What I find that is very disturbing is that being we are a nation of over consumers, not one individual has focused on the prevention of many of the illnesses by eating right, exercising, and getting enough rest.
As a Canadian, I'd like to shed some light on how things work here. This is more directed at the people who disagree with you kailabreece, because I obviously agree with you. It's true that in Canada things like dental and optometry are not covered, it's a mixed system . People can always buy more health insurance if they have the means to do so. With the debate going on right now with Obama's reform, opponents seem to be crying out because of the lose of the health insurance industry, and this
is just simply not the case. But how can you oppose a system that insures when you're in an emergency, have a baby, etc., you do not have the burden of medical bills after? The comments that universal healthcare is just another way for lazy people to guzzle at the teat of the government are simply ridiculous. Why is healthcare not a human right? And if works for the rest of the industrialized world, why in the hell will it now work for the U.S.A The cries of Fascism by conservatives (Limbaugh)
are utter stupidity. Why are people so afraid of change, even when it is for the better. This really seems to be a class issue, because upper middle class and higher really have no worries when it comes to health, but anyone in a class lower is getting screwed, as always in America.
Just another reason I'm happy to be a Canadian citizen...not that our system doesn't have it's flaws. It's just good to know I can get my torn ACL replaced with absolutely no cost to my family or myself.
In my opinion, we should invest in our youth, give more money to the schools so that the upcoming generations of Americans are better prepared to solve our nations problems because when the majority of us are retired, I'm pretty sure i speak for us all when I say I don't want a bunch of idiots in government making laws we have to follow. Now I'm not saying we should completely ignore the healthcare issue, but Universal Healthcare has some serious flaws that are constantly overlooked.
3. You can't honestly believe that extending coverage to more people will result in better care, competition breeds the best quality and with only 1 nationalized healthcare provider there will be no standard on which to base healthcare coverage.
4. Like food stamps and WIC programs, this is just another incentive for lazy people to live off of taxpayer dollars and not find a job.
5. It's unfair for healthy Americans/taxpayers to pay for the ailments of those who don't take care of theselves.
The U.S. healthcare system is far from perfect, but that does not mean universal healthcare is the answer.
1. Yes it might be cheaper, but there is also less coverage. The U.K. and Canada pay less, but their citizens do not have dental, chiropractic, or optometric coverage.
2. Eliminating the private health insurance field will result in vast job losses, can we afford that in todays economy?
Human rights are largely a confused concept. If it becomes a claim on someones survices, it becomes a claim to the right to enslave someone. Ayn Rand said that you cannot claim such a right without giving yourself in to being a slave as well. I think there is truth in this. There is a difference between accepting health care, and forcing someone to provide it. How many people will become doctors once they realize that to do so is a sentence to a life of servitude? Shortages will be next.
Ayn Rand is a little out there, lol. Here view of humanity is cold. You say there is a "difference between accepting health care, and forcing someone to provide it." I agree, but I see it differently. Anyone can accept it... I accept my healthcare... but providing it requires work. Can we provide it to those who do not have the fortune to merely accept it? U assume doctors will become sentenced to a life of servitude... I say they would be so lucky. As a piublic servant, I consider it an honor.
Saying Ayn Rand is "a little out there,lol" is a simple way of stepping on the idea without really addressing it. So far as the honor goes, I agree that there will be those who regard servitude as such. But you're not really addressing the problem I'm trying to bring up here. 1. Have you ever tried to assess the competance of a public servant? 2. How many competant people will choose another career because they don't want the restrictions imposed. You will end up standing in ques for care.
I opologize for the way that sounded. Incompetance can exist in any area of life. And I wont deny that there are issues I've had with Ayn Rand's tendency to be calouse in regards to aspects of humanity.
1. I have accessed the competence of public servants, and it is the SAME as those choosing monetary servitude. The difference, in my opinion, is moral accountability versus the bottom line.
2. I agree that lines will get longer, but I feel that is more an issue of our lack of youth pursuing medical and science fields... we r short staffed.
* I advocate for a public universal health care system... alongside the private sector. Let both systems compete. Your Thoughts?
1a. Incredibly, I find youth seems to be taken for a financial ride. You don't suppose the educational institution has a financial course that teaches them how good a lifetime of debt is for their future, do you?
But in seriousness, I find peoples views on morality often stops at the buck. So I find myself in agreement with #1. Having been a public servant many years ago, I'd left it because of the predominance of the "the world owes me everything", and "I want more for less" outlook.
