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 I believe the US doesn't have free health care and free higher education...

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by FreeFromTheHerd
 


Oh get over it. The constitution also didn't allow women to vote and legalized slavery. You're trying to base your entire system and argument on a 200 year old document in desperate need of a rewrite.




posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
no such thing as free anything from the gov't

you just mean "paid for by taxes"



And what's wrong with that? I have no problem donating some of my taxes to health care for my fellow human beings. I'd rather my tax money go to that and education than to war and prisons.



posted on Jul, 2 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 

Please explain to me. You talk about how many poor kids join up just to get health care and education. Look at some numbers. The kids from the bottom 30% of the income scale only accounted for 27% of the recruits. It's the middle class that's signing up. nationalpriorities.org...


And why are they signing up? Same reasons: For health care and college tuition.



Further, would you explain why we are opposed to universal health care in order to drive people into the military, at the same time Obama is reducing military budgets and strength levels? Do we have two groups of people running this country, each with opposite goals?


I believe we do. You can go with the "two party" example and claim it's Dems vs. Repubs. Or you can go the route of the two groups are the government (who are nothing more than puppets) and the Hands Behind the Shadows that are really running things.



Of course, if you remove perks there will be less interest. That's true of anything in the world. If you add perks there will be more interest. True, but I don't know how that helps the analysis.


Well it illustrates exactly what I'm saying. If anyone can get free health care and education then it makes less people join the war machine.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadeWolf


Oh get over it. The constitution also didn't allow women to vote and legalized slavery. You're trying to base your entire system and argument on a 200 year old document in desperate need of a rewrite.


Get over Constitutional abuses by the federal government?

There is no need to rewrite it when there is an amendment process.

That 200 year old document is what limits the government and doesnt allow them to run rampant over the people, yet you seem to think said document is useless. Coming from an 18 year old "dedicated socialist" (aka parasite) your opinion shows your lack of experience in something we call the real world.

Set yourself on fire kid

edit on 3-7-2012 by FreeFromTheHerd because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 


Thats weird, my friends in the UK go on and on on how terrible free healthcare is. About having to wait long periods of time, for clinic style healthcare.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 

Dear CoolerAbdullah786,

It may very well be that you are a much better thinker than I am. That may explain why you are leaving me in the dust. If the government wanted more people in the war machine, wouldn't it be simpler and less expensive to just raise their pay?

It's hard for me to accept that Congress and the President have been dancing around health care for decades, throwing billions, if not trillions, at it, for the purpose of getting a few more people to enlist. I prefer simpler explanations.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by zonetripper2065
Thats weird, my friends in the UK go on and on on how terrible free healthcare is. About having to wait long periods of time, for clinic style healthcare.


People complain about health care regardless of it being free or not. I have experienced both the UK's national health care system and the American system, including free clinics, the VA, and private.

There is really not much difference, except in how you pay. It depends on the facility, not the payment method. If you go the St.Francis ER the wait is 20 minutes, If you go to General you sit there for hours.

Do you think $1200 is acceptable for a 5 minute visit where they don't do anything, and don't even get the diagnosis right? (see my post page 1) If you took your car to a garage and they spent 5 minutes looking at it, and said it's probably the Johnson rod go see your regular mechanic, who finds it was the jimmy switch, then the garage sends you a bill for a ridiculous amount you'd be thinking this is a complete rip-off right?



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
That 200 year old document is what limits the government and doesnt allow them to run rampant over the people, yet you seem to think said document is useless. Coming from an 18 year old "dedicated socialist" (aka parasite) your opinion shows your lack of experience in something we call the real world.


But the constitution doesn't stop capitalist interests running rampant over the people.

That is the problem, the government is a symptom of that problem, not the cause.

Health care for profit is a conflict of interest. Profit becomes more important than caring for people.


edit on 7/3/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

Just as an aside, hospital operating profits have been in the 2% - 5% range for years. Where do you want them to be?



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Just as an aside, hospital operating profits have been in the 2% - 5% range for years. Where do you want them to be?


It's not the hospitals themselves making the big profits, it's the insurance companies. It's the insurance companies that make health care expensive, not the hospitals. In America you pay at least twice what countries with national health care do.

There is nothing wrong with hospitals making profit as long as that profit is used to better the health care system.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

Dear ANOK,

You know, you may be on to something, looking at the profit margins in the health care industry. May I suggest you look at a slightly different target within the industry? Perhaps the drug manufacturers?

For the most recent quarter these are the healthcare areas that have made over 10% profit:
Drug Manufacturers - Major and Other
Medical Aplliances & Equipment
Medical Instruments & Supplies
Biotechnology

Generic drugs were at 6%
Health care plans were at 4.5%
Hospitals 4.3%
Long-Term Care Facilities at 0.9%

Now this is just the most recent quarter and I didn't list all of the ones outside of the top 5. You can find the chart here. biz.yahoo.com...
Sure, it's hosted by Yahoo, but I pretty much believe it.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


Drug manufacturers were at 16%. What does that come to in real $?

