Healthcare Reform is Communism (Socialism), page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 16-10-2009 @ 10:49 AM by Dermo
reply to post by Axial Leader



Ok fair enough Im sure you can understand that coming from capitalist, democratic nations and blocs.. when Americans insult us and our policies simply because there is a conditioning in your country that has been hijacked by profiteers (And you have to admit it has), we have to respond.

I get what you are saying about the States, I have been to the US many times and was pretty taken aback the first time with how 'In your face' that aspect of the country is.

But the US is not the most capitalist country.. Hong Kong is. And it has a similar healthcare system to Sweden.

Capitalism has been around a lot longer than the US has and it doesn't have to be the way the wealthy CEO's want it to be because they want better revenue.. Army, Police, Healthcare and Education are amenities that a country needs to be profitable, healthy and safe. Privatizing the core of these things is never good and has never worked properly anywhere. It can only end up in shortcomings and bad practices.


reply posted on 16-10-2009 @ 11:03 AM by TSOM87
Originally posted by oneclickaway
reply to
post by TSOM87



I never said anything was stopping me? I know theres the private Health Care option. All i was saying it that i didn't like the idea of working hard day in day out and getting the same Health Care as someone who sits about all day. Don't think anyone would like that. Take away that sort of Health care system then people will realise that they are going to have to work to get any healthcare.

Some people who do work but mabay can't afford Prv Health Care, whos money is going to funding the NHS don't like the fact that theres lazy people getting it for nothing.

As People from the UK know, people who don't work in the UK make more money off the Government than some people who do work plus get free Health Care. It relly is a joke.


Why don’t you like the idea? It is hardly fun having a condition of any kind which requires medical attention, so why be so churlish as to not want people unable to work, or unable to get a job in this climate, to not get health care? Why do you so wholeheartedly buy into this sick system of everyone having to work until they drop, wasting their entire lives so some scummy bankers, key workers and the elite can cream millions or billions off each year? That is like moaning that your prison shackle is on tighter than your neighbour’s, rather than moaning at a system that has put you in prison.
I have never met anyone in my entire life who ever even mentioned minding everyone getting medical care. And it is NOT free. It is paid for by everyone for the totality of their working lives. And nobody is living the life of Reilly on basic benefits at all…nobody. They are hardly enough to feed and heat. If they have 6 kids and are conning the system somehow then yes, maybe they are. But the bulk of benefits recipients are not working the system, so why not reserve your indignation for those few that are conning the system. Basic benefits are £64.30 a week. So that is more than you get a working week is it? Sigh.
Maybe if the benefits were enough to live on in the first place people would not have to con the system, ever thought of that?



You get people on benefits who are able to work, but would rather live of hard working peoples money. They also get free health care. I don't like that because i believe if you want anything in life you have to work for it. Whereas these people aint! I aint got a problem with people not wanting to work, though when its your tax money it going towards these people, well i know for sure it bothers me.

Its just what i believe in!

Sink Or Swim!

Tsom87



reply posted on 16-10-2009 @ 01:12 PM by Pathos
Originally posted by Badgered1
If Socialism IS Communism, then Conservatives ARE Fascists.
Happy with that? Can't have it both ways.
Turn off Fox News, and think for yourself, you Fascist, you....
What? You're not a Fascist? But your logic means you are!

Hmmm.... I think you have me mixed up with conservatives. I am a Constitutionalist. I might have a slight leaning one way over another, but I am primarily a true believer in the US Constitution. I believe Thomas Jefferson represents what this country should be, and that both parties are failing to protect everyone's constitutional rights.

When I look at Obamacare and its intent, I see an absolute violation in the Thomas Jefferson America that I embrace.


"A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government. "

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. "

"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."

"Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health no pleasure can be tasted by man; without liberty, no happiness can be enjoyed by society."

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual."

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."



I think many of my fellow Americans need a re-education in American and World History.

Everything quoted above is from Thomas Jefferson. Obamacare violates our constitutional freedoms and rights. Our government has been taken over by socialist communists, and they want to control everything we hold precious.

You are for freedom, or you are not for freedom. There is no in-between.

Its either liberty or death.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Pathos]


reply posted on 17-10-2009 @ 02:46 AM by Jim Scott
Socialism has its place in America. We have public schools. Why? The founding fathers decided that an education was necessary to preserve democracy. We have public roads. Why? The Congress decided we needed roads for the defense of the nation. Did you really think that the interstate system was for your family vacation? We have many public jobs, like police and firemen. Why? Because we can't seem to keep the costs of services down and the consistency of services up without long term employees who have corporate knowledge of what did and did not work in the past so we don't repeat the same mistakes.

How does socialized medicine fit in? Do we need democracy, defense of the nation, or long term knowledge? Maybe.

I think it is about helping our poorer brothers and sisters to rise up. It is about giving others a fighting chance to do well. It is about providing help and care to the sick. It's a good thing to do.

Sure, its great to have money. Many do. You know it can be because of talent and education, or it can be because of luck. You guessed something right. Well, maybe the next family didn't guess so well. Should they be treated like second class citizens when it comes to their health?

Frankly, I think a public health system is long overdue. I speak as a Republican, too. We need to elevate the family, protect the ill, provide for the disabled, and save our families from medical bankruptcy.

It's funny how the same people who fight against public medical support will stand and point a finger at the homeless. Maybe they are homeless because they have a medical condition, mental condition, or some other problem. Solve the problem, you have better social functioning.

Bottom line, America will be a healthier nation if it takes care of the health of its citizens. I think the costs of health insurance are way out of line. My rates went up 33% recently. I sent a complaint letter to the state department that oversees insurance companies. They said that as long as they gave me 30 days notice, it was ok. It's not ok. Especially now, when recession is a big problem.

