|
|
Post by ebuzzmiller on Feb 8, 2018 12:52:58 GMT
Brits?
I mean I get the arguments for it being flawed, over-stretched etc, but even it's biggest critics view it as flawed but good overall.
So is the argument Trump made that he doesn't understand it or is he just a shill for the insurance lobby.
(hint: it's probably both)
Trust Donnie Tinyhands to be against a system just about every western democracy agreed was a good one half a century ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by ebuzzmiller on Feb 8, 2018 12:53:23 GMT
And to the libertarian knuckle-draggers who will inevitably bitch about 'tax being theft'; what would you rather pay tax for, healthcare for the people or a pointless nuclear weapon upgrade?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 13:02:29 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves?
What if I don't want government "help?"
What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills?
|
|
|
|
Post by ebuzzmiller on Feb 8, 2018 13:08:38 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves? What if I don't want government "help?" What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills? That just means 'I'm a complete selfish misanthrope'. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 13:43:18 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves? What if I don't want government "help?" What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills? Then why don't you put out your own fires and catch your own burglars and build your own roads? |
|
|
|
Post by zos on Feb 8, 2018 15:04:50 GMT
I've never met anyone who doesn't consider it one of our crowning achievements as a nation, especially considering when and how poor we were when it was set up . The only argument ever, seems to be to what extent it should be funded and how much "bureaucracy" and wastage there may be.
Since it's start I think there has been a year on year rise of 4% and all Governments pretty much honoured that until Cameron/Osborne in 2010 lowered it by about half and also demanded cuts of 22 billion within a decade.
With an aging population and medical advances costing more, that was always going to be impossible and it seems that austerity has been used as an opportunity to bring in some right wing ideology and allow more creeping privatisation (started by Blair).
To me, personally, the idea that being sick could mean you lose your home and life savings as in the US is just obscene and it's not even as if they were spending less or getting value for money as they don't. It's just a free for all for "big pharma" to make billions ripping off those most in need.
The idea that ones taxes could be used to save the lives of strangers has come to be seen as such an awful thing in America that mean spiritedness is actively championed and UHC is seen as some form of evil communism.
A country that says it is an inalienable right to own guns, but not to be healthy without the possibility of going bankrupt has no business calling itself civilised.
|
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Feb 8, 2018 16:27:27 GMT
The more do-gooders have screwed with health care in the US, the worse and more expensive it's got.
I have an older co-worker who was told by a doctor last month to get a colonoscopy. The new Obamacare regulated insurance we have refuses to pay for it! Even though a doctor ordered it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 17:38:11 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves? What if I don't want government "help?" What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills? I have always advocated that people like you should have a one time only option to opt out of NHS healthcare cover and your tax/national insurance contributions adjusted accordingly. Of course once you opt out you are never allowed to opt back in and will receive no NHS treatment for the rest of your life no matter how sick you get. And since you don't want to "pay anyone's bills" then it seems fair that you can opt yourself out of the fire and police services as they're socialised and subsidised services as well. If not you can pay thousands of pounds a year upfront to cover the true cost of the police and fire services protection in your area. And you can opt out of sending any children you may have to state run schools unless you want to pay the actual cost of educating your children(£3000 PA per child). If you don't like the government "helping by offering these services to its citizens then why don't you fuck off to a country where the government doesn't offer these services,see how long you last. |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Feb 8, 2018 18:20:16 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves? What if I don't want government "help?" What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills? I have always advocated that people like you should have a one time only option to opt out of NHS healthcare cover and your tax/national insurance contributions adjusted accordingly. Of course once you opt out you are never allowed to opt back in and will receive no NHS treatment for the rest of your life no matter how sick you get. And since you don't want to "pay anyone's bills" then it seems fair that you can opt yourself out of the fire and police services as they're socialised and subsidised services as well. If not you can pay thousands of pounds a year upfront to cover the true cost of the police and fire services protection in your area. And you can opt out of sending any children you may have to state run schools unless you want to pay the actual cost of educating your children(£3000 PA per child). If you don't like the government "helping by offering these services to its citizens then why don't you fuck off to a country where the government doesn't offer these services,see how long you last. But the police can't arrest you though, right? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 19:24:19 GMT
