Confused Briton seeks clarification from right -wing Americans

[Alex_P]

To continue this point those of us who wish for private care(as I have) instead of government run, do we get that tax money back? Taxes will HAVE to go up, you can't add a trillion+dollars to the deficit without them increasing (even on the middle class). SO why should those of us who go to college and get those 50-200k middle class jobs have to pay for insurance twice?

Why do the states that actually developed their industrial and cultural centers have to pay for some of the states that aren't as well-off? (Answer: because the whole country's kinda fucked if they don't.)

Perhaps it is because Republicans tend to have more people who fashion themselves as independent thinkers.

I would believe them more if they stopped telling me to go read Atlas Shrugged.

-- Alex

 

[Doug]

I honestly doubt these people actually believe the lies they are spewing... They are only saying these things to cause mass panic in the public, just for the purpose of making the democrats look bad.... They know deep down that our health care system is absolute shit being like the 37th in the whole word, it's just that they are too rich to care for the common people.....

Still, its better than the NHS is quite a few area's - BUT you do spend twice as much of your GDP on it than we do, so its probably just the fact that its badly underfunded, and has been from day 1; Add to that, our current government hasn't got a clue, and assumes forcing hospitals to meet targets == better NHS!

 

[Doug]

Also, I have this image of these nut ball FOX watchers going "Oh no, the poor MIGHT SURVIVE THEIR ILLNESSES! WE MUST STOP THIS SOCIAL JUSTICE!"

 

[Kedcom]

The NHS is NOT FREE. It is free at the point of use, but you still pay shit loads in taxes to keep those dirty, understaffed hospitals running. And if you take out private healthcare you still have to pay for the public healthcare you will never use.

Let's be honest people, we all know the NHS is crap. If people didn't think it was free it would be a national disgrace. Instead its apparently something to be proud of.

I totally disagree. You can call the NHS badly run, overpriced and in need of reform of its own but it is NOT a national disgrace.

A national disgrace would be allowing the poor and vulnerable and old to just get steadily sicker and die because they have no way of paying for their medical care.

A national disgrace would be allowing uninsured and desperate people (even many postgrad Americans I have met) to live in a constant state of fear that they will be in an accident and taken to the emergency room and then bankrupted when they get the bill.

A national disgrace would be giving employers the power of God over you through the knowledge that if they let you go and you can't get a new job immediately then you have no health cover.

A national disgrace would be to find a person who had been stabbed in the street and for that person to ask for your help but beg you not to call an ambulance as they had no ambulance insurance and would then have a $2000 bill to pay as happened to me in AUSTRALIA of all places.

The NHS is something to be proud of even if it needs more hard work.

 

[Dramatic Flare]

I'm honestly pretty tired of all the Republican hate. I'll say what I always say, both sides have good to them, and both have BAD to them.

It's not so much Republican hate, its more idiot republican hate..... Nobody is blaming all republicans, just the idiots who are unwilling to see the world as it is...

You'd be surprised how many quotes I get for saying anything having to do with my Republican viewpoint. Most of them are incredibly hateful.

I'm sure they are, It just happens to be a bad time to be a republican... People blame all republicans for the likes of Fox News, and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.... But people who are truly intelligent realize that there are idiots on both sides and don't blame all republicans on the actions of a few

Yeah, but that's the thing--idiot Republicans have massive media outlets and use it to influence the party.

How many idiot Democrats can we name with that kind of a soapbox and power over the party?

Obama, and (former president) Clinton. Sorry to break it to you, but anytime I've questioned something Obama or Clinton has said or done I have gotten flack from a radical democrat, and every word he speaks seems to be like honey to the slobbering masses. On the flip side, they're not idiots,

Then what you're saying has nothing to do with my point.

your new point has nothing to do with my argument.

How did I make a "new" point that has nothing to do with your argument in a post that was up before you made your argument: in fact, the post you are responding to with your argument?

