Socialism, Universal Health Care

[cslewislover]

I didn't mean that the people in monastaries or convents are perfect yet. I do think if someone feels inclined to live a life like this - in charity, prayer, and contemplation - then that's a good thing. It's an example of life that can be lived here, that's Godly, although it's not the only example. A very good family life is another example. Still, a lot of the communities are very charity oriented, and that is obviously unselfish. A great thing. So if you want to argue some more about that, OK

[zoegirl]

CS,

I would agree and there is an important distinction. ONe in wich the GOvernment is the one in charge of decisions and one in which a body of CHristians. I am all for charitable giving and caring for the poor.

I don't, however, believe in socialism as a form of govenrment, especially one that is secular. The worldview of socialism, and communism, asusmes that everyone is willing to give all he/she can.

"From each all that they can give and to each according to their need" is the famous saying, right? Except for the fact that people are sinners and will often not work "according to what they can give", especially if they can then be one who needs. And we would end up with the same questions we do now. At what point do we declare that someone doesn't "need" and they can work harder?

When I observe a system that was set-up inHawaii that had to be shut down because perfectly able-bodied people were quitting their jobs because they could get free healthcare, it seems that we see the flaw in the system.

It ASSUMES nobility of character that isn't there in humans.

And to honest, as poor as I am relatively speaking, on a privater schoolteachers salary, I feel that no one, no government should tell me what to do with more and more of my money.

Get on the insurance companies, agreed

[Harry12345]

I think that people should be able to get health insurance through their employer, with the government giving aid to people with special needs.

Everything I've read suggests that socialism really doesn't work in today's world. Mainly because people like to keep what they earn.

It works fine here in the UK.

Would the typical stereotype of bad teeth in the UK be a sort of indicator of this fine work?
.
.

Hey, you don't bring up the 'teeth' thing, and I won't bring up the 'fat' thing. The whole 'teeth' thing here in England is about culture more than anything; our sweets are quite a bit more sugary than yours!

Besides, my teeth are as white as my sins. Hey, that's an interesting observation: America's a Christian country and they have better teeth than us, and Christian evangalists have big, white smiles. I have better teeth than all my athiest friends. I didn't know eternal salvation came with a free dental plan!

@zoegirl: Are you a private schoolteacher? I assumed you were state (now I can't use the whole 'taxes pay your salary' argument. )

[FFC]

As Christians we're to give much of what we earn, right? To be God's "hands" on earth. There's a difference between a Christian type of socialism (which would just be called Christian society, say) and a government imposed socialism. I don't see people making the distinction here on the board. Unfortunately, there is no pure Christian society on earth, except for maybe in a convent or monastary (and it is beyond me why Protestants don't have pure communities like these). If there are some other examples, please give them; that'd be interesting. Anyway, much of all this is idealistic, but it's actually what we're called to do in this world - be the ideal. That's my view.

Makes perfect sense to me.

[Leprechaun]

I would be a 100% advocater of universal health care, I believe it should be right up there with education. At the moment the Irish Govt. seems to be slowly but surely moving towards private hospitals and I am dreading it (although I am and always have been, except for a broken arm once, in perfect -relatively- health).
I think it is wrong that people shouldn't have access to health simply because they are poor nor do I believe that rich people should have access to better health care.
From an economic point of view the demand for healthcare is inelastic so it could be easily surmised that private healthcare would increase prices as in order to gain maximum profits for inelastic goods/services one should raise their price as much as possible.
I am aware however that the Irish Govt. has made a pig's ear of the health system but that's because we have a terrible government not because the system is wrong (I hope they get voted out...and arrested..)
I don't think it would be accepted in America as they hear the word "social" and freak as they believe that the word "social" means "give money to those who aren't willing to work". I do think it would work in Ireland and I hope the next Govt. stops any privatisation.

[zoegirl]

Let's take the issue of education.

YOu say the rich shouldn't have access to better health care. How would a national health care stop that???

The rich have access to better education and always will. There will always be private schools that provide smaller class sizes, more advanced classes, and better equipment. They still p[ay taxes for the public schools.

THe education system is one of the most bloated, beaurocratic systems we have and throwing more money at it doesn't solve the issue.

Do you really think that the government will do any better with a health care? And do you really think that the rich won't be able to have access to better health care? They will be able to pay for better care AND some smart company will realize that and offer better care for them. A national health care will still be worse and have the same complaints as many of tyhe public schools.

I mean, come on, there are doctors that cater to the Hollywood elite cimply because they pay better.

And yes, I do think the people will take advantage of a national health care system. We have seen that with Hawaii, people who had healthcare with their jobs quitting because they knew that the state would provide healthcare. People are not as noble as it is presumed.

[Cross.eyed]

Let's take the issue of education.

YOu say the rich shouldn't have access to better health care. How would a national health care stop that???

The rich have access to better education and always will. There will always be private schools that provide smaller class sizes, more advanced classes, and better equipment. They still p[ay taxes for the public schools.

