Excuse me while my brain melts at the idea that a healthy workforce that isn't raped with debts from paying medical bills (or alternatively simply doesn't go to a doctor while their teeth rot, their appendix explodes, whatever else) isn't an important part of the infrastructure of a nation.

I can't even argue against that point because it's so fucking STUPID. When the whole basis of your arguement boils down to "I DO NOT LIKE TO PAY TAXES WHY SHOULD I HELP OTHER PEOPLE ESPECIALLY THOSE WORSE OFF THAN ME IT IS PROBABLY THEIR FAULT ANYWAY" then you are a stupid, selfish cunt and frankly I think you should be deprived of oxygen, but not before having your genitalia fed to some rabid hyenas or something similar in front of your eyes.

I mean...fucking nora. The utter lack of empathy for other human beings is utterly astounding. This fuckwittery is why I'm drawn more and more into the idea of Nihilism. The sort of anarchism espoused by Bakunin and his followers, specifically the idea that one must destroy (by means of a violent revolution) the current system in order to topple it. And while I abhor violence I do wonder if it wouldn't just be better for everyone if someone just "accidentally" hit the big red button that means the beginning of nuclear armageddon so that earth can have the slate wiped clean and evolution can begin from scratch.

Yeah, if you can't tell, laissez faire capitalists really fuck me off, I mean genuine anger at the short-sighted selfish thinking primarily. But also: the idea that you should trust your government is idiotic, but the idea that you can trust business is just as dumb, if not even more fuckwitted. Much like any ideology capitalism sounds good on paper. However when you inject humans into the mix you end up with greedy selfish people exploiting resources. Not to mention treating HUMAN BEINGS as merely a resource.

Edited by user 24 February 2010 01:42:38(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Yes, it's a discussion on the internet. But I get this frustrated about this topic in any enviroment, among friends, among strangers, or on the internet. Stupidity is stupidty regardless of where it takes place.

46 million is not a small number, in comparison to 300 million it's not massive but that still leaves nearly 1 in 6 without insurance, which is stupid and the UK is a prime example of how a National Healthcare service can work perfectly well. I mean yeah there's a few scares for 'super bugs' and there is stories of poor treatment, but you always have the option to go Private where you pretty much every time get what you pay for.

And I mean, sorry for butting in with the big boys here because I'm not entirely clued up on the US healthcare system and shit, but surely if you're paying insurance you may as well pay that little bit extra for the benefit of others?

And private education could clearly provide the same. It just so happens that certain things are too important for profit to be involved in. Like educating the next generation to be free-thinkers with the ability to analyse the world around them, or like ensuring people are alive, fit and healthy. Yeah, the American health care system is great man. I mean the masses of debt that people are left with, even those WITH insurance, it's fucking flawless. Fuck man, I thought I was a cynical cunt.

Groan.

OK, I'll give you a personal example. I suffer from depression. For the past two months I have been prescribed Citalopram, an anti-depressant, at 20mg a day, every day. A 4 week (28 day) pack costs me £4, flat-rate, as do all NHS prescriptions (although by 2012 prescription charges will be completely done away with in Scotland). Having done some research, that same medicine which has cost me £8 so far (it doesn't even have an immediate effect, taking between 1 & 3 months to make a noticeable difference). I've spent £8 on it. If I was an American the same medicine at the same quantities would have cost me over £200 a month, that's £400 in total. Now I plead ignorance to the differences between health insurance in the UK & US (there is a private option in the UK if you so wish to use it of course) but to get things like medication covered I'd be looking at monthly payments to the insurance company of £20. Not to mention that I don't get certain services scrimped on because it's too costly for my insurance bracket. I pay my National Insurance every month and thus I am able to go the GP when I need a check-up, get in an ambulance in the case of an emergency or whatever it is and just worry about getting better rather than worrying about how to pay the bill.