Why are you arguing semantics with me at what is two in the morning instead of just countering my damn position?
As for your use of sarcastic quotation marks, you had a point against which I argued. You then pointed out that what I was saying has nothing to do with your previous argument. To separate the two and prevent confusion, I included the word "new" to specify that I was referring to your new post, not your original point.

Perhaps it is because Republicans tend to have more people who fashion themselves as independent thinkers.

I would believe them more if they stopped telling me to go read Atlas Shrugged.

-- Alex

I didn't say they were good at it, just that they did.
However, yes I agree that you should ignore most of the points made by anyone who lives by Ayn Rand's creed.

 

[SimpleChimp]

It's taxes my UK cousin. American's dont want to pay taxes so that illegals, or poorer citizens can clog up the hospitol systems. The truth is rich canadians come to america for their healthcare because the lists are packed in canada.

Actually, the waiting lists have been shortening year over year. True, there are still waiting lists but that's because if you have a non-essential surgery and don't want to pay (yes, Dorothy, you actually can pay to receive treatment in Canada.. doctors have the choice between working in the public care system and working privately and some, mostly in specialist services, choose private) then you have to wait for all the people that have critical and urgent care needs. How horrid.

It's rather humorous, people saying they don't want to pay for their neighbour, but the truth is that Canada spends about half as much on a per capita basis for health care. And we're not *nearly* the best system out there. So anybody who's worried about paying for your neighbour? You basically already are. Except instead of it going directly into health care for your neighbour, it's going into the pockets of the insurance industry and the HMOs. Which means you still have to worry about your neighbour getting sick and not feeling like he can afford to get it treated before it becomes serious -- and contagious -- and infects you.

I really don't understand people who can't see the selfish argument to public health care. I'm not paying to keep my neighbours and the poor healty because I'm kind or generous. I'm paying to keep them healthy so I don't have to worry about them making ME sick.

I had just typed out a long argument and realized, arguing on the internet especially over politics is mute. We are both set on our differing views, and will only be able to concede on small points that make very little purpose. I respect your views, but calmly have to say they are not mine. I pay car insurance for my car so that if i get into an accident i can get it fixed. Yes that money goes to other people that pay to the same company, but it doesn't go out to cover some random person who gets into a car crash. Why should i pay for his car breaking down, or him getting into an accident? I just make sure that if it happens to me i am covered.

Yes it is selfish, but i believe that individuals should look out for their own well being, not the government. My tax money should go to the troops, not to health care, and not to be used to bail out failing countries. I'd rather pay more taxes to support our boys (and girls), then to pay random peoples health needs, why should the government be worried about such peoples well beings while they are sending female soldiers out with out tampons and other basic amenities?

I know thats an off shoot of the original question, and that i started off by saying i didn't want to argue politics. I am just stating my reasons for believing the way i do.

 

[Dramatic Flare]

your new point has nothing to do with my argument. Think about it. Would Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, or Glenn Beck be so widely known and in some cases respected if they were complete dunces?

Ah.. the "But everybody else is doing it!" argument. Yeah.. that works well.

That's not specifically Republican, that's all media in general. If you're arguing that all of the American media system is screwed up and realistically inconsequential then.... I agree with you. Why are we arguing?

I know you are tempted to answer yes but realistically the answer is no.

Sorry, that argument is called "Appeal to the masses" and it's not a valid argument. In order to show that they aren't complete dunces, it is required to put forward various opinions they hold that aren't that of complete dunces.

Appeal to the masses requires that I actually appeal to the masses, not point out that the obvious ass who likes to take rhetorical questions and answer them with an opposite opinion of the poster just to ruin his argument has had his game called beforehand.
Your right, I should go find evidence! then someone can point out its appealing to a higher authority, which is also a "invalid" argument.

