The Truth About Socialized Medicine

I have to agree, but it's my belief that there are many here to blame not just a single entity as many like to portray. As much as the doctors, insurers and pharmaceutical companies are greedy to make as much money as possible, some people are willing to pay for outrageous prices and want the freedom to choose who, where, when and how many times they can go to a doctor. Other want it dirt cheap or free. So in reality the real problem is not so much the medical system, but the people who can't decide and the Gov't who is more concerned with staying in power the next coming election.

The reason why the healthcare system isn't getting fixed has very little to do with the public. It's all about how badly Washington is broken. There is legitimate debate about how it can best be done but what the public wants or needs or what is best in the longterm is being hindered by lobbyists groups. You have lobbies from the insurance companies, doctors,pharmaceuticals, etc. that are influencing the politicians on both sides of aisle. They showed the problems in the different countries systems but there is obviously a way to do it that involves a compromise of all the positions. The big thing I looked at was the % of the GDP that each system represented. In every case it was substantially lower than that in the U.S. That is the key number to use from an economic standpoint. If we spend less of our productivity on healthcare then we will have more to spend elsewhere. You also need to look at things like life expectency,etc. to be sure you are providing adequate levels of care. People can argue about a free market all they want but when you have politicians that are blocking change because of the business lobbies that are supporting them,then there is no free market. It's so ironic because the Reps. who tout free markets are sucking up to the lobbies so there is no free market and the Dems are sucking up to the same lobbies so even tho they advocate change they won't do it. Simply stated its only a matter of time before this country fails unless we start cleaning up Washington. About the best one can hope for is a Katrina type disaster to flush the lobbies and a good portion of congress out to sea.

I think this statistic is compounded when you consider the incredibly high GDP rate the U.S. has. Both per capital, and pure GDP.

Uh, no. Smoothseas made the statement about % of GDP. Which is accurate and the one that you want to use to make comparisons. Your statement merely confuses and demigogues the issue.

For the record, I do not agree with Smoothseas premise. But I do understand his concerns about it. Like any other system devised by man, it is not perfect. Far from it. But it is the best around.

... what?

Smoothseas clearly said:



so, every other system has a lower GDP % spending on healthcare than in the U.S. The whole thing is made even worse (or better, depending on your p.o.v.) by the gargantuan size of USA's economy, and the incredible high GDP per capital ratio you enjoy. Even if you had the same % than another country, you would still spend a LOT MORE than that country on healthcare.

I beg to differ. It's because of the publics lack of interest in this countries welfare, lack of education in politics and the desire to make as much money as possible in as little time as possible with the lowest expenses possible that our Gov't is out of control. We have the power to put who we believe is best for the job and we have the power to have him/her removed if we believe they are not fit to do the job. What we lack is the understanding of this power given to us by our Constitution.

So in the end we, the American population, have more to do with the disasters we are witnessing today in our Govt than we wanna believe.No only do many believe we made a mistake when voting for Bush not once but twice, but many also believe we messed up in 2006 when we gave the Democrats control of the House and Senate and now with all the people who decided to run for President from both sides, again the American people have decided to pick from the bottom of the barrel. So tell me again how exactly the public has little to do with the corruption going on in this Govt? Cause last I check our Constitution puts the power in our hands.

You are correct. That is a huge part of the problem. But Nader has it right when he says both parties are screwing us. Unfortunatly we need to get rid a large percentage of the incumbent congress to make things right, because I know there are Democrats in congress that are over protecting certain industries also. When both sides cow tow to the same interests there is no balance.

You need to take the political influence out to make a good health policy. In other words have it be crafted by health economists without the influence of lobby groups or the politicians that support them.



The barrel runs pretty deep so I wouldn't say bottom, but there aren't many if even any politicians that are floating near the top.

That is true, but the way I see it, if someone is screwing you it's not because you want to be screwed (please stay with me, this is a political comment, nothing more, LOL). True both parties are responsible for the hell that is todays US Gov't but we, the people, have allowed it to happen and continue and unless we do something about it (something smart and logical) it will only continue.



It is my belief that once we can get past being so greedy and selfish, then maybe people can think about working for the betterment (a real word?) of the people, not their pockets and bank accounts. So long as self interest is what drives the average persons lifestyle, we will never be able to better this nation. It was because at one point in time those with the power to make changes were thinking about the entire nation, not just themselves, that we have the Constitution. If only we could remember how we came to be then maybe we may still have a chance to turn things around.

