If Obma gets elected and turns america into a socialist wasteland...

europe gets a month or 3 of vacation and when your wife gives birth they even send a maid of sorts to help out your wife with house stuff. and of course the woman gets maternity leave as well. good lord that's sweet.

Ontain

wait youre women also get one year off from work when they get a baby right?

never heard about the maid thing althrough you can ask for a nurse to come to you for some 2-3 months every day if you are a first time mother so she basicly teaches oyu what to do.

it's actualy quite funny that we don't have this and aperantly france does while we have been the ones under some 50 years of communism...

[QUOTE="streak000"]

You just don't listen to anything that contradicts your view, do you? Let me explain something to you. Australia has a universal healthcare system that is completely subsidised by the government, but also a profitable and growing private health system. With Medicare (free), you only get the most basic level of care. This is why a large number of employed people choose to take out private health insurance. It ensures quicker, more personalised service and generally higher quality of care than is the case with the free system.

One does not exclude the other, like you seem to be saying. Many people "volunteer" to pay. And the cost is not prohibitive. But you'll probably ignore this, because it doesn't fit with your views of how things should be. Whatever, ignore or not, my country (along with many others) is a living proof that you're wrong. I'm not saying you should import the Aussie system into America, simply that you shouldn't write it off as unworkable like you have been doing all night (day?).

LJS9502_basic

Second...you can't compare Australia to the US which has a much more extensive population. There are many factors that have to be considered...and you are ONLY focusing on one.

And no..I didn't ignore your post.;)

Wrong. Private healthcare is profit-based, which is why they pay for so few medical expenses. They definitely try to cut corners, and universal HC would do the same, but at least with universal HC you don't have to go through all that paperwork, and many more people would be able to recieve treatments and prevention-based exams.

Wrong. Private healthcare is profit-based, which is why they pay for so few medical expenses. They definitely try to cut corners, and universal HC would do the same, but at least with universal HC you don't have to go through all that paperwork, and many more people would be able to recieve treatments and prevention-based exams.

Lord__Darkstorn

[QUOTE="Lord__Darkstorn"]

Wrong. Private healthcare is profit-based, which is why they pay for so few medical expenses. They definitely try to cut corners, and universal HC would do the same, but at least with universal HC you don't have to go through all that paperwork, and many more people would be able to recieve treatments and prevention-based exams.

LJS9502_basic

I don't care about what your experiences are, the fact of the matter is that a tremendous amount of time and energy (see: MONEY) is put into paperwork to verify insurance and such. this is an inefficiency that would be resolved if insurance did not have to be accounted for at every visit (as in, if everyone automatically had free healthcare).

cutting corners often makes money. look at fast food. often, the name of the game is to make a product as cheap to produce as possible. same applies to soda, to automobiles, and to healthcare. this will always be true. the issue is, healthcare policies often require deductibles on such common-sense and essentially cheap procedures as regular checkups. I have to pay ten bucks every six months just by default, and that's with a healthcare policy. often, healthcare plans will only cover up to a certain amount, maybe it's 2,000, maybe it's 5,000, but still, this means that if someone develops a serious illness, even WITH healthcare plans that are sufficiently expensive to put a financial burden on them (try, 500 a month), you're going to be financially destroyed to keep from dying because healthcare companies won't pay more than x amount of dollars for anything.

healthcare is still extremely expensive, and the worst part is that it doesn't even mean that we don't pay medical expenses. doesn't that sound like 'cutting corners' to you?