Republicans can think too, and I have listened to them become enraged as their senators failed to do what was asked of them. Perhaps it is because Republicans tend to have more people who fashion themselves as independent thinkers. Thus, they wouldn't listen to Limbaugh or Fox if all they received for their trouble was drivel.

(emphasis added)
Fallacy of supposition. Runs smack-gob into the fact that when polls were done of the American public, those that believed Iraq was responsible for taking out the WTC were overwhelmingly Fox news watchers. It seems most Fox news watchers were quite happy watching drivel. In addition, studies have shown that people who are less educated are less likely to watch or look for opinions which are different from those they already hold. Or in short, dumb people watch dumb news. Smart people watch all kinds of news.

I would like to point out my previous post made on this subject to Alex, which basically supports your position. I did not say they "are" independent thinkers, only that they fashioned themselves as such.
Right, and the people who believe Obama is the next greatest thing since their own creation are just as unwilling to change their own positions even when he does things that could have potentially horrible consequences. My point is that both sides are guilty of the crime of idiocy, usually in equal measure.
Also, polls are statistics, and it is generally agreed that around half of all statistics are made up on the spot so I'm highly unlikely to trust them. Never mind the whole fiasco of 4chan bombing a time magazine poll. [http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/27/time-magazine-throws-up-its-hands-as-it-gets-pwned-by-4chan/]

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

I don't really have a strong opinion for either side, but I'll play devils advocate here.
The semi intelligent arguments against it are that that Obama's healthcare system will be far from free, because taxpayer money will inevitably go into it, and this will also make it so that you HAVE to pay for health coverage, whereas before you had a choice whether or not you wanted to buy health insurance. Public healthcare existing means that the quality of medical care will decline because doctors will be much busier with more patients, and it will further destabilize the economy by removing the health insurance industry.

The ACTUAL reason most right wing activists oppose it is mainly because it is a socialistic plan, and they're conditioned to think that socialism is evil and a precursor to communism. I've also heard some stuff about it being exploited by illegal immigrants or something along those lines, though that happens anyways with our current system.

 

[Alex_P]

Now that you mention it, it's very reminiscent of the move from Creationism to Intelligent Design

They're playing from the same playbook, yes. But the Creationists kinda suck at it in comparison to the main thrust of the "culture wars".

There's defining the political language, e.g. "socialized medicine", "political correctness". It's the very essence of thought-corrupting language yet nobody calls that "Orwellian" because the same process has already been used to redefine "Orwellian" to mean "socialist".

There's also acting offended to force deference. Civil society is based on compromise and this approach exploits the natural desire to accommodate others. It's a huge part of the Creationist movement: you have to talk about how basic science education is some kind of monumental attack on your cultural identity. Fox News is a great platform for this, since you can have a 24/7 stream of people acting offended about anything that happens to be happening right now.

Then there's essentialism. This kind of strategic framing -- turning big sweeping self-serving generalizations into definitional concepts -- goes great with essentialism, which is very much the post-Nixon Republican party's stock in trade. The modern Left has too few members who actually understand the underpinnings of its own core beliefs (not to mention a wishy-washier idea of what those core beliefs are) to mount an effective resistance on this front, it seems.

It plays upon people's natural cynicism and distrust of politicians: the truth must be somewhere in the middle of what the two sides are arguing.

All politicians are crooked.
All statistics are lies.
All beliefs are subjective, personal opinions.
These are great slogans for getting crooked, lying politicians with ridiculous personal beliefs into office. And every time you get one in and he fucks something up or disgraces himself, it gets easier easier to vote in the next one.

-- Alex

 

[Dramatic Flare]

I'm honestly pretty tired of all the Republican hate. I'll say what I always say, both sides have good to them, and both have BAD to them.

It's not so much Republican hate, its more idiot republican hate..... Nobody is blaming all republicans, just the idiots who are unwilling to see the world as it is...

You'd be surprised how many quotes I get for saying anything having to do with my Republican viewpoint. Most of them are incredibly hateful.

