United States Almost had Universal Health Care

[Libertarian California]

And the expansion of slavery into new territories was almost halted in 1784 when Thomas Jefferson's bill failed by one vote.

Would've limited slavery to the original 13, and that's it.

[Pandeeria]

What a tragedy. We could've killed the Constitution much sooner than 2010, if it weren't for those slave-driving Kochbots.

I didn't know that Universal Healthcare killed the Constitution.

[Atlanticatia]

Sigh, I wonder if we'll ever have a single payer system.

[Ifreann]

What a tragedy. We could've killed the Constitution much sooner than 2010, if it weren't for those slave-driving Kochbots.

I didn't know that Universal Healthcare killed the Constitution.

Death Panels, man.

[Caverna]

Sigh, I wonder if we'll ever have a single payer system.

It will come when majority demands it.

[Allet Klar Chefs]

What a tragedy. We could've killed the Constitution much sooner than 2010, if it weren't for those slave-driving Kochbots.

I didn't know that Universal Healthcare killed the Constitution.

Yep.

rip America, 1783-20XX.

[Pandeeria]

I didn't know that Universal Healthcare killed the Constitution.

Death Panels, man.

Next they'll take away our guns.

[Pandeeria]

I didn't know that Universal Healthcare killed the Constitution.

Yep.

rip America, 1783-20XX.

Poor America.

Died because of those liberals who were only looking out for themselves and everyone else.

[Atlanticatia]

Sigh, I wonder if we'll ever have a single payer system.

It will come when majority demands it.

You mean when the health care lobby allows it, right?

[The Sotoan Union]

Didn't have the manpower? You're kidding right?

No, just knowledgeable about the health of the USSR in the forties and fifties.

The working-and-soldiering aged male population was completely devastated. About fifteen million able-bodied soldiers died, and plenty more were maimed physically or mentally. Then you have all of the civilians who were killed, which is usually taken to about double that figure. That's a very big deal for any country, let alone one which had only just recovered from its own civil war by the time the second world war came around.

If you look at many Eastern European places like Ukraine, Russia and Estonia, even now, the female population is significantly higher than the male population, and quite a lot of that is due to the impact of the second world war.

They could split an atom in 1949, and put up a spaceship in 1959. I think they could do something as simple as have some conscripts take over Eastern Europe.

Well you might think that if you're of the Clancy school of historical thought, but that doesn't make it true.

The USSR was in horrible, horrible shape in the forties into fifties. They split the atom, but then so did the broke-ass Brits, and they weren't conquering much of anything after India left the empire. That doesn't take a terribly great amount of people.

I honestly think the Cold War empowered the USSR by giving it the image of an implacable foe more than it hurt it, especially in the early days.

Millions of Soviet troops poured into Germany. Did those troops just disappear when the war ended? Could the Soviet Union not have mustered those troops again?

But the core argument here was that the United States shouldn't have funded the Cold War and should have left the Soviet Union alone. This is based in the grounds that the Soviet Union was too weak from the war to take over Europe or become the dominant superpower. Well maybe so, but because of the war. The Soviet Union had to undergo a period of economic recovery. But so did the US. So did Europe.

In this alternate reality where the US refuses to fund a Cold War, there is no Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was crucial to rebuilding Western Europe. Without it the devastation of the war takes a massive toll on those countries. Without US military backing they can't defend themselves from the Soviet Union. Again the millions of Soviet soldiers at the end of WWII don't magically disappear, nor does the Soviet Union magically lose boys who will soon grow into combat worthy men. By 1959 the Soviets had over 4 million troops in the Soviet bloc. Western Europe can't match that. So with a United States that remains isolated and no nuclear weapons, what prevents the Soviets from taking all of Europe? Ignoring it and pretending it doesn't exist? That didn't work so well for the Axis before Pearl Harbor.

[Indira]

Istead Americans would be complaining about their problems in their answer to the NHS. Still, I think that it would be better than America's current healthcare issues.

[Hurdegaryp]

I'm sure we'd have a host of economic problems to go with it that we would have to deal with over the decades. History would certainly be different, but can we honestly day better? Too many variables.

