Why does America hate Socialism?

[Forster Keys]

Because socialism is a failed system! Having more things provided by the government means more opportunities for government waste and higher taxes! Now, I don't think anybody likes government waste OR higher taxes so that is why America hates socialism. Although, some would say that our current president is socialist...

And they'd be wrong.

[ALEKZAVIER]

And Canadians regularly have to come to the U.S to get there medical procedures in a reasonable amount of time.

Medical tourism is not just an American phenomenon. Americans go elsewhere, too - usually to find treatment they can afford.

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

[ALEKZAVIER]

Because socialism is a failed system! Having more things provided by the government means more opportunities for government waste and higher taxes! Now, I don't think anybody likes government waste OR higher taxes so that is why America hates socialism. Although, some would say that our current president is socialist...

Your definitely right no one wants higher taxes and those who advocate for them are always taxing someone else.

[Forster Keys]

Medical tourism is not just an American phenomenon. Americans go elsewhere, too - usually to find treatment they can afford.

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/ec ... /index.htm

The number of people who lacked health insurance last year climbed to 49.9 million, up from 49 million in 2009, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.

Nationwide, 16.3% of the population was uninsured last year, statistically unchanged from 2009.

The world bows to the wonder of the US healthcare system...

[ALEKZAVIER]

Omg a socialist government that subsidizes businesses? Who would've thought!

I know right! Almost like not socialist at all! ZOMG!

Corporatism is socialism because you have the government picking winners and losers and taking control of private businesses. And corporatism wouldn't be a problem with less government or no government at all.

[ALEKZAVIER]

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/ec ... /index.htm

The number of people who lacked health insurance last year climbed to 49.9 million, up from 49 million in 2009, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.

Nationwide, 16.3% of the population was uninsured last year, statistically unchanged from 2009.

The world bows to the wonder of the US healthcare system...

I never said the U.S healthcare system was perfect unfortunately we spend the most out of most all countries I believe but I was specifically talking about waiting times.

[ALEKZAVIER]

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/ec ... /index.htm

The number of people who lacked health insurance last year climbed to 49.9 million, up from 49 million in 2009, the Census Bureau said Tuesday.

Nationwide, 16.3% of the population was uninsured last year, statistically unchanged from 2009.

The world bows to the wonder of the US healthcare system...

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research ... x?id=18232

but at least we get something with all that money spent.

[Forster Keys]

I know right! Almost like not socialist at all! ZOMG!

Corporatism is socialism because you have the government picking winners and losers and taking control of private businesses. And corporatism wouldn't be a problem with less government or no government at all.

I'm not sure you know what socialism is. It revolves around "public ownership", the abolition of private property, originally the transitional stage between capitalism and classless utopia. Corporatism involves a partnership between the public and private sector, its a centrist idea, used by centrist democracies, and a key part of fascism.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... /socialism

[Chestaan]

Because a hybridized system (mixed economic system) exists in most parts of the world at the moment and it is far from satisfactory. Extreme poverty, starvation and death still exists so I don't accept that a mixed system is the answer.

Poverty, starvation, and death (really here?) will always exist. Yes, welfare programs and such help for such things, but then you have people who abuse the system by not bothering to look for work.

Firstly I was referring to the world as a whole so your "really here?" comment is irrelevant. You are not taking into account the affect that the actions of the first world have on the third world.

And I don't accept your attitude that poverty, starvation and avoidable death due to this poverty will always exist. If we simply spread wealth more evenly to these third world nations then the extreme poverty there would be greatly reduce if not completely destroyed.

[NyxNyke]

Americans do not hate socialism. We already are a socialist country, just not total fascist yet. SS, medicare, medicare, welfare are all socialist systems. about 51% like them and 49% feel they have already destroyed the US.

[Forster Keys]

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/13/news/ec ... /index.htm



The world bows to the wonder of the US healthcare system...

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research ... x?id=18232

but at least we get something with all that money spent.