I'm sure they are, It just happens to be a bad time to be a republican... People blame all republicans for the likes of Fox News, and Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.... But people who are truly intelligent realize that there are idiots on both sides and don't blame all republicans on the actions of a few

Yeah, but that's the thing--idiot Republicans have massive media outlets and use it to influence the party.

How many idiot Democrats can we name with that kind of a soapbox and power over the party?

Obama, and (former president) Clinton. Sorry to break it to you, but anytime I've questioned something Obama or Clinton has said or done I have gotten flack from a radical democrat, and every word he speaks seems to be like honey to the slobbering masses. On the flip side, they're not idiots,

Then what you're saying has nothing to do with my point.

your new point has nothing to do with my argument.

How did I make a "new" point that has nothing to do with your argument in a post that was up before you made your argument: in fact, the post you are responding to with your argument?

Why are you arguing semantics with me at what is two in the morning instead of just countering my damn position?

Because I don't give a damn about your damn position? If I'm talking about one thing, don't throw some tangentially related argument at me and bury it so I have to read what you said over again to figure out you weren't actually saying Obama and Clinton are as idiotic as Limbaugh and Glenn Beck.

Wait a minute, how does

Obama, and (former president) Clinton. Sorry to break it to you, but anytime I've questioned something Obama or Clinton has said or done I have gotten flack from a radical democrat, and every word he speaks seems to be like honey to the slobbering masses. On the flip side, they're not idiots, but they're not the gods they really, really are made out to be.

wind up being buried, and at what point was any correlation between them and Limbaugh drawn? You asked for people who were Democrats and had incredibly huge soap-box sway over their party and I provided some, and then to cover the back argument agreed they weren't really all that idiotic. Later I made the point that, really, none of the people on the list are all that idiotic, it has just been assumed that they are idiotic by you, and you have not really listened to an argument in the other direction.

I mean, if you really don't give a damn then don't run me through a semantic circle. My cohesion skills may be fatigued at the moment but they haven't failed for anyone other than you yet. Admittedly, it was tangential but that has to do with the fact my main argument has been that no one is above idiocy, but none of the party leaders are really all that stupid either.

 

[murphy7801]

The NHS is NOT FREE. It is free at the point of use, but you still pay shit loads in taxes to keep those dirty, understaffed hospitals running. And if you take out private healthcare you still have to pay for the public healthcare you will never use.

Let's be honest people, we all know the NHS is crap. If people didn't think it was free it would be a national disgrace. Instead its apparently something to be proud of.

Actually nhs pretty good because it has really advance equipment are medical equipment is normally better than the germans! and on the dirty side yes but thats being worked on. Also hospitals would run alot better if politicians had no hand in them because they keep bring in so many system changes it sometimes gets in the way of the medicine part.

 

[Timotei]

When it comes to America, it's just best to ignore what we say and laugh at our overall idiocy.

 

[PumpActionJesus]

Why do you not want a free health service when the option for private care will still exist?

To answer shortly and quickly. If we have a state health care system everyone will be charge for it regardlessly, even if you choose to use private care doctors.

Then there is the economics side of it.

America is the only hyper power in the world, give its people free health care pweeease.

Never had a bad time with the NHS(broken arms, leg been in and out when ever.)

I also went private for other things but i love how the NHS covers so much.

The taxes implied on the people of britain of minute, everyone pays them and everyone can benifit from them. Why do republicans tend to also look at canada's socialism as a bad thing :/

Its like america, but safer.

America, F%$£ YEH!!! Comin again to save the mother F$££ing health care!

 

[asinann]

I didnt care, Then they pulled the NHS into the arguement.

How dare they! Stupid conservative nut-jobs, On WE are allowed to slag off our health service!

Get your own, THEN slag it off!

Because some people are too shallow-minded to see the truth. It happens with just about everybody... well, here at least.