Also, if you think that the fact that over 15% of the American population cannot afford health care is OK then you are a cold hearted bastard. Never mind that the number of uninsured is increasing every year. You are the wealthiest nation in the world. If little Britain (fuck man, little Cuba!) can afford decent state health care (hardly perfect, but at least everyone can get treatment) then so can America.

If I may be facetious and Teaparty-esque for a moment here, isn't efficiency something that HITLER and STALIN were into?

Although they have the money to lobby their way out of it. The real problem I have with extremely high tax rates on the top tiers of incomes is whether the government actually has the right to tell you what to do with your money. In my view, the government doesn't have the right to tell me that I need to spend money to help someone else out.

A better benefit structure for charitable donation would be something I could support. For instance a system where there is a fund that allows earners in every income bracket to donate some of their money into this fund, up to a limit proportional to their income. This fund would give you some bonus, instead of a straight deduction, it reduces your tax liability by some percent. This makes it more likely that people will donate and then you have a taxless creation of health care funds. The only caveat is that the amount each person can donate must still keep income tax revenue high enough to cover its programs and debts.

I can choose where to spend my money. If I don't like the practices of a business I choose not to spend there. While I don't agree with the military strategy of the US I still consider defense and military spending a role of the government and not private industry. I never said the government doesn't have the right to tax you. This entire time I was advocating a government tax policy to pay for vital services. I just don't think health care is a service the government should provide.

Simply put, if you took the people who don't have health care and then gave them a ton of money so they could live a comfortable life with health insurance and then asked them to give up some of their income to insure others I would argue they would probably say "Why should I pay for their insurance, the government isn't paying for mine?"

Besides how do you make government health care fair. I mean lets say there are 350 people in Hypotheticaland. A lower class who cannot afford health insurance of 100 people, a large middle class of 200 who probably could pay for private insurance and still live a middle class lifestyle, and then 50 people who make up the wealthy upper class. Also assume society has decided that everyone deserves at least $45 in health benefits.

Further suppose each class pays a different amount towards national health care based on income level, the lowest class pays $10 per person, the middle $30, and the upper $50 (with a progressive tax system). The entire lower class will enroll in the government option as well as half the middle class. The total amount available is $9500 to spend on government health care or $47.50 per person. Now lets assume that seeing this the rest of the middle class and the upper class decides they want to get in on this since they are already paying for it. We now have $9500 split among 350 people or $27.14 per person.

For the government to get everyone their required $45 in benefits taxes must be raised. Now I don't think it is fair to force the upper-middle and upper class to shoulder all the burden of paying for the lower class's health care. Therefore all taxes would have to be raised so each income level is taking on a burden proportionate to their income. Eventually as taxes get raised the lower class will hit a point where it is cheaper to take the risk of not having insurance.

There is also a benefit to having insurance and a cost to being taxed. As a person is taxed more and more (in this case the low income person's taxes were raised because of more people joining the government option) the benefit to insurance becomes less than the cost of the taxation. That means that there is a level of taxation that causes people to be worse off by government insurance than if they had the money in their pocket.

For the government to defend against this price spiral the government has to make sure the benefits of the government insurance are less than that of private insurance so that those people with the money to afford private insurance have an incentive to choose it. The other option is to set some sort of income, wealth, or expenditure cap on those who can participate in the government option. Either way the same problem arises, why should I pay for something that provides a very small benefit to me or that I am barred from using myself.

I know I mentioned it. Also, America does run a progressive tax system its just not as progressive as others.

I just want to get the Godwin out of the way by doing it in a slightly tongue-in-cheek manner.

AMERICA'S TAX SYSTEM IS ABOUT AS PROGRESSIVE AS HITLER!

As for why you should pay tax so someone ELSE can get health care? Simple human decency. We are not mere animals, we are self-concious, we are able to analyse the world around us and thus we are able to stop and break out past the base animal instincts of self-interest and greed.

That's why I support universal health care. You know, so that everyone is eligible for it.

Also, stop being quite so selfish.