THe education system is one of the most bloated, beaurocratic systems we have and throwing more money at it doesn't solve the issue.

Do you really think that the government will do any better with a health care? And do you really think that the rich won't be able to have access to better health care? They will be able to pay for better care AND some smart company will realize that and offer better care for them. A national health care will still be worse and have the same complaints as many of tyhe public schools.

I mean, come on, there are doctors that cater to the Hollywood elite cimply because they pay better.

And yes, I do think the people will take advantage of a national health care system. We have seen that with Hawaii, people who had healthcare with their jobs quitting because they knew that the state would provide healthcare. People are not as noble as it is presumed.

Absolutly, money always does the talking. It is a misconception to think universal healthcare will put everyone in the same class.
Just consider this, if I had more resources than others because of wealth, do you think the doctors and hospitals would give me the same treatment as someone who pays what the government allows? I think not!
Good post zoegirl, it's just common sense.

[Furstentum Liechtenstein]

I have an anecdote to tell. You will find it amusing and instructive. First, you'll have to read a bit of background:

I am 51 years old and live in a country that has had socialized healthcare since I was a toddler. The Lord has blessed me with perfect health, a strong body and a nurse for a wife.

I've never really needed this country's healthcare system, and because my wife is a nurse, routine annoyances like vaccinations are given to me in the comfort of my home. For the odd time in my life when I have needed to give blood samples or need X-rays, I get the VIP treatment where my wife works and rarely wait very long...actually, I never wait at all.

I am also a licenced pilot (since 1984) which means that I must get a complete physical every year. Medicare does not pay for a medical exam for the pilot licence, so this has always been an out-of-pocket expense for me. These «pilot medicals» have always been done by a parallel private-for-profit healthcare system that caters to those able to pay. Under Medicare, these private clinics were illegal but tolerated.*

That was the background, now the anecdote:

A physical is never any fun but when I have to go to renew the medical certificate for my flying licence, I am always well surrounded: the private clinic has cushy couches and individual armchairs. There is hot coffee and tea in silver pots available...fresh fruit if I want some...a selection of breads, bagels, croissants, muffins, jams, marmelades, even peanut butter!...calming music fills the waiting room...recent magazines and today's newspapers are available and plentiful. The other people in the waiting room are well-dressed. They appear to be businessmen & women, or professionnals. A hostess comes into the room now and then and leads a client away to a waiting doctor.

About 10 years ago I received a letter in the mail from the private clinic notifying me that they had moved. Their new location is in a downtown office tower. Fine. I made an appointment and arrived extra early to read the newspapers and sip on their great coffee. I exited the elevator at their new location and saw a door with the clinic's name on it. I opened the door and walked in.

I thought I was in the wrong place, so I reopened the door and looked at the name: M******S...yep, this is the right place. So, I walked up to a lineup at what looked like a counter and I got in line. I never wait in line! I'm thinking. I looked around: this was one big room with what looked like church pews behind me. There are bright neon lights on the ceiling. The walls have posters about diseases pasted up. People are sitting in the pews, badly dressed people, crying babies, whining children. This place has sure gone downhill, I thought. I stand about 15 minutes in line and slowly make my way to the counter. My turn! a surly-faced woman looks at me and says «Name?» I give her my name and add «I have an appointment!» She looks on her screen and says curtly «You don't have an appointment.»

I tell her that I am here for my pilot licence and her eyes brighten, «You're in the wrong place! Go back towards the elevator, turn left and you will see the clinic!» I do as she says and I find the right place. I open the big glass door and recognize the pretty receptionist behind the semicircular counter. «Mr. Liechtenstein, how nice to see you! How have you been?»

I felt like telling her that I had just returned from socialized-medicine-Hell across the hall but before I knew it, a pretty hostess was guiding me to the waiting room. I poured myself a good cup of coffee and felt like I had come home. Ahhhhhhh....

FL

*private clinics are now legal but with restrictions, since 2005.

Considering Zoegirl's posts, I think this previous post of mine is now í  propos.

Good post zoegirl, it's just common sense.

I agree.

FL

[Leprechaun]

In an idealized world I believe healthcare should be free for all or at least it should be free for a lot of people, so much so that it would not "pay" to stop working. Also notice I am talking in an Irish context I said health care in Ireland I did not mention Hawaii or Hollywood. Also I said I don't think they should have better health care I didn't say that universal health would solve the problem but it would go some way.
I agree about bureuocracy but this is often caused by political appointments etc. but that's not to say it can't be fixed with appointments on merit, simple interviews, accountability. I didn't advocate "throwing money at the problem" the Irish health system is already overbloated but it would require a rehaul of the system but this does not defeat the prinicple I believe universal health care should be implemented. As for education, public education has been one of the best things for Ireland and the world in general, I hope I never have to live in a world where education is a privelege no matter how nominal the charge might be and to that end i think additional costs to education should be eased or removed. This is what I believe, I have already admitted that Americans don't like this thinking but that doesn't change my opinion I amn't American

[zoegirl]

In an idealized world I believe healthcare should be free for all or at least it should be free for a lot of people, so much so that it would not "pay" to stop working.

