The caregiver could see that a patient is overweight or has high cholesterol and do what they can to get them to live a healthier lifestyle. Without any coverage, the person wouldn't change anything and eventually wind up in the hospital and the cost of that will exceed any prevention, and as I said before eventually we will be paying for that anyway through higher premiums. This is part of the strategy of the UHC plan to reduce costs.

This mentality that you shouldn't have to pay for someone else is shortsighted, because with this plan maybe we can reduce the cost of health care which all of us would benefit from.

So now let me ask you a question. Do you have a better idea to reduce the cost of health care? If not then why are you complaining about this one?



posted on Jun, 2 2008 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Hal9000
 


I am tired of answering you. It's like you really don't read. I've given my solution. You asked for the conformation that I donated. Now you act like you don't know. I give up.

[edit on 2-6-2008 by jasonjnelson]




top topics



 
2
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join