I don't care about what your experiences are, the fact of the matter is that a tremendous amount of time and energy (see: MONEY) is put into paperwork to verify insurance and such. this is an inefficiency that would be resolved if insurance did not have to be accounted for at every visit (as in, if everyone automatically had free healthcare).

cutting corners often makes money. look at fast food. often, the name of the game is to make a product as cheap to produce as possible. same applies to soda, to automobiles, and to healthcare. this will always be true. the issue is, healthcare policies often require deductibles on such common-sense and essentially cheap procedures as regular checkups. I have to pay ten bucks every six months just by default, and that's with a healthcare policy. often, healthcare plans will only cover up to a certain amount, maybe it's 2,000, maybe it's 5,000, but still, this means that if someone develops a serious illness, even WITH healthcare plans that are sufficiently expensive to put a financial burden on them (try, 500 a month), you're going to be financially destroyed to keep from dying because healthcare companies won't pay more than x amount of dollars for anything.

healthcare is still extremely expensive, and the worst part is that it doesn't even mean that we don't pay medical expenses. doesn't that sound like 'cutting corners' to you?

quiglythegreat

In socialized health care many treatments are not done to keep cost down. Sound like cost cutting to you? With private insurance....if the doctor says it's necessary it is done.

Those who handle the paperwork for insurance are not paid at a high pay rate. I was referring to getting treatment...I have NO paperwork to deal with. Guess what...paperwork will still exist even if the government is involved...in fact...I'd bet it would triple. Ever see how much paperwork the government requires? May surprise you.

In socialized health care many treatments are not done to keep cost down. Sound like cost cutting to you? With private insurance....if the doctor says it's necessary it is done.

LJS9502_basic

obviously paperwork will still exist, but you go from claiming you don't have to do any paperwork to insisting that it will still exist. how do you do that? it's an interesting style of rhetoric.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Those who handle the paperwork for insurance are not paid at a high pay rate. I was referring to getting treatment...I have NO paperwork to deal with. Guess what...paperwork will still exist even if the government is involved...in fact...I'd bet it would triple. Ever see how much paperwork the government requires? May surprise you.

In socialized health care many treatments are not done to keep cost down. Sound like cost cutting to you? With private insurance....if the doctor says it's necessary it is done.

quiglythegreat

obviously paperwork will still exist, but you go from claiming you don't have to do any paperwork to insisting that it will still exist. how do you do that? it's an interesting style of rhetoric.

And paperwork will increase....not decrease.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Those who handle the paperwork for insurance are not paid at a high pay rate. I was referring to getting treatment...I have NO paperwork to deal with. Guess what...paperwork will still exist even if the government is involved...in fact...I'd bet it would triple. Ever see how much paperwork the government requires? May surprise you.

In socialized health care many treatments are not done to keep cost down. Sound like cost cutting to you? With private insurance....if the doctor says it's necessary it is done.

LJS9502_basic

obviously paperwork will still exist, but you go from claiming you don't have to do any paperwork to insisting that it will still exist. how do you do that? it's an interesting style of rhetoric.

And paperwork will increase....not decrease.

When I went to Sweden, my friend broke his arm and got free treatment, and he's not even a citizen! He just had to fill out a single sheet of paper that referred the treatment to a particular country. Of course, the Swedes have higher taxes than most Americans (usually around 25% more as stated on Wikipedia), but I think the trade-off is definitely worth it.

Socialism isn't so bad. Many of the largest and most powerful European countries are socialist. All socialist means by definition is that the government controls the most vital resources. Capitalism still exists by and large. It's communism and command economies you have to worry about. jetpower3

yeah the correct term is Democratic Socialist I believe, and if yo ureally look in to it the majority of people who attack it are the wealthy and or powerful, i.e. big bussnesses( i know I butchered that) and washington. there just gread and power hungery and want to stay that way. BTW one the private-vs socalized healthcare, we have been talking about this kinda stuff in my A.P. human Geograhy class. and those Social Democraices are in general better off and happy than us, they also have higer life expectancies.

Just about everything will be passed. The dems will have a super majority and won't be enough republicans for a filbuster. ScaredWarrior

Pelosi may as well be president then.

I just got back from my daily moose hunt, life is hard here in Canada.UssjTrunks

Really? Theres no moose left over in NS. We just eat Snow with syrup on it now.

[QUOTE="swizz-the-gamer"]

Seriously? England a socialist wasteland? WASTELAND?

1. Land that is desolate, barren, or ravaged.
2. A place, era, or aspect of life considered as lacking in spiritual, aesthetic, or other humanizing qualities; a vacuum

TheOddQuantum

I know. It's hard to believe what people think of sometimes.