I have always advocated that people like you should have a one time only option to opt out of NHS healthcare cover and your tax/national insurance contributions adjusted accordingly. Of course once you opt out you are never allowed to opt back in and will receive no NHS treatment for the rest of your life no matter how sick you get. And since you don't want to "pay anyone's bills" then it seems fair that you can opt yourself out of the fire and police services as they're socialised and subsidised services as well. If not you can pay thousands of pounds a year upfront to cover the true cost of the police and fire services protection in your area. And you can opt out of sending any children you may have to state run schools unless you want to pay the actual cost of educating your children(£3000 PA per child). If you don't like the government "helping by offering these services to its citizens then why don't you fuck off to a country where the government doesn't offer these services,see how long you last. But the police can't arrest you though, right? Absolutely in the same way they can't arrest homeless people or the unemployed who don't pay any taxes towards police costs.😞 We are a nation of laws our government has granted the police the power to enforce those laws. Everyone is subject to those laws but if you wish to live in a libertarian society and opt out of socialised systems then unless you pay the actual cost of maintaining the police in your area then you are offered none of the protections they afford tax paying citizens but are still subject to obeying the laws of the land and are penalised accordingly for breaking them. I would be in favour of setting aside a part of Britain for libertarians to live in. They can operate autonomously and build their own society,no central government shall oversee them,no police or fire service shall protect them,no school service shall educate their children,no NHS service will ever treat them. And they'll never have to pay taxes again. The kicker is they must renounce their citizenship and give up their rights as British citizens. How long do you think such a society would last? |
|
|
|
Post by ayatollah on Feb 8, 2018 19:33:05 GMT
But the police can't arrest you though, right? Absolutely in the same way they can't arrest homeless people or the unemployed who don't pay any taxes towards police costs.😞 We are a nation of laws our government has granted the police the power to enforce those laws. Everyone is subject to those laws but if you wish to live in a libertarian society and opt out of socialised systems then unless you pay the actual cost of maintaining the police in your area then you are offered none of the protections they afford tax paying citizens but are still subject to obeying the laws of the land and are penalised accordingly for breaking them. You people are lunatics, you know that? So basically theit own nation. I think they'd be fine provided you leave them be. But you probably wouldnt. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 8, 2018 19:59:53 GMT
Absolutely in the same way they can't arrest homeless people or the unemployed who don't pay any taxes towards police costs.😞 We are a nation of laws our government has granted the police the power to enforce those laws. Everyone is subject to those laws but if you wish to live in a libertarian society and opt out of socialised systems then unless you pay the actual cost of maintaining the police in your area then you are offered none of the protections they afford tax paying citizens but are still subject to obeying the laws of the land and are penalised accordingly for breaking them. You people are lunatics, you know that? So basically theit own nation. I think they'd be fine provided you leave them be. But you probably wouldnt. "Lunatics hey😀 As an American why have you accepted a socialized police and fire service for decades without complaint yet many on the right have bleated for years that socialized medicine was the path to communism. Why shouldn't the police and fire services be opened up to competition and the private sector? After all free market capitalism beats socialized and government regulated systems every time right? Why has no Republican adminstration sort to correct this massive oversight at either the state or national level? How could such a socialized service operate within America for so long with no Republicans challenging it? And just before you try and argue that the police and fire service are not socialized services,here are the two core principals that the world first socialized medical system the NHS was founded on. 1) Free at the point of access 2) Treatment/Service based on need not ability to pay. Those are the exact same principals that the police and fire service operate under. Can you give a substantive rebuttal of my points or as with most on this board is that beyond You? |