Poor Canada, hopefully they'll fix their problems. Anyway, Australia pays less than America for good quality universal healthcare. Same for the UK and most of Europe, so its hardly an indictment on universal healthcare.

[Forster Keys]

Americans do not hate socialism. We already are a socialist country,

With your large public owned industries, and your progressive punitive taxation system...

just not total fascist yet.

More fascist than socialist really.

SS,

Wha?

medicare,

It's not socialised or universal. Not really socialist.

medicare,

Two medicares?

welfare

Hardly exorbitant and all consuming like Cuba's.

are all socialist systems

Yep, they are socialist ideas.

about 51% like them and 49% feel they have already destroyed the US.

Interesting observation. Source?

[Grave_n_idle]

Medical tourism is not just an American phenomenon. Americans go elsewhere, too - usually to find treatment they can afford.

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

Hmm. Maybe.

Then again, Forbes seems to be suggesting that the US receives about 85,000 foreign patients a year that come here explicitly for medical treatment.

Versus, the 750,000 Americans who go elsewhere, according to this study

So perhaps your numbers are wrong. And given that that study also found better results in some areas (e.g. "the success rate of coronary bypass
surgery in India is reported to be 98.7 percent as against 97.5 per cent in the US."), even your claims about WHY you think medical tourists travel to the places they travel to, may be wrong.

[Northern Dominus]

Well to be fair another part of the problem is we haven't dropped a JDAM on a few local Warlords either...mainly because there's no oil there, but that's beside the point.

And again this all is an argument in favor of an all-or-nothing notion regarding either system. Why hasn't it occurred to more than a few people posting here that perhaps hybridizing both might be a great way to move forward.

Because a hybridized system (mixed economic system) exists in most parts of the world at the moment and it is far from satisfactory. Extreme poverty, starvation and death still exists so I don't accept that a mixed system is the answer.

Oh right and nations like Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, plus Canada and Australia to a lesser extent are just languishing under the opression of socialism/tyranny of capitalism...

Oh wait, they're not, in fact all of the above are doing quite well. Are all of them free of social ills such as poverty or starvation? No, but they're doing far better than most. They're social democracies, meaning under a democratic system they hybridize capitalist and socialist systems to make sure the government works. And guess what, lots of their citizens are HAPPY with the arrangement, more than most places in the world.

[ALEKZAVIER]

Corporatism is socialism because you have the government picking winners and losers and taking control of private businesses. And corporatism wouldn't be a problem with less government or no government at all.

I'm not sure you know what socialism is. It revolves around "public ownership", the abolition of private property, originally the transitional stage between capitalism and classless utopia. Corporatism involves a partnership between the public and private sector, its a centrist idea, used by centrist democracies, and a key part of fascism.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... /socialism

The only difference between corporatism in a socialist state and a fascist state is fascists don't completely abolish all private property only most of it that they view is inefficient. So pretty much just like socialism you don't own your property and it can be taken away from you any time.

[ALEKZAVIER]

I'm not sure you know what socialism is. It revolves around "public ownership", the abolition of private property, originally the transitional stage between capitalism and classless utopia. Corporatism involves a partnership between the public and private sector, its a centrist idea, used by centrist democracies, and a key part of fascism.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... /socialism

The only difference between corporatism in a socialist state and a fascist state is fascists don't completely abolish all private property only most of it that they view is inefficient. So pretty much just like socialism you don't own your property and it can be taken away from you any time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

[ALEKZAVIER]

Well Canadians and people from other countries come over here to get better service and less waiting time in greater numbers than Americans looking abroad.

Hmm. Maybe.

Then again, Forbes seems to be suggesting that the US receives about 85,000 foreign patients a year that come here explicitly for medical treatment.

Versus, the 750,000 Americans who go elsewhere, according to this study

So perhaps your numbers are wrong. And given that that study also found better results in some areas (e.g. "the success rate of coronary bypass
surgery in India is reported to be 98.7 percent as against 97.5 per cent in the US."), even your claims about WHY you think medical tourists travel to the places they travel to, may be wrong.

your right. I was wrong on the numbers part but what I'm saying is Canada's healthcare is very inefficient to what it spends on its healthcare there so on last resort they have to go abroad for medical treatment.