If only there were other countries with universal healthcare that you could look at to determine whether such a program would, in fact, bring about economic doom.

I guess we shall never know, then.

[Scholmeria]

What is the problem with the American healthcare system? What syste to they have instead of Universal Health care?

We have a system where we pay for health care through insurance companies. Many people can't afford it. For them, Medicaid has been established. But since some states are opting out of the expansion of Medicaid (calling the PPACA "socialism"), many are and will continue to be ineligible for this coverage.

So, you dont pay healthcare by taxes? And thoose private insurance companies are making profite from the sick people, right?

it is a little bit socialism, but it does not mean that it is necesarly negative.

[Indira]

What a tragedy. We could've killed the Constitution much sooner than 2010, if it weren't for those slave-driving Kochbots.

And there was me thinking that there was nothing in the constitution banning decent healthcare provision. You learn something new every day

[Pandeeria]

We have a system where we pay for health care through insurance companies. Many people can't afford it. For them, Medicaid has been established. But since some states are opting out of the expansion of Medicaid (calling the PPACA "socialism"), many are and will continue to be ineligible for this coverage.

So, you dont pay healthcare by taxes? And thoose private insurance companies are making profite from the sick people, right?

it is a little bit socialism, but it does not mean that it is necesarly negative.

The mentality in America is that "anything socialist = bad."

God it's a shame we developed that mentality.

[Scholmeria]

What is the problem with the American healthcare system? What syste to they have instead of Universal Health care?

Have you ever been sick? It costs roughly $100k to treat an appendicitis.

Yes, sorry but it does not cost me anything.

[Norstal]

Have you ever been sick? It costs roughly $100k to treat an appendicitis.

Yes, sorry but it does not cost me anything.

I'm gonna assume you're not American.

[Norstal]

So, you dont pay healthcare by taxes? And thoose private insurance companies are making profite from the sick people, right?

it is a little bit socialism, but it does not mean that it is necesarly negative.

The mentality in America is that "anything socialist = bad."

God it's a shame we developed that mentality.

Not in California. Thank God for California.

[Socialist Czechia]

What is worse than not to have Universal Health Care? Have totally f*cked up universal health care.

*coughing* Britain. *coughing*

Nuff said.

[Pandeeria]

The mentality in America is that "anything socialist = bad."

God it's a shame we developed that mentality.

Not in California. Thank God for California.

California is a Liberal paradise compared to the rest of the US.

At least I don't live under the Bible Belt.

[Farnhamia]

What is worse than not to have Universal Health Care is to have f*cked up health care.

Britain.

Nuff said.

Have people started dying in the streets in Britain because of fucked-up health care? I would have thought that would be on the news, even in the US.

[Scholmeria]

Yes, sorry but it does not cost me anything.

I'm gonna assume you're not American.

And I assume you are an American?

The mentality in America is that "anything socialist = bad."

God it's a shame we developed that mentality.

You are exaggerating, of course socialism is not necesarly bad but marxism and other form of left-wing shamanism and exoteric teachings are indeed.
Universal healtcare is also not necesarly socialist. The US governmenr do its best for it people.

Universal heathcare has also its negative sides: the doctors are easy to bribe, the quality of threatment is sometimes bad and even if the doctors do a mistake they are not allowed to take responsibility.

[Norstal]

I'm gonna assume you're not American.

And I assume you are an American?

Yes. There are people here who think that healthcare here doesn't cost anything, so, I apologize in assuming you're one of those.

[Pandeeria]

The mentality in America is that "anything socialist = bad."

God it's a shame we developed that mentality.

You are exaggerating, of course socialism is not necesarly bad but marxism and other form of left-wing shamanism and exoteric teachings are indeed.
Universal healtcare is also not necesarly socialist. The US governmenr do its best for it people.

The US government is currently doing what it think is the best for it's people. I disagree that they're doing their best.

But along with the "anything socialist = bad" mentality another mentality came along with accompany it. The others mentality is "any thing even barely left wing = socialist"

[Villa Mercedes]

But we do not.