|
|
|
Post by scienceisgod on Feb 8, 2018 21:18:20 GMT
What's wrong with people being expected to take care of themselves? What if I don't want government "help?" What if I don't care enough about you to pay your bills? I have always advocated that people like you should have a one time only option to opt out of NHS healthcare cover and your tax/national insurance contributions adjusted accordingly. Of course once you opt out you are never allowed to opt back in and will receive no NHS treatment for the rest of your life no matter how sick you get. And since you don't want to "pay anyone's bills" then it seems fair that you can opt yourself out of the fire and police services as they're socialised and subsidised services as well. If not you can pay thousands of pounds a year upfront to cover the true cost of the police and fire services protection in your area. And you can opt out of sending any children you may have to state run schools unless you want to pay the actual cost of educating your children(£3000 PA per child). If you don't like the government "helping by offering these services to its citizens then why don't you fuck off to a country where the government doesn't offer these services,see how long you last. I don’t think you’ve thought this through because the whole argument behind programs like Obamacare and the individual mandate is that health care was expensive on account of not enough healthy people buying in to offset the cost for sick people. If you allow healthy people to opt out, they will, and the cost will be that much higher for sick people, prompting people on the margin to opt out as well. Think about it this way. You’re poor (I know Libs, it’s hard to imagine). Are you going to be healthier spending what little you have on food, or on pharmaceutical drugs? NHS doesn’t make people healthy. It’s not about “being hit by a bus”. 80% of health care spending is for managing chronic lifestyle disease. You also don’t understand something about America. We don’t restrict our services to only people who have paid into the system. Unlike NHS, we are required to treat non-citizens and even illegals. I have a different idea for an opt out. Instead of allowing people to not pay certain taxes, like for schools, just give everyone the money that government would have spent on their behalf. In America, public school costs WAY more than $3000 per child. DC public schools, the worst in the nation, spend $30,000 per child. You could hire a live-in personal tutor! You underestimate what people actually think of government services. Sure everyone likes the NHS. Until they get the hundreds of thousands of dollar instead. If people cared about their health they wouldn’t be as obese. They value other things, demonstrably. That’s why your ideas have to mandatory. |
|
|
|
Post by scienceisgod on Feb 8, 2018 21:32:35 GMT
With an aging population and medical advances costing more, that was always going to be impossible and it seems that austerity has been used as an opportunity to bring in some right wing ideology and allow more creeping privatisation (started by Blair). To me, personally, the idea that being sick could mean you lose your home and life savings as in the US is just obscene and it's not even as if they were spending less or getting value for money as they don't. It's just a free for all for "big pharma" to make billions ripping off those most in need. The idea that ones taxes could be used to save the lives of strangers has come to be seen as such an awful thing in America that mean spiritedness is actively championed and UHC is seen as some form of evil communism. A country that says it is an inalienable right to own guns, but not to be healthy without the possibility of going bankrupt has no business calling itself civilised. England never implemented “austerity”. They merely decreased the rate of increase. The “opportunity” you speak of was that nonsense about an “aging population”, used as an excuse to bring in immigrants and raise the social burden. Medical advances are supposed to decrease the cost of health care, not increase. Look as LASIK eye surgery, not covered by insurance. Who do you think profits when the NHS treats someone, if not Big Pharma? Why do you think England is home to GlaxxoSmithKline, the biggest of Pharmas in the world? They can charge 10000000% markup, because we are forced to pay on behalf of those who can’t. You ENABLE Big Pharma. Do you really believe America doesn’t “give you the right to be healthy”? It sounds like you’re not healthy. Your drugs aren’t working. |
|
|
|
Post by scienceisgod on Feb 8, 2018 21:34:33 GMT
And to the libertarian knuckle-draggers who will inevitably bitch about 'tax being theft'; what would you rather pay tax for, healthcare for the people or a pointless nuclear weapon upgrade? You’re blaming libertarians for your military industrial complex? The progressives literally argued that a permanent state of worldwide war was a good idea because it would justify central planning. |
|
