The Reality of Socialized Medicine

[oggbashan]

...

Nothing works without making a profit....do you work for free???

This is why you must get the authority of government involved to try and force it.

Your ignorance is showing again. The UK has thousands of non-profit organizations and charities delivering services. So has the US.

 

[BotanyBoy]

We have the rights to free speech, and the right to own firearms,( with a few rules more rules than the US has) sorry. Maybe you should read our's, instead of just assuming?

You have hate speech laws....without defining hate speech....you don't have free speech.

Cite it...show us where Canada guarantees every citizens right to arm themselves.

LOL too funny, and I should say, it was the people who forced the Government into paying for health care, not the other way around...

And where does the government get it's money to pay for that health care??

Forcibly taking it from the people.

Funny, but you can't refute it.

 

[gunthernehmen]

There is not one right that you have in the US, that Canadians do not also enjoy.

Here's one. As a private citizen going about my own pursuits I can carry a concealed handgun virtually anywhere. Notable exceptions being Federal buildings and schools.

In Canada, unless the internet is lying to me, in order to carry concealed you must have a lawful occupational purpose under the Firearms Act.

It took about 10 seconds to find one right that we have in the US, that Canadians do not also enjoy.

 

[gunthernehmen]

Your ignorance is showing again. The UK has thousands of non-profit organizations and charities delivering services. So has the US.

You might want to take a more detailed look at how non profits operate LOL

Especially given the topic of this thread.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Your ignorance is showing again. The UK has thousands of non-profit organizations and charities delivering services. So has the US.

What ignorance exactly??

Charity is different than a company because it's not an exchange per-se but it STILL has to get paid, it can't run at a loss, in the red forever, people won't run/manage it full time without getting paid because they gotta eat too.

And that's not at all what we are talking about or what you and the other lefties are calling for is it???

The discussion is about a government HC system and what that government system should look like.

Right??

 

[Bray123]

What ignorance exactly??

Charity is different than a company because it's not an exchange per-se but it STILL has to get paid, it can't run at a loss, in the red forever, people won't run/manage it full time without getting paid because they gotta eat too.

And that's not at all what we are talking about or what you and the other lefties are calling for is it???

The discussion is about a government HC system and what that government system should look like.

Right??

As an example, my water is supplied by https://www.dwrcymru.com/
This is a non-profit company serving three million customers according to their web site and the bills they send me.
Dammed commies!

 

[BotanyBoy]

As an example, my water is supplied by https://www.dwrcymru.com/
This is a non-profit company serving three million customers according to their web site and the bills they send me.
Dammed commies!

"non profit" means they aren't growing it for the purpose of generating profit, it doesn't mean they don't make ANY profit, or profitable exchanges. They HAVE to make enough for those to keep doing what they do. They have to profit enough to maintain their shit.

Thus your bill.

If they don't they go under just like many "non-profits" that didn't make enough profit or obtain enough charity to sustain their operations and maintain a pile of "oh shit" money big enough to cover their ass on a bad day.

This bill you and the other members of the water service co-op is the problem most have with HC. There are a lot of folks that can't handle the bill and tons of people who don't think they should pay any out of pocket expense out of principle so they wont pay theirs.

The entire discussion here is how the government should go about making that bill go away.

So the government must either enable a subsidiary of the state (such as an insurance company) as we keep trying to mess with here in the US and failing, OR it must directly do the wealth redistributing itself with a HC system to somehow cover that bill.

Run either in the red or even at break even long enough and eventually it will go under.

 

[TheWhiteBull]

So quick interesting fact for those that talk about private care in the US, the majority of hospitals in the United States are owned/run by religious institutions. I apologize for not having the exact numbers, I did do the research on it a few years ago but I don’t have it on hand or have the time to perform the research again.

Another fund fact, we do supply coverage to everyone federally that can’t afford it in the form of Medicaid. Although participation is based on the States so it’s not the same for everyone.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You have hate speech laws....without defining hate speech....you don't have free speech.

Cite it...show us where Canada guarantees every citizens right to arm themselves.

Did you read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Seems not. ( I post links all the time, no one reads them, google it yourself, but note, it is not laid out like the American one)

And where does the government get it's money to pay for that health care??

Forcibly taking it from the people.

Funny, but you can't refute it.

I am not refuting it? The government raises the health care money through taxation. I am pretty sure that is exactly what I said earlier? I also said exactly that public health care was forced upon Government to enact and fund by the citizens of Canada.

So you figure out a way to explain how a Government, following the will of the people is a problem? I thought your whole complaint was Government doing the exact opposite, by not following the will of the people?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Did you read the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Seems not. ( I post links all the time, no one reads them, google it yourself, but note, it is not laid out like the American one)

Not my job to support your claims.

Considering the kind of restraints you have on both speech and gun ownership you don't have the same gun rights as we do and you've not shown anything to support your claims that you do.

I am not refuting it?

No, you're talking around it.

The government raises the health care money through taxation.

Exactly....so it's the government who's forcing the people to pay for HC collectively.

. I am pretty sure that is exactly what I said earlier?

No....you said the exact opposite.