I actually forgot about drugs manufacturers, they're probably more powerful than the insurance companies?

A quick StartPage search came up with this...


There are few industries with as much power in Washington as the pharmaceutical sector. Drug companies have spent $2.3 billion on lobbying and $183 million on campaign contributions since 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.


Auction 2012: How Drug Companies Game Washington

I know it's the pharmas who are mostly funding the war against prop 215.


The nation’s major health insurers are barreling into a third year of record profits, enriched in recent months by a lingering recessionary mind-set among Americans who are postponing or forgoing medical care....
....Yet the companies continue to press for higher premiums, even though their reserve coffers are flush with profits and shareholders have been rewarded with new dividends....


Health Insurers Making Record Profits as Many Postpone Care

It's all about profits. What happens when you lose your job? You lose your house, your car, oh well at least you'll have your heal...oh wait.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
Yeah, great medical system you have. Great for generating lots of cash for nothing.


Never quoted myself before lol but I wanted to add this...

Generating lots of cash, that you pay for. Through your taxes for medicare etc., and through high insurance rates.

It's a complete scam. These high medical costs don't pay doctors wages, they create mass profit for shareholders.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Folks, as noted in an earlier post, we really need to substitute the word “free” with the phrase “tax-payer paid.”

Oxygen from the atmosphere is about the only thing left that’s actually free (carbon trading credits not withstanding).



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

Dear ANOK,

Can we narrow this down at all? It's hard to find a solution until there is some idea of what the problem is.

I think you are saying that Americans spend a lot of money on health care that doesn't go into health care, wait, that can't be right. Maybe it's that we spend a lot of money that isn't spent on the health care and necessary associated costs. Doctors have to buy tongue depressors, etc. But those costs are OK, because they're necessary. Fine, let's go with that for now.

How much government regulation is necessary? After all we spend a lot of money on that. How about malpractice insurance and legal fees? It's not unusual for an OB/GYN to pay $100,000 annually in malpractice insurance. Are companies allowed to make any profit at all? Do we push doctors into giving unnecessary, defensive medicine tests. Do patients use expensive, high-tech, ERs for trivial problems?

I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I'm just asking where you think the problem is. Saying "The Capitalist System," is just a bit too broad.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 09:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeFromTheHerd
How about the simple fact that it's unconstitutional.

Nothing in Article 1 Section 8 authorizes the feds to be involved in either one of those, and only through the twisting of words and redefining the intent of the founding fathers by ignorant jackasses in Congress has led to the current intrusion by the feds.


Just when you had me convinced that you were an auctioneer, now you want me to believe that you're a constitutional scholar as well? Yeah Right!


I think what you really are is a just sore loser, that's what.



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


What I like is how people constantly invoke the Constitution yet there are many things that they believe in that aren't in the Constitution. For instance, capitalism. Capitalism is not once mentioned in the Constitution. Could we make the argument then that Capitalism isn't constitutional?

Furthermore, I love how these guys invoke the Constitution when it benefits them, but then turn their back on it when it comes to things they are opposed to (for instance, the not-Mosque not at Ground Zero amongst other things).



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by charles1952
Dear ANOK,

Can we narrow this down at all? It's hard to find a solution until there is some idea of what the problem is.


Yes, private ownership for profit.


I think you are saying that Americans spend a lot of money on health care that doesn't go into health care, wait, that can't be right. Maybe it's that we spend a lot of money that isn't spent on the health care and necessary associated costs. Doctors have to buy tongue depressors, etc. But those costs are OK, because they're necessary. Fine, let's go with that for now.


You pay a lot of money to make profit for private owners (shareholders).


How much government regulation is necessary? After all we spend a lot of money on that. How about malpractice insurance and legal fees? It's not unusual for an OB/GYN to pay $100,000 annually in malpractice insurance. Are companies allowed to make any profit at all? Do we push doctors into giving unnecessary, defensive medicine tests. Do patients use expensive, high-tech, ERs for trivial problems?


I didn't say anything about government regulations, but why does that worry people so much? If the regulation keeps you from getting ripped-off, what is the problem? The state is supposed to take care of public services, not invade foreign countries for capitalist interests. People in countries with national health care pay half, or less, for health care than you do. They get the same, or better, health care than you do.

Profits don't buy doctors supplies. If they did it wouldn't be a problem, prices for health care would go down, and health care would improve. We want good quality health care at a reasonable price, not healthy bank accounts for people who are lucky enough to own stock.


I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I'm just asking where you think the problem is. Saying "The Capitalist System," is just a bit too broad.


Not really capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, where workers and consumer are exploited for profit, and that is the problem.


edit on 7/3/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 

Dear CoolerAbdullah786,

A few things from the Constitution:

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


You would have a VERY difficult time contending that capitalism is not constitutional.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Jul, 3 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 

Dear ANOK,

The idea that we could have better health care for less cost if only the government would own and run it, flies against tradition, laws, the Constitution, economic theory, experience, and common sense.

I don't think we will have a basis for agreement, although I am always happy to look for one.

With respect,
Charles1952



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join