[Northern Dominus]

I'm not sure you know what socialism is. It revolves around "public ownership", the abolition of private property, originally the transitional stage between capitalism and classless utopia. Corporatism involves a partnership between the public and private sector, its a centrist idea, used by centrist democracies, and a key part of fascism.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... /socialism

The only difference between corporatism in a socialist state and a fascist state is fascists don't completely abolish all private property only most of it that they view is inefficient. So pretty much just like socialism you don't own your property and it can be taken away from you any time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Uh..making your own argument against yourself much there?

[ALEKZAVIER]

Hmm. Maybe.

Then again, Forbes seems to be suggesting that the US receives about 85,000 foreign patients a year that come here explicitly for medical treatment.

Versus, the 750,000 Americans who go elsewhere, according to this study

So perhaps your numbers are wrong. And given that that study also found better results in some areas (e.g. "the success rate of coronary bypass
surgery in India is reported to be 98.7 percent as against 97.5 per cent in the US."), even your claims about WHY you think medical tourists travel to the places they travel to, may be wrong.

your right. I was wrong on the numbers part but what I'm saying is Canada's healthcare is very inefficient to what it spends on its healthcare there so on last resort they have to go abroad for medical treatment.

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research ... x?id=18232

[Nidaria]

If leftists are so dissatisfied with America, perhaps they could move to Europe (if they like Scandinavia so much, they should live there). Fifty years from now we could see who has done better. Think of it as an experiment.

[ALEKZAVIER]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism

Uh..making your own argument against yourself much there?

Lol I must have misused the quote button or something i didnt say the top paragraph.

[ALEKZAVIER]

If leftists are so dissatisfied with America, perhaps they could move to Europe (if they like Scandinavia so much, they should live there). Fifty years from now we could see who has done better. Think of it as an experiment.

Agreed. I never got why people who hate a countries founding principals so much just didn't leave.

[Grave_n_idle]

Hmm. Maybe.

Then again, Forbes seems to be suggesting that the US receives about 85,000 foreign patients a year that come here explicitly for medical treatment.

Versus, the 750,000 Americans who go elsewhere, according to this study

So perhaps your numbers are wrong. And given that that study also found better results in some areas (e.g. "the success rate of coronary bypass
surgery in India is reported to be 98.7 percent as against 97.5 per cent in the US."), even your claims about WHY you think medical tourists travel to the places they travel to, may be wrong.

your right. I was wrong on the numbers part but what I'm saying is Canada's healthcare is very inefficient to what it spends on its healthcare there so on last resort they have to go abroad for medical treatment.

Canada's healthcare may be inefficient. I've never used it. On the other hand, I have used the healthcare system in the UK and the system in the US, and I received approximately equal care in each, with approximately equal delay - but only in the US did it virtually bankrupt me.

[Grave_n_idle]

If leftists are so dissatisfied with America, perhaps they could move to Europe (if they like Scandinavia so much, they should live there). Fifty years from now we could see who has done better. Think of it as an experiment.

Agreed. I never got why people who hate a countries founding principals so much just didn't leave.

Indeed. Bloody abolitionists. If you don't want niggers picking your cotton, fuck off somewhere else.

*nods*

[Northern Dominus]

Agreed. I never got why people who hate a countries founding principals so much just didn't leave.

Indeed. Bloody abolitionists. If you don't want niggers picking your cotton, fuck off somewhere else.

*nods*

Or if you want women to come out of the kitchen and not only vote but add to the workplace, try one of them fancy Ero-peen communes fulla drugs n sex n....

Hey wait that sounds like my kinda deal...

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/research ... x?id=18232

Yeah try using a source that doesn't come from a neo-con think tank...you know, an unbiased one.