| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
So US spends double of Australia, France, Germany, Japan, UK, Norway, Sweden, has the less life expectancy and the infant mortally the those countries, can you please explain to me how it is cheapest and better? U.S. has as much government involvement in health care as any other country. I do not support the current American system. I like the American system of 70 years ago. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
GOP roughly rallied to push six-month deterrent POS through to the Senate, who will probably reject it. House will debate the bill tomorrow. Carry on. | ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:06 chickenhawk wrote: So US spends double of Australia, France, Germany, Japan, UK, Norway, Sweden, has the less life expectancy and the infant mortally the those countries, can you please explain to me how it is cheapest and better? EH, The United States has the most advanced medical technology in the world, there is no question about that... it's lifestyle differences that even super technology can't beat. Also the fact that most of the tech goes to the rich anyways... | ||
|
Expurgate
United States208 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:06 BestZergOnEast wrote: Do you know what socialist means? IT means ownership of the means of production by the state. Everywhere this has happened (Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia) you have mass graves. Denmark and Sweden are mixed market economies. Do they have stock markets? Then they are not socialist. Yet. This is actually hilarious. Do you know what socialist means? Because it means ownership of the means of production by the working-class, which may or may not be through public ownership. Your knowledge of history and economics is laughable. You ought to be ignored, in a just universe. | ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
+ Show Spoiler [Round 1] + On July 27 2011 13:38 Probulous wrote: Just thought I would pop in here to play a little game I like to call "Let's compare pages" The OP asks The first post on this page is about Jefferson's approach to the military.  Don't mean to flame but how in all nations did we get here? Let's compare pages. The OP asks How exactly do Americans look at their own debt, and compare it to the current crisis in Europe? At the top of this page we have On July 28 2011 10:52 Expurgate wrote: Yes, in retrospect that turns out to be the case. I'm not describing why I dropped the atomic bombs, after all. Once again, how in all nations did we get here? Edit: Damn, changed page. Oh well... | ||
|
chickenhawk
Portugal339 Posts
U.S. has as much government involvement in health care as any other country. I do not support the current American system. I like the American system of 70 years ago. So please explain to me how came an USA citizen has to pay taxes + insurance to have almost the some care as other people? EH, The United States has the most advanced medical technology in the world, there is no question about that... it's lifestyle differences that even super technology can't beat. Also the fact that most of the tech goes to the rich anyways... Lifestyle differences? You know that in europe we have mcdonals, ribs, coca-cola, sprint. hotdogs, popcorn, smokes, pizza etc? The problem is the half of america never listen to the words preventing medicine. And europe has alot of advanced medical technology too, you are not special. Just because someone goes to space and used a pencil instead of a pen, it does not mean it can't get the job done. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:06 BestZergOnEast wrote: Do you know what socialist means? IT means ownership of the means of production by the state. Everywhere this has happened (Russia, China, Cuba, Cambodia) you have mass graves. Denmark and Sweden are mixed market economies. Do they have stock markets? Then they are not socialist. Yet. Do you even understand your own argument? If Denmark and Sweden are not socialist then what do mass graves have to do with Social Security and government provided health care? | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
Capiche? | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:13 Probulous wrote: Once again, how in all nations did we get here? For lack of a better term, naive libertarianism. Sort of not understanding politics (or for that matter history, economics, logic, etc.) because it doesn't need to be understood because whatever it is it should be demolished and replaced with some system of Rand/Mises-inspired pseudo-feudalist oligarchy that is represented as some vague vision of freedom, prosperity, "good economy," etc. Some people are arguing against this ideology and its mouthpieces and are either ridiculously patient and disciplined or catatonic and slack-jawed. That's how. | ||
|
chickenhawk
Portugal339 Posts
Do you even understand your own argument? If Denmark and Sweden are not socialist then what do mass graves have to do with Social Security and government provided health care? He just does not understand that half of Europe has parties in power with the words socialist in them. | ||
|
aristarchus
United States652 Posts
