As an American, and as an 'independent', and more proponent of socialism than against, i do affirm and applaud your convictions..!!! Sing out loud and clear..!!!
I will make no excuses for American attitudes..nor it's narrow minded justifications of 'party' mentality's...it is embarrassing to be clumped into the two, and be totally another opinion.
Don't misunderstand..i am patriotic, love my country, served its causes in military, vote for who i consider the best candidate, pay my taxes, ...but i am not a ;democrat', nor 'republican',..certainly not a party zealot.
I am encouraged tho...i see Americans changing, i see a wider self description of self expression in my countrymen, i see them listening to world opinions, and considering what they hear.
We are like every other nation,..influenced by our medias, taught our nationality, and molded by our conformity's. Unfortunately, we are also a very powerful nation, with an attitude and influence...that's not an easy thing to manage.
Sometimes criticisms from another seems directed at Americans individually, or directed at us collectively, and neither seems appropriate or fair or justified, because we have been led to believe our government is behaving honourably. Again, we are the opinions we get from our media.
2007-02-24 11:55:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by olddogwatchin 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Some serious study of economic history and the actual effects of political programs would do you a world of good. The universal health care you seem to think should be an obvious good leads to some very negative long-term secondary effects. These effects have begun to become apparent in countries that have it, such as Great Britain and Canada: declining quality, scarcity of services, out of control expenses, shortages of practitioners, etc. It is even the case in those idyllic Scandinavian countries, if you seriously look into it.
It does not make me greedy to recognize how economics and politics actually work, and to prefer the system (free enterprise) that has led to the fantastic improvement in living standards that has taken place in the west in the last 200 years. Socialism is based on assumptions about economic behavior that have been disproved so many times it's hard to believe the beliefs persist. In the case of health care, it is an unfounded preconception that for some reason health care is different than every other arena in economic life (because "everyone needs it"?).
I point to the example of food--something everyone needs even more than medicine. In the 1970s, with exploding world population and widespread shortages of food, there were many predictions of impending disaster, the poor revolting and turning over the world order because of shortages of food. Instead, the reality was -- because of free enterprise -- agricultural production increased so much faster than the world population that we now have surpluses, even in some of the world's poorest countries. The same can happen with medicine, if we get government out of it. Government does more harm than good when it intervenes. Universal health care would be a disaster.
2007-02-24 08:24:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by sargon 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Don't worry, it's not all Americans. It is only those who work for a living and pay taxes.
There is a lot you socialists are ignorant about and/or disregard. Partly, socialists forget that someone IS paying for what they're getting, it is not free. It's a big joke in many socialist countries to find ways to not pay taxes with some or another excuse, and take advantage of and support a black market in just about everything.
Let me try to explain this simply. USA is a large Country of 50 States. Not all States are equal economically for various reasons - geography, population, resources &c. States can be and are the size of many countries in this world.
The US Constitution lays out the Rights and Responsibilities of the Federal Government and states explicitly that all other Rights and Responsibilities belong to the States, and to the People.
Next. All 50 States have state health care plans and hospitals devised by those states that their taxpayers already pay for to aid the indigent &c, that suit the circumstances of that particular population. Each State has a better handle on how their taxpayers' money shall best be collected, spent, and disbursed for health care issues - it's already socialized.
Now let me ask you. Let's say you are Belgian. Do you think you should tell China how to run their healthcare? Or say you are Indian, is it correct for you to tell Lesotho or Ecuador how to run their country?
Thank you for reading this and giving thought to the bigger picture.
2007-02-24 10:39:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Once you are use to the idea you can only earn and have some much money and you have to give the 80% of your hard earn money to the government to spend what I feel I can spend the way I want better for me. Who are you to tell us Americans how much we can earn and how to live. Why should we have to wait for health care six to nine months if we have an injury or sickness. How rich does a person have to be is determined by the individual person and how he or she works to make the money to live on. Then from there we spend the money to create more jobs and wealth for ourselves and our families. If you believe that everyone should be the way you are and you feel the government can make better decisions for you and your family then that is OK. But here in the USA are very concerned of what socialism has done to many countries, especially on health care. Canada has laws that prohibit sick people from getting better treatment. UK, and even your country. Universal Health Care is a bad idea in a country where Independence of ones mind is and capitalism is so great. If you like to be a sheep and live less than you are capable then fine. But not for us Capitalists. We have the right to choose how much money is enough for us. We should go back to if you don't work you don't eat.
2007-02-24 06:32:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
You obviously do not understand supply and demand or competitive markets! Please go read the broken window fallacy! Government inefficiencies run rampant! Universal healthcare systems throughout the world are heavily subsidized and pull straight from the production system which leads to economic growth. Socialism is just that, POLITICS! It has twisted your mind to believe that some all ruling power is needed to help when history has shown to make things worse! There is reasosn why California is losing good doctors and has bed shortages, even though they are subsidizing a huge percentage of their GDP! What we need is more wealth in our nation to help increase philanthropy and to help reduce costs and make new medicines. The people do these things through the competitive markets, not governments! I think you need to research socialism a little more! Your dream world will never be realized! It will only lead to more and more poverty for all! Government's do not help people, they just prolong the problems!