LOL too funny, and I should say, it was the people who forced the Government into paying for health care, not the other way around...

So you figure out a way to explain how a Government, following the will of the people is a problem?

I thought your whole complaint was Government doing the exact opposite, by not following the will of the people?

No I never said it was a problem....If you Canadians want to vote to take everything from everyone that's fine by me, eliminate all private property and starve 1/3 of your country to death in the name of progress and great leaps forward!! I don't give a shit.

You thought wrong and read that nowhere, totally made up in your head.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

considering the kind of restraints you have on gun ownership you don't have the same gun rights as we do.

Just out of curiosity, what ownership laws do we have that are different?

I can't own a machine gun, but I can own an AR-15, I can't own a Bazooka or an M-50, but I can own a Glock.

However we also do not have this as a right : "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Since at the time of our Independence from England, we had no need to fear of England attacking us and taking us back into the Empire, we have no need for "a right to bear arms".
Note at the time of this amendment, the USA need to have a large army, one that would make England think twice about starting another war. Yet at the time the Government could not afford to fund one. So by enacting the second amendment, they manged to do two things.
First and possibly most important, they gave the citizens the right to own the most modern and lethal weapons of the time. Which no other monarchy, or dictatorship would dare to do. It is possible this one amendment laid out the complete stability required for the American Democracy to be established, and grow.
The second was to have a conscription able armed force at the ready, at no cost to the Government of the day.

Exactly....so it's the government who's forcing the people to pay.

We all pay taxes, even you, and yes taxes are pretty much a pay or else thing, but I fail to see your argument on this. I thought we agreed a long time back, Canadians and Americans can have different wants. Agree to fund different programs.

SEE BELOW FOR YOUR AGREEMENT

No I never said it was a problem....If you Canadians want to vote to take everything from everyone that's fine by me, I don't give a shit.

The decision to fund health care happened in in the 1960's, I am not sure what other "right" we have also had taken away since then, nothing that I remember, but I am a bit older and memory's do fade....

 

[zotique]

Here's one. As a private citizen going about my own pursuits I can carry a concealed handgun virtually anywhere. Notable exceptions being Federal buildings and schools.

In Canada, unless the internet is lying to me, in order to carry concealed you must have a lawful occupational purpose under the Firearms Act.

It took about 10 seconds to find one right that we have in the US, that Canadians do not also enjoy.

That ain't a benefit. It's a fucking threat to others.

What's your per capita handgun murder rate again?

Accidental handgun shooting by children?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Originally Posted by gunthernehmen View Post
Here's one. As a private citizen going about my own pursuits I can carry a concealed handgun virtually anywhere. Notable exceptions being Federal buildings and schools.

In Canada, unless the internet is lying to me, in order to carry concealed you must have a lawful occupational purpose under the Firearms Act.

It took about 10 seconds to find one right that we have in the US, that Canadians do not also enjoy.

That ain't a benefit. It's a fucking threat to others.

What's your per capita handgun murder rate again?

Accidental handgun shooting by children?

No the internet is not lying. No need for a citizen to carry a concealed firearm in Canada. We don't live in a society of fear, of our neighbours, or police or military or Government, or others not listed in general. chuckles

 

[BotanyBoy]

Just out of curiosity, what ownership laws do we have that are different?

I can't own a machine gun, but I can own an AR-15, I can't own a Bazooka or an M-50, but I can own a Glock.

However we also do not have this as a right

That is the most fundamental difference in my mind.

You have legal ownership, your government can take that away from you on a knee jerk whim.

Popular vote? Boom, you're no different than England or New Zealand.

I have a right the government is legally forbidden from infringing upon.

As for what we are allowed to have that varies wildly from state to state but at the federal level we can have bazookas, RPG's, grenade launchers, machine guns, even big shit like tanks, artillery and fighter jets.

Sure you can't buy a lot of the latest and greatest in weapons because national security and shit. But a lot of the generic current stuff and most outdated things sans a few special security concerns like the F-14 Tomcat I can own as a private citizen.

Money is the only limiting factor in most cases.

We all pay taxes, even you, and yes taxes are pretty much a pay or else thing, but I fail to see your argument on this. I thought we agreed a long time back, Canadians and Americans can have different wants. Agree to fund different programs.

My argument is that it is the government is the arbiter of force....not the other way around. Yes the government represents "the people"....but it's not "the people" who kick your door in at 2am and drag you out of your house in cuffs when you violate. It's a government employee with a badge that means they are a representative of the government and a gun/tazer/beat stick to force the governments will upon you.

Yea we for sure agree on that. Hell that's why we have 50 states and why borders are important..... so we can agree to fund different shit and run our societies by different rules.

The decision to fund health care happened in in the 1960's, I am not sure what other "right" we have also had taken away since then, nothing that I remember, but I am a bit older and memory's do fade....

Best of luck with that!

 

[magicalmoments]

#412 above.
I thought as much, no one is promoting Marxist socialism, it's a figment of fearful imagination of a few on the extreme right. So those using it can be called for the bullshit artists they are.

