Healthcare In The USA

Basically it breaks down like this:There are two sides of the story, but both sides generally agree that there is a major problem with the health care system in the US, but they have opposing views on what would fix it.People that lean to the Left (Democrats) want to socialize medicine as it is in your country, as they feel that the health care system in America is broken. They also feel that socializing medicine should be a fundamental right to all people, and that they shouldn't be burdened with having to purchase insurance to cover medical expenses. The Left feels that it places a higher emphasis and special interest in corporations over the common man who is in need.People that lean to the Right (Republicans) agree that there is a problem, but that socializing medicine will inevitably lead to an exorbitant raising of taxes that will negatively affect its citizens in the long run, and that the quality of care will be stifled. They want to avoid the pitfalls of socialized medicine, leaning to the ideal that private business, learning from the economic principle of supply and demand, that private business is generally more efficient than when the government gets a hold of something.Both sides obviously claim that their version better serves the needs of its people.I see pro's and con's on both sides, but at the end of the day for me it boils down to a simple economic question. There is no nation that can stand without a strong economy. If a nation's economy is weak, which is is the oil that runs all the machines, every other system fails catastrophically. You can't have ANYTHING without an efficient economy.If I were Obama, I would first tackle the debacle that is the economic crisis before I even attempted to undertake such a massive overhaul that would only further lead the nation in to an economic depression.The US is the third most populace nation in the world. The supply and demand would be outrageous, so that even if well meaning, it ultimately ends up being in a worse condition.From what I can tell, socialized medicine, wherever it is used, is barely sufficient, let alone efficient. And that has nothing to do with the capabilities of its doctors or quality of care, it boils down to dollars and cents. This misconception that socialized medicine is "free" is patently absurd. There is nothing free about it. Money needs to come from somewhere and quite frankly, either the taxes have to be raised to a ridiculous amount that will certainly enslave Americans even more than they are, or they have to make budget cuts which destroy other vital programs already in place.That money has to come from somewhere, and the price tag would be so costly that I'm not sure that it is in the best interests for America to go down this path.Medicade, Medicare, and Social Security are three examples of how the government simply can't supply the demand. Those programs are utter failures, and what ends up happening is that it was initially promised that Social Security would not be compulsory; that if you wanted in, you opted to buy in to the program. Now that thing leaches off of every American, most of whom will never see a dime reimbursed. We are paying in to a program that will be completely depleted in likely less than 10-20 years. We're forced by law to pay this huge percentage and of those who do receive it, it's not enough money to reasonably sustain people in need. It's a failure.

---

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

That's what the plan is tantamount to at most or what it's leading up to in the least. Nobody in that administration would come out and use those words. Democrats aren't stupid, they don't want to come across as socialists in a country that is based on individual rights. If I were to source anyone using that term, it would come from a right-leaning pundit who only wants to unanimously demonize Obama. That doesn't do anyone any favors. What then would you call it? It's a lot like why the housing market bubble burst. As soon as government made restrictions against private businesses, who are regulated by the people themselves, it forced banks to invest in risky loans in the interest of giving people affordable housing. Well, big surprise, those risky loans defaulted and you know how have EVERYONE suffering equally as a direct result. That's how it works, that's the reality of the situation. There's no denying that benevolent intentions are at hand, but if it leaves an entire economy deflated, then how is the latter better than the former? I think both sides suck too, but it is counterproductive. Yep, but that's what was said about housing too... Look where we are now. Who cares about what Palin thinks? She's a dolt who is completely unqualified to run this country or even a nation the size of Luxemburg. She's completely partisan and aligns where her party aligns rather than thinking on her own. My concern is the cost to overhaul, how it will affect citizens pockets, where this money is going to come from, and whether or not it will be stripped from vital programs that barely have funding as it is. You're going to have to read between the lines here. No one transitions from 0-100 in a second because it is too much of a shock to the system. It's a slow and methodical process.You keep talking about propaganda... But you only see propaganda in one direction. Is it unimaginable that our president, like all presidents before him, is trying to sell you on an idea while actually trying to (in his words) Trojan Horse his true agenda?Keep an open mind. And now they are frantically doing damage control calling it misrepresentation when all one has to do is listen to his own words. He indicts himself.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbXrSK_VfME

---

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine

I have to say, Peg, I'm astonished that no one seems to use Australian health care as a model to aspire to. It sounds very reasonable, if your description is accurate.I like elements of private insurance and I like elements of socialized medicine.The Aussie system seems to take the positive elements I like about both systems while doing its best to avoid the worst elements.

---

"I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. 'Tis the business of little minds to shrink, but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death. " Thomas Paine