The United States does a terrible job of taking care of its citizens. The United States is the only industrialized nation in the world that doesnt provide national helathcare to its citizens.
2006-07-07 07:33:33 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
I think that the question is what is wrong with our system now? We need to revise the political situation so that the rich can't always be the ones in power. We think that this land can be governed by the common man. Nope, it is the rich who can get the presidency. This is why people don't vote.
The next Civil War will be West vs East. The election are already decided when the east closes it poles, so those in the west don't want to waist their time by going to the poles when the east has already decide who has won.
2006-07-07 07:41:14 · answer #1 · answered by jwarther 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No...we should maintain our Capitalistic economic system and it's Democratic Republic government structure. These are why this country has become as great as it has.
It's not the government's job to take care of us...it is only to protect us from external threats and provide justice from internal threats. Not to rob some citizens and give a small portion of those spoils to other citizens (a.k.a. "redistributing the wealth"). This only causes an "entitlement" mentality, a belief that it's the government's role to provide everything we need. Too many citizens have bought this line and sit around contributing nothing to the system.
Instead, the government should be encouraging us to work hard and take care of ourselves with as little intervention by the government in our lives.
Families should be taking care of each other, and when that isn't enough, we have charitable organizations to which we can turn.
The government hasn't done an effective job ANY time it has tried to take care of social issues. Look at the debaucle it has made of welfare, social security, medicare and medicaid.
It's time that we stop mooching off of our neighbors paycheck, start living within our means, helping our families and giving to charitable organizations and solve the problems that way.
2006-07-07 07:47:20 · answer #2 · answered by Ronald G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of the poor are poor by choice.
second, there is NO national health care in the world that equals the quality of care received here, unless 4 hour waits and not having a choice as to who your provider is is progress for you.
And like the great patriot answered above me said, its not the governments responsibility to take care of you. It should be your family and church. Oh yea, you don't believe in God especially since your daddy moved out when you were 4.
2006-07-07 07:41:20 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No-- Many parts of Socialism don't work. In general, we don't do all that bad in the US. Healthcare IS a problem but national healthcare won't necessary solve it.
There are other solutions to the problem, unfortunetly none of the politicians can come up with any. Why? Well, politics + they have GREAT health care benefits.
2006-07-07 07:39:08 · answer #4 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As an American the rules are like this:
Every man for himself. It's not up to me to take care of people who don't want to work. Socialism rewards people who do nothing to receive a benefit. If you work you can afford to buy health insurance, I wouldn't want the government running the healthcare system, I wouldn't want to go to a State run health facility! No way! If you work, you can afford to do things, if you don't work, you deserve nothing. If you cannot work because you are physically unable to work, then there should be assistance for you, but not for a lazy man who refuses to get a job.
2006-07-07 07:49:03 · answer #5 · answered by alwaysbombed 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
certain. it will be very incorrect. that is ironic that Obama proposes socialistic rules at a time even as eu international locations are transferring from socialism to freer markets because their economies have not finished besides because the U. S. economic equipment (more advantageous unemployment, decrease prices of enhance) and they have realized they could't arise with the money for each and each and every of the social classes with their getting old populations.
2016-10-14 05:29:57 · answer #6 · answered by jesteriii 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The primary problem with Socialism is that it takes it for granted that production and innovation just happens. I have done production and R&D. It does not just happen.
As much as a pain in the rear it is, what is best for the average shmo on the streen is this free market system we have today.
2006-07-07 07:40:14 · answer #7 · answered by eric l 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We're already socialistic...SOCIAL Security, Medicaid, Medicare, Food Stamps, Public Assistance, tax breaks for education, retirement. Almost every aspect of our lives are dictated by the federal or state government(s). Now they're even trying to legislate what we eat....and you want more??? GET OUT OF MY LIFE !!!!
2006-07-07 07:40:18 · answer #8 · answered by jim 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, we just need to spend our money more efficiently and pay for things like medical, and schooling that should be free.
Id rather pay 60 percent of my money in taxes to have free medical and schooling. Already paying close to half of my money for taxes.. what more is the rest..
2006-07-07 07:45:41 · answer #9 · answered by red_samurai_dragon 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not full socialism, but I think U.S. corporations need a slightly tighter rein.
2006-07-07 07:49:24 · answer #10 · answered by karkondrite 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