But why wou;dn't they? In an idealized world people would be noble enough to see work as a good thing. In our world, people stop working if there is a way out of it.

Also notice I am talking in an Irish context I said health care in Ireland I did not mention Hawaii or Hollywood. Also I said I don't think they should have better health care I didn't say that universal health would solve the problem but it would go some way.

My apologies, I knew you were referring to Ireland but didn't clarify that.

I agree about bureuocracy but this is often caused by political appointments etc. but that's not to say it can't be fixed with appointments on merit, simple interviews, accountability. I didn't advocate "throwing money at the problem" the Irish health system is already overbloated but it would require a rehaul of the system but this does not defeat the prinicple I believe universal health care should be implemented. As for education, public education has been one of the best things for Ireland and the world in general, I hope I never have to live in a world where education is a privelege no matter how nominal the charge might be and to that end i think additional costs to education should be eased or removed. This is what I believe, I have already admitted that Americans don't like this thinking but that doesn't change my opinion I amn't American

My point was in reference to your point that health care would be fair in a universal system. It's never going to be fair.

I don't necessarily disagree about the value of public education, merely the execution. Unfortunately, public education is not something to be proud of in many areas. We have had a junior transfer to our school who received straight A's in her subjects and she cannot write a complete sentence well. After many decades of the execution of government handled systems, I have come to the conclusion that nothing can be done well through bigger government.

Many of the countries that have universal health care are also much smaller.

And that's fine if you think it works well. There are plenty of people who disagree with the execution in the U.K. I disagree with the principle and the idea that it would work well in the U.S.

[Harry12345]

Okay, hopping on board the education bandwagon, even though I agree with Universal Health Care I'll say this:
Universities in England are not socialised - they are private enterprises. Also, Britain's top universities have fared well in international rankings, where four of universities in 2006 came in the world top ten, them being Oxford (2nd behind Havard), Cambridge(3rd), Imperial College London (5th) and University College London (9th). Is this a coinkidink? It may not be...

Our PhDs fare well internationally as well; I know that the Clinical Psychologists working with my mum get invitations to practice in other countries!

On the contrary, Primary Schools, Secondary Schools and Colleges are state-owned, state-funded and state-run. There is a reduced drive for competition... and people are turning 18 not being able to read or write, as zoegirl said.

So does private = better? Does the desire for profit increase quality? In the USA, Universities are also private, and Havard is the best in the world! And yet 'lower-ed' schools, which are state schools, remain relatively lacklustre. I may not agree with privatisation but it's something to think about...

At the end of the day anyway, even though I'll leave University with a £30,000+ debt, I'll have had a good quality education, and a PhD that is valuable overseas and over here

[Leprechaun]

I don't mean this in any offensive way and if it does cause offense I apologise but I merely am stating the way it is perceived.
I don't think American state schools are bad because they are state schools I believe they are bad due to the cirriculum taught. It is often joked about, here in Ireland (and presumably elsewhere), that if we were to fail in an Irish school we could always go to America because there we would be a genius. The American primary + secondary cirriculum is somewhat lacking although (to my knowledg) a lot of this is recovered in Uni (although not everyone goes there) so I think the cirriculum has been lowered to get better results but this inevitably leads to a huge decline in standard.
PS: This is my understanding of the situation although as I am not American I have no personal experience or info about the American cirriculum but from anything I have heard about it it would seem they are behind by several years in terms of what you learn and when. Just to see whether or not I am completely mistaken when do you start learning say......algebra?

[zoegirl]

Algebra is usually broken down in two levels to start, Algebra I and Algebra II. Algebra I at the earliest in most public (and many private) schools is offered sometime between 7th(12-13 yrs old) and 8th grades (13). Many schools start in 6th grade with a pre-algebra class that teaches the basics in using variables. Algebra II is then taken the 9th or 10th grade (14-15 years). Some schools have a pre-calc class with college algebra

There are students, however, that cannot understand the concepts or have not been taught them and so take algebra I their freshmen or sophomore years and then don't take math past algebra II.

[Leprechaun]

pre-calc? Calculus? Hmm I started then when I was say....15? I think. Although I did honours maths (it's broken down here students choose eithe Honours, Ordinary or for the ....more challenged Foundation level. I started algebra with secondary school so say when I was....about.....eh.....I don't know 12? Maths seems similar so can I ask about say Geography? or perhaps science? (Genuine interst here)

[zoegirl]

6th grade is usually an earth science
7th grade life science
8th grade physical science
9th could be environmental or biology depedning on whtehr you are honors or Gofted/Talented
10th could be biology or Chemistry
11th is usually physics or possibly AP BIology
12 th is for electives, Anatomy or Chem II, Biology II (AP Biology), of Physics II