2007-02-25 02:57:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The reason Americans dislike socialism is that it is unfair. By creating social programs through taxation, you punish those who want to build businesses and work harder. In France for example, a person working for the government can never be fired. This means there is no incentive to work harder or produce more. If there was someone else willing to do the job better, or for less money, he or she would not be allowed because the other worker is protected. This also applies to tenured jobs here in the US.
If people have no incentive to work harder, no one would start a business. If no one started new businesses, no new jobs would be created. No jobs, and people become worse off. Denmark has a taxation rate of about 70% including income, sales, and excise taxes. Think in terms of grades. If you worked really hard and got a 100% on a test, and the rest of your class got zeros, you would have to give up 70% of your grade to make it so everyone got some score. They wouldn't get 30% like you, but they had something.
If you had to choose between giving up 70% of all your hard work, or not working and getting enough to live on, the choice is simple, and most people would become lazy and complacent. The system can not be sustained. France has constant riots from poor people who the government has trouble now supporting. Those poor people don't want a handout, they want a job to feed their families. They want to be able to be socially mobile. If you are poor in France, you will always be poor. If you are poor in America, you can work and make a better life for yourself.
Look to Venezuela now. Hugo Chavez implimented socialist changes that tax the best educated and the business leaders. All of Venezuela's engineers and managers are coming to the US because they have no desire to stay. Venezuela could be a thriving nation, fueled by money it makes from its oil reserves; but instead, all of the people educated enough to run the country are leaving and disaster will occur there.
To answer the universal healthcare issue, look to our neighbor to the north. Canada has a big problem in healthcare. No one wants to be a doctor because they are not paid well enough for the work they do. This doctor shortage also means that people have to wait sometimes months for proceedures that you can get in the US the same day like MRIs. New Jersey has more MRI machines than all of Canada combined. This is because in the US, private organizations provide the best healthcare they can so they will get customers. In Canada, the government regulates medicine, so they never buy the latest medical equipment, and healthcare suffers. Look up how many people from Canada come to America so they can PAY for they best healthcare NOW, not get it in 6 months for free.
Socialism robs people of their hard work. You need to make people equal at the starting line, not hold people back so everyone is equal at the finish.
As Milton Friedman once said, "The society that puts equality before freedom will end up with neither. The society that puts freedom before equality will end up with a great measure of both."
2007-02-24 06:58:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Preston S 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
We understand all too well about socialism.
There is a large spectrum of options in the world of Socialism.
You can have the Totalitarian/Intrusive pseudo socialism
You can have the marginally benign Scandinavian socialism.
All the systems of socialism are doomed to fail because their basic premise is flawed.
Humans are not born with a "hive" gene like bees. Humans, eventually figure out that they get the same amount of desired goods if they work hard or if they slack off.
(Pause for dramatic effect)
Eventually the number of slackers outweigh the worker bees and:
(pause for an even more dramatic effect)
YOUR UTOPIA COLAPSES. DER DER DER
Might I be so forward as to suggest you read a book other than something from Marx.
Why not try P. J O'Rourke's "Eat the Rich".
2007-02-24 06:39:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by zaphodsclone 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Most Americans don't know much about anything, including socialism. But most Americans are not in favor of a large and powerful federal government and would prefer that things be done privately when possible. Also, most people don't want to pay huge taxes to provide comforts for slackers, of which there are many, who would be quite happy to do nothing and live off the forced largess of others.
2007-02-24 06:34:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The problem isn't Socialism it's the Governments that manage it. Governments/Bureaucracies are notoriously bad at managing anything especially social programs. They are unorganized, inefficient, unreliable, and they end up wasting more tax money than they bring in. Unlike US business, there is no competition in Government programs and that means there is no accountability or drive to do the best at your job. Some Govt. socialistic programs may work Okay in the short run but in the long run they are disasters which is why Socialism always fails.
2007-02-24 06:30:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I agree....
I, as a Canadian, am not poor and I am certainly not rich.
I do not have to pay for health care and contrary to popular belief...I do not have to wait long.
We are leaders in the scientific, medical, business, political and cultural communities, so again, contrary to popular opinion, money is not the only driving factor for success.
Success and development also comes from compassion for fellow human beings and wanting to make the world a better place for all.
I am happy to know that I may pay a bit more in taxes to know that little old ladies have their medicine, children have food, and the disabled have homes, etc.
Of course there will always be some who abuse these processes, but there are also abuses of the welfare system in the Capitalist United States as well.
Its like giving money to a beggar...sure he says its for food, but you think it may be for booze. I would rather give up my dollar anyway, just in case.
A point many so miss is that Socialism and Communism are NOT the same thing.
2007-02-24 06:40:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by elysialaw 6
·
0⤊
2⤋