Its a power grab, and Orwellian is just a descriptive of how they are presenting itself. Doing a little research you will easily find that the president is back and forth on exactly what is in the bill (of which there are several different versions, not just one) and honestly if you take a historical, or definitive standpoint it is socialism.

Problem is, "socialism" has been so overused in the last 20 years, both correctly and incorrectly, that it has now become empty rhetoric. Nazi, likewise, but the terms are in essence the same, because Nazi stands for National Socialist. Just look at what socialist governments did in 1915-30 Russia and 1930-36 Germany and make the comparison of what the president is saying.

Also, "free" is not as free as you would expect. I don't want my neighbor paying for my health care because I don't want to pay for his. A tax increase is mandatory to be able to pay for it, so it's not "free." There is also going to be rationing within the bill, as it stands in each version, which is due to the fact that they cannot simply afford it for everyone, and the poor will lose out there still.

Also, I want MY CHOICES not the government choosing what health care I will be able to get. Within each version of the bill there are stipulations saying that all major decisions will be made by a government bureaucrat, which takes time that could, and will cause unnecessary mortality and morbidity, due to the lack of immediate on site decision making. I would rather have a doctor, not a politician, make recommendations and keep myself in charge, rather than have a corrupt power hungry politician in charge of my health.

Maybe I'm too much on the "self responsibility" thing because I'm not some mentally deficient, pathetic simpleton who requires the government to hold my hand for every little thing in the world.

Fair point, Fairly rational at least. Y'see the thing is, i know an increase in tax is on the cards, But think of the number of lives it could save? With taxpayer money going into healthcare shouldn't that also bring up the standard of healthcare on the bottom line?

Also, just because something calls itself socialist or a republic doesn't mean it actually is. The USSR, China and North Korea all call themselves republics. In fact, almost every communist nation calls itself a republic somewhere in it's full name.

Republicans are hated in the US because they always try first to fear monger, then when that doesn't work they go search for some piece of dirt that really shouldn't be considered a high crime or misdemeanor, but since the republican party wants back in power, they go for an impeachment based on it. Ronald Regan (the patron saint of the current republican party) did nothing but cut taxes on the wealthy and kill as many public services as he could. Obama is proposing raising taxes to the rate they were at in 1985. Every republican administration from 1980 to present has cut the crap out of services while raising military spending and lowering taxes on the upper class and corporations.

Democrats aren't a whole lot better, but that's mostly because the party is schizophrenic due to constant attacks by republicans. What we need over here is some sort of viable third party, but every time one attempts to form at the state level, the parties group up and pass a law to make sure those new parties can't get on ballets. If you can't get on the ballet you can't get elected.

Both parties are crap, but you have to pick one or the other.

No, you don't. There are other parties. I hate this "lesser of two evils" sh*t. I swear if America had to vote and the Democrat was Stalin and the Republican was Hitler, only 1/8th would vote independant/Libertarian/etc.

Really? Then how the hell is it that only those two parties are allowed to hold primaries and get government money for their presidential campaigns? There was an attempt in Oregon to BAN all 3rd party candidates from the presidential ballots. This includes independents, without that little R or D you aren't a viable presidential candidate. Name the last third party candidate for president that came even remotely close to winning. Give up? It was before the dems and republicans were even in the picture in their current forms. And don't say Perot or Nader, they were just there to take votes off one party or the other (Perot took them from Bush 1 and Dole, Nader from Gore.)

I mean sorry come back later when we have a balanced budget and a surplus and the idea would sound a lot more rational.

We had one, the republicans squandered the whole thing in under a year. Spent it all on tax cuts to the wealthy if I remember right.

If by 'wealthy' you mean "Iraq and Afghanistan", then yes....you remember correctly.

Except that the money was gone before those wars started. Bush went right in and started with the tax cutting and the increases in military spending.

 

[curlycrouton]

I bloody love the NHS. They've fixed my broken bones more times than I care to mention.

[small]Bloody flimsy bikes....[/small]