I don't think I need to pay that much for a doctor that doesn't make house visits, an industry that treats symptoms more than causes, and a technologically overburdened hospital system.

Drugs...the cost .... don't get me started!

Properly overseen government programs have made a big positive difference. However, in this country, most citizens don't oversee their government.



[edit on 17-10-2009 by Jim Scott]


reply posted on 17-10-2009 @ 03:54 AM by useless eaters
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck



Communism is socialism without a choice. Communism is forced socialism. The guiding word here is choice or freedom. Socialism has freedoms that communism does not have


reply posted on 17-10-2009 @ 04:17 AM by Dermo
Originally posted by useless eaters
reply to
post by JohnnyCanuck


Communism is socialism without a choice. Communism is forced socialism. The guiding word here is choice or freedom. Socialism has freedoms that communism does not have


Socialism generally pushes the capitalist system except that there are moderate market regulations, social safety nets and state business's.

The Social Democratic Capitalism that most EU countries use is slightly regulated capitalism (depending on the state), state start up business's (during hard times) that are continuously privatized (also depending on the state), excellent social safety nets, healthcare etc.

Its hard to become a millionaire in the EU because of this system but not many people want to be excessively rich anyway. Its also extremely healthy and poverty levels are exceptionally low.

Communism does not use any form of the capitalist system. Everything is set up by the state.

China now has moved from a Communist system to a more Socialist system in order to use capitalism to expand its economy.


reply posted on 17-10-2009 @ 05:11 AM by Merriman Weir
Originally posted by Jim Scott
Socialism has its place in America. We have public schools. Why? The founding fathers decided that an education was necessary to preserve democracy. We have public roads. Why? The Congress decided we needed roads for the defense of the nation. Did you really think that the interstate system was for your family vacation? We have many public jobs, like police and firemen. Why? Because we can't seem to keep the costs of services down and the consistency of services up without long term employees who have corporate knowledge of what did and did not work in the past so we don't repeat the same mistakes.


Whilst much of the above is laudable and things I'd want to see in every country in the world, and whilst there's various competing models of socialism - just like there is in capitalism - I'm not sure that these things are actually 'socialist' in any real definition I recognise.

For example, the fact you have roads isn't anything to do with your Congress. You have planned and specifically constructed roads because it's a practical and generally efficient way of travelling. Nothing to do Congress or 'socialism'. Asking 'what did the Romans ever do for us' is a running joke in British history and one of the responses is that they gave us 'roads' in the modern sense rather than 'tracks'. Whilst the Romans obviously used them for defensive reasons, the idea that this is somehow 'socialist' is, frankly, bizarre. Were the Romans socialist? Did they implement 'socialist' policies?

I think part of this comes from this idea that many Americans have that, somehow, 'socialism' specifically equates with 'state', which isn't true at all. What Americans are really talking about when they say 'socialism' in this sense are elements of 'authoritarianism' and 'totalitarianism'. And yes, these things have appeared in structures that are perceived as being 'socialist', but that doesn't make socialism per se authoritarian or totalitarian or having a focus on 'state'. It's a logical fallacy. It's like saying 'I once a saw a couple of fat Americans' and taking it mean that all Americans are fat, which isn't true even if you do get fat Americans.

Over the couple of decades there's been a lot of talk about American cultural imperialism. To be honest, I'm wondering whether all this nonsense spoken about 'socialism' is another aspect of it, where America seeks to define something in itsterms or its understanding and then push it to the rest of the world as the definitive/only understanding of something.

[edit on 17-10-2009 by Merriman Weir]


reply posted on 18-10-2009 @ 10:54 AM by I_am_Spartacus
Originally posted by Axial Leader
Originally posted by I_am_Spartacus
This already exists in places and we are experiencing it first hand here.
I bet 75-85% of those currently on it will no longer qualify for it. Oh, they will let you stay on it if you subject to their humiliating, time consuming, requirements like multiple online surveys appraisals, doctors visits every six months, medications, etc. Its designed to either fit their norm, or more likely, to cause you to give up and go back to their crappy expensive plans, now that the competition is out of the way.


I find this post to be persuasive. (I am not too impressed with the OP, but I think this is an enlightening argument.)

What makes everyone believe this push for public health care won't end up with REQUIRED proctology exams, gynecology exams, forced participation in a system that requires unpleasant and unchecked medical checkups based upon the results of dubious studies that fit some norm but actually fit nobody well? Why not require drug testing for everyone, at the same time forcing people outside the norm to take drugs? Some people could be persuaded to that line of thinking. We see it right now, here at ATS.

Of course, nobody will actually arrest you and force you into this. But you won't be able to get public health insurance without it. (But you will still have to pay for it, anyway.)

Edit: What I outline above seems a basic problem with mixing socialism (cooperation) with capitalism (competition). The most likely outcome: nobody wants to use the public cooperative. Why? Because the capitalists influence the lawmakers to make it that way.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Axial Leader]


Oh I didn't impress you?, you've ruined my day....



[edit on 18-10-2009 by I_am_Spartacus]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Senator Paul is being detained at the Nashville Airport by the TSA
  Posted 18 days ago with 89 member flags
Bruins goalie Tim Thomas takes stand against U.S Government
  Posted 18 days ago with 88 member flags
This is what happens when Ford announces they are hiring
  Posted 19 days ago with 77 member flags
Romney: "I\'m Not Concerned About the Very Poor"
  Posted 9 days ago with 73 member flags
The Girl Killed by Obama: She "never saw it coming"
  Posted 3 days ago with 62 member flags
Ron Paul In Nevada - The Caucus Is Rigged!! - w/VIDEO
  Posted 5 days ago with 60 member flags