As Mufasa told Simba in "The Lion King" -

You have forgotten who you are, and so have forgotten me. Look inside yourself, Simba. You are more than what you have become.

We have forgotten who we are and therefor forgotten our ancestors and pioneers of this great nation.

True, at times it almost looks like it connected to the barrels of some of the worst world leaders this planet has seen.

Its human nature or maybe better termed the human condition. What is so ironic is that there are voters who base their vote on greed and are actually voting the wrong way because they can't differentiate between what is simply a lie or how a certain policy truly affects them.
Or more importantly how certain things are going to affect them and their children in the future. And I'm not being partisan. There are reasons to vote one way or another, but the system would correct itself faster if more people understood how certain policies were truly affecting them, and how going too far either left or right is bad.

If you are so fired up about the lobbies that have too much influence in Washingtown, why not outlaw them? The USA would waste much less money on it's election, the candidates would be influenced less by the industries.

We have outlawed commercial contribution to political parties in Quebec, and the whole lobbying action is illegal (in theory). Many peoples here think the politics have become a lot cleaner since these laws were made.

I know a lot of people really don't agree with that position on lobbying, just my 2 cents

Cikomyr,

I consider myself one of those Americans who didn't make it their business to get to know our system and it's politicians. Now a days I try to learn as much as I can and look forward to voting based on my understanding of the issues. But I still don't quite understand the lobby thing that goes on in Washington. I can't say for sure if banning it all together is a good thing since I have no clue how that part of the system works, I mean it exist for a reason I have to believe, but I do understand how they can have so much power in having the country run the way they want it as oppose to how we, the people, want it.

Honestly I am all for banning the hell out of them if screwing the system is all they really do and they serve no better purpose. I just can't say for sure if it's a good idea since, like I said, I don't really know what lobbiest really do.

Because lobbies do have a legitimate purpose. Many lobbyists are extremely knowledgeable about the groups or industries they represent. Politicians are not very knowledgeable about all the various factions affected by the laws they write or vote on. The problem I have concerns specific instances where lobbies have swayed politicians or even written legislation that is not in the best interest of the public. The Enron Loophole is probably one of the best known recent instances of this type of activity. I think a lot of people are familiar with the name Jack Abramoff also which is another example.

I see your point, but even if lobbies are knowledgeable, aside from the occasionnal citizen groups and non-profit groups that want to support issues Xs and Ys, the mainstream lobbying is made by different parts of the industry, which means it's the industry, and not the citizens, who hold the largest leash on the politician's neck.

The point of lobbying is gaining influence by supporting the political campaign of key politicans with financial contribution, and make them.. supportive to your views. The lobbyist also use the "influencial way-in" to elected representative when they have an issue about legislation, governement contracts, etc... Because professionnal lobbyists just happen to know the Senator's main advisor, so your case will presented to him on a good way, since you paid well the professionnal.

It all end up with less power in the hand of the people, and more in the way of the wealthy. I don't care if someone is wealthy. I sure think less tax is good (but not at all cost), a good thing overall. I do not believe in punishing the wealthy people/industries for success. But I cannot stand in having a political system where wealthy can simply pay to have a quasi-direct influence over the executive/legislative body of a governement.

Having some dedicated NGO who listen the industries and support groups, forbidding commercial financing of any political-influencing organisation and the such would limit the cash flow into many publicist's pockets. And politican's. And it would also denying something I consider a destructive influence over the whole political climate in Washingtown.

Exactly. However there are unions and such which do lobby on behalf of small groups of citizens and environmental groups that do lobby issues that affect large groups of the population. Most of the corruption has to do with lobbies related to industry.



Some don't give any financial support to campaigns. You simply visit Capital Hill and present the views and concerns of your lobby in regard to any related legislation that is being written. Often lobbies simply give their groups support in front of a camera.



Which isn't a bad idea, we already know that doesn't work though....527's

which is why I think commercial-related lobbies should be the ones outlawed/heavily regulated. Leave the citizen groups be, and those other.



Can you inform me about that? I have read wiki's article about the 527, but I am not sure I see what you see..

I agree but don't know the constitutional law well enough to see what is possible.





527's are the loophole that have basically made past attempts at campaign finance reform ineffective. They are groups separate from campaigns, so although reform laws try to limit influence through direct campaign contributions these groups buy advertising themselves to fill in the gap.

Have any non-commercial add be considered a "political add", and they should register the side of the issue they are on. Limit the amount of spending both issue (on the whole) are allowed to spend in totality. There shouldn't be things as "freelancer political add", since there isn't such a thing to begin with. It's totally hypocrite.