Most ways of reducing the debt (spending cuts, taxes) are bad for people in general. We will have to do some of them anyway. I think, though, that there are several things that we could do that would actually be good ideas anyway, and also reduce the deficit. I propose two: - Taxes on greenhouse gases (including a gas tax): This makes the market more efficient by taxing externalities, regulates better than hard caps on miles per gallon, etc., has positive national security benefits, and could potentially raise a lot of money. (It's so obvious an idea that basically every other country on earth has already figured it out, at least for gasoline...) - End a lot of business subsidies: Farm subsidies are the most obvious here, but there are plenty of other industries that get them. It's costly, it makes the economy less efficient, and it makes other countries mad at us. Kill three birds with one stone. These don't close the deficit at all, but they actually do add up to meaningful money. | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:19 BestZergOnEast wrote: I do understand my own argument. I have no clue what your question means though. What do mass gravs have to do with social security and universal health care? I'm not sure. My point was societies where you have state ownership of the means of production also had mass graves. This did not occur in nations like Sweden or Norway, with private ownership of the means of production. Capiche? Yeah. So, in your argument it's the "state ownership of the means of production" what's connected to the mass graves. No one is arguing for that. Therefore mass graves are irrelevant to the discussion. | ||
|
BestZergOnEast
Canada358 Posts
| ||
|
Probulous
Australia3894 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:21 jon arbuckle wrote: For lack of a better term, naive libertarianism. Sort of not understanding politics (or for that matter history, economics, logic, etc.) because it doesn't need to be understood because whatever it is it should be demolished and replaced with some system of Rand/Mises-inspired pseudo-feudalist oligarchy that is represented as some vague vision of freedom, prosperity, "good economy," etc. Some people are arguing against this ideology and its mouthpieces and are either ridiculously patient and disciplined or catatonic and slack-jawed. That's how. Right.. Well this is what kept running through my head when I read this thread I know it is off topic but hell so is everything else here. | ||
|
jon arbuckle
Canada443 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:35 BestZergOnEast wrote: | ||
|
chickenhawk
Portugal339 Posts
- End a lot of business subsidies: Farm subsidies are the most obvious here, but there are plenty of other industries that get them. It's costly, it makes the economy less efficient, and it makes other countries mad at us. Kill three birds with one stone. So kill thousands of job to people with no education, so that US starts to buy food at a more expensive price from outsiders, and at the some time provide social security to those new unemployed? is that your way save the economy? | ||
|
aristarchus
United States652 Posts
On July 28 2011 11:38 chickenhawk wrote: So kill thousands of job to people with no education, so that US starts to buy food at a more expensive price from outsiders, and at the some time provide social security to those new unemployed? is that your way save the economy? Yeah, pretty much.  It's not overall more expensive for Americans because every dollar cheaper that food is because of the subsidies is a dollar higher that taxes are. (Actually, much more than a dollar higher, because food is a highly competitive commodity and the price consumers pay is set by a global market, so subsidizing the producers spreads the price reduction around the world, not just within the US.)Food prices are the highest they've been in some time, so you wouldn't get huge unemployment out of this, and definitely not if it's phased in over several years. Industries and companies that can't stay profitable die all the time. That leads to people being unemployed very directly, but not to more unemployment overall. You would never question that it's a good idea to let unprofitable businesses go bankrupt in other industries, so why here? | ||
|
chickenhawk
Portugal339 Posts
You would never question that it's a good idea to let unprofitable businesses go bankrupt in other industries, so why here? Maybe not in USA, but in Europe although we care, it is not the end of the world if an hospital, school etc is wasting more money than it is earning. Also some Industries are important for the state to support them, like car industry and telecommunications. The problem in agriculture is that oil is getting to expensive, and for small communities to survive they must get some help, why do banks have then and they don't? | ||
|
vpatrickd
Indonesia279 Posts
So ending business subsidies is not a good idea. The only way the US government can end their debt is by printing more money = more US dollars. This would depreciate the dollar to record low compared to other currencies, but right now they have no other way. What they can do in the future though, is introduce incentives for local businesses to manufacture consumer goods domestically, stop outsourcing, but keep opening their doors to foreign trades because foreign investments = more money into the economy. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
|
|
|
EPT