Your attempted explanation of how the Marxist socialist theories are being applied to the health system is very interesting. I don't understand why a lot of yanks fear what has been applied in most first world economies and is working successfully without any of the negatives you have outlined. Either you have been sucked in by the propaganda of the American medical fraternity or you are wilfully ignorant. I suspect a little of both. Any reasonable, open minded, research and analysis of public health systems in the likes of Canada, Australia, Scandinavian and European countries, New Zealand, will demonstrate how wrong you are.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You have legal ownership, your government can take that away from you on a knee jerk whim.

Popular vote? Boom, you're no different than England or New Zealand.

I have a right the government is legally forbidden from infringing upon.

All it takes is the courts to limit the right, or an amendment to the constitution. No one is immune to government intervention. Enough people in the US vote in the right people, ( wrong in your stance though) and your "gun" laws can disappear in a heartbeat.

I have no fear or concern the government will try and forcibly take away our firearms. Sorry but no sale on that. (back to my "the US lives in fear of _____" statement)

The only instance of it even coming remotely close to what you suggest in Canada( google Alan Rock) which was only a firearm registry, similar to automobile registration, over 2 million Canadians who possessed long guns( estimated) refused to comply.

To quote Alfred E Neuman, "what me worry?"

My worry is the Government moving more towards the US on firearms ( hell could freeze over)

You all down there can keep you gun rights, I like not needing to worry about untrained armed idiots walking around with concealed firearms. No worries about going to see a concert and getting shot, Or kids in schools taking drills on school shootings.... etc etc

Btw no I don't need a gun for protection, hell I leave my keys in the truck , house's unlocked, and I sleep damn well at night.

Oh and to keep on topic, I believe in socialised health care....

 

[YDB95]

Your attempted explanation of how the Marxist socialist theories are being applied to the health system is very interesting. I don't understand why a lot of yanks fear what has been applied in most first world economies and is working successfully without any of the negatives you have outlined. Either you have been sucked in by the propaganda of the American medical fraternity or you are wilfully ignorant. I suspect a little of both.

I think so too. Here's my theory as to the culprits:
1. For decades, the Republicans have been engendering hatred of government. For far too long, no one even really tried to rebut their claims that the government is out to get you and can't do anything right. (Also, relatively poor salaries and lousy working conditions for federal employees have made this something of a self-fulfilling prophecy: the public sector struggles to attract the best and the brightest, and they rarely stay long when they do go that route. I worked in the civil service briefly years ago, and I wouldn't go back for a billion dollars.)
2. The extreme aversion to taxes you've seen here is all too common. Essentially since Reagan, the Republicans have been telling Americans they can have their cake and eat it too, and people want to believe it. That is probably going to continue until a critical mass of American voters get it through their heads that no, you cannot cut taxes and also balance the budget. At least not without budget cuts that are going to hurt everyone but the ultra-rich.
3. Thanks to years of predatory practices by big Pharma, people tend to think the cost of health care is much, much higher than it really is. They look at their medical bills and think if the government tries to cover that, it'll be a budgetary disaster. What they don't realise is that the price has nothing to do with the cost, and is based entirely on what the pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies think they can get away with.
4. The mainstream media, decades of Republican whining about liberal bias notwithstanding, tends to repeat anti-reform propaganda as if it were objective fact, or at least as one side of the story. So people hear a lot of nonsense about "death panels" and worse, with no mention of the fact that they're not based on anything resembling reality.

 

[gunthernehmen]

That ain't a benefit. It's a fucking threat to others.

How is it a threat?

 

[gunthernehmen]

No the internet is not lying. No need for a citizen to carry a concealed firearm in Canada. We don't live in a society of fear, of our neighbours, or police or military or Government, or others not listed in general. chuckles

Who's afraid?

 

[gunthernehmen]

#412 above.

#426, #327, #305 and #289 above, what was the question again?

 

[YDB95]

How is it a threat?

The remainder of the post you quoted answers that question.

 

[zotique]

How is it a threat?

I can only repeat what Fuzzy said above:



"You all down there can keep you gun rights, I like not needing to worry about untrained armed idiots walking around with concealed firearms. No worries about going to see a concert and getting shot, Or kids in schools taking drills on school shootings.... etc etc"

 

[YDB95]

I can only repeat what Fuzzy said above:



"You all down there can keep you gun rights, I like not needing to worry about untrained armed idiots walking around with concealed firearms. No worries about going to see a concert and getting shot, Or kids in schools taking drills on school shootings.... etc etc"

Seconded! As an American living overseas, I can tell you there is a real difference, and it's a welcome one.

 

[BotanyBoy]

I think so too. Here's my theory as to the culprits:
1. For centuries, liberal Americans have been engendering hatred of government.

2. The extreme aversion to taxes you've seen here is all too common. Essentially since the Boston tea party December 16, 1773.

Fixed those two.

And adding my 3rd, "progressives" won't do any of HC plans they want in their state and can't come up with a good reason to try and force all the other states into it.

They won't set the example and lead the way, so they won't get what they want.

 

[magicalmoments]

#450 above
Who's afraid? Hah!
Any country that has 120 guns for each 100 citizens (and that's not counting military and law enforcement) is a country living in fear. That's twice as many guns as the next most well armed. That's a shitload of fear.