2a. "More for less". It's an inversion of the whole process that has become institutionalized. Unfortunately people have come to believe that free markets can be made to produce an isolated desire without concern for all the underlying processes by proxy, or decree alone. Very similar to decreeing goodness by pointing a gun at everyone's head. By doing so, good will disapears, and is replaced by suspicion and resentment. Continuation of this inversion doesn't get fixed with these patches...
First of all, I love all your videos! As you say "A fellow intellectual". When I was a kid I wanted to be a doctor so I could help heal people. One of the main problems with health care in the US is that the driving force is money! It's more about a big fancy house and nice car in the driveway. Then when you get the government involved you end up with a real clusterf***! It becomes "How can we capitalize on one more necessity"?! Fixing it? Remove the greedy bone of all those involved! Peace! :-)
The problem is not how we are going to pay for it but having a monopoly run our health care will lead to the same corruption that other programs that government creates. We need to turn our health care system into a competing market with competing prices.Health insurance will become a thing of the past as prices for medicines operations will become cheaper.Enforced Taxation is a form of slavery.Their will be no freedom until we get rid of government through agorism
Fair comment, however, having a private sector only competition, in my opinion, does not carry with it ANY moral accountability or responsibility, the bottom line and for profit is not an alternative that leads to the freedom that you mention. Why could the profit sector not remain and compete with the public sector? As for forced taxeation... there is no other kind. Taxes r not an evil, they do get abused, but they r not an evil, my opinion. Taxes are like club dues. Thanks for sharing friend.
You can't compare it to a club because A) you are born into it, and B) you can not leave without entering the ground of another club, and for that you will require a passport (which, partially, is a permit to leave the club and enter another).
Don't you think that if it was possible, anarchists would stop bitching and just leave nations behind?
Mmmm... good point. The club dues was a bad analogy.
As for anarchists... no. Most that I know personally too lazy and would merely continue to bitch... lol. But, I can see the anger with taxation, however, so long as there is taxation WITH representation, than all that is being done is creating community wealth to be ditributed for communal needs (roads, education, defense, health, safety, etc.)
Honestly, I, as a self-proclaimed anarchist, wouldn't have a problem with governments if they didn't have monopoly on the services they provide for the taxes (membership fees) they want, and if they weren't obligatory.
If government really were like clubs, then you could be an anarchist (anarcho-capitalist specifically) if you supported them.
I like the way you think. I would be cool with such a gov't... those who chose NOT to pay taxes, would either pay into a private use fees or go without certain services... I like it. I'm gonna sit and think on that for a bit. Any suggested reading material?
Kailabreece, good to see the channel again...we disagree again however. Id like to ask you to consider one thing. The private company providing a service can never compete with the public service provider long term and be successful in todays environment for many many reasons. A) Long term its not a fair fight because the government makes all the rules (as the go along!) B) Too many lazy people looking for a handout C) Many people who are paying for adequete care now will take advantage
of the "free system". This has happened almost every time, and the government projections never take it into account. Think about it- why would anyone stay on the private system long term when the free one is available? Would you keep paying for a private cable company when there is a free government provided cable service alternative? A few channels are different ok, but you get the point. What happened to a republic? What happened to a free market? Also the little problem we cant afford it
What I find that is very disturbing is that being we are a nation of over consumers, not one individual has focused on the prevention of many of the illnesses by eating right, exercising, and getting enough rest.
jcsump 2 years ago
Excellent point. That is very disturbing... healthcare costs would drop dramatically if we simply lived healthier.
kailabreece 2 years ago
As a Canadian, I'd like to shed some light on how things work here. This is more directed at the people who disagree with you kailabreece, because I obviously agree with you. It's true that in Canada things like dental and optometry are not covered, it's a mixed system . People can always buy more health insurance if they have the means to do so. With the debate going on right now with Obama's reform, opponents seem to be crying out because of the lose of the health insurance industry, and this
shananciole15 2 years ago
is just simply not the case. But how can you oppose a system that insures when you're in an emergency, have a baby, etc., you do not have the burden of medical bills after? The comments that universal healthcare is just another way for lazy people to guzzle at the teat of the government are simply ridiculous. Why is healthcare not a human right? And if works for the rest of the industrialized world, why in the hell will it now work for the U.S.A The cries of Fascism by conservatives (Limbaugh)
shananciole15 2 years ago
are utter stupidity. Why are people so afraid of change, even when it is for the better. This really seems to be a class issue, because upper middle class and higher really have no worries when it comes to health, but anyone in a class lower is getting screwed, as always in America.
Just another reason I'm happy to be a Canadian citizen...not that our system doesn't have it's flaws. It's just good to know I can get my torn ACL replaced with absolutely no cost to my family or myself.
shananciole15 2 years ago
In my opinion, we should invest in our youth, give more money to the schools so that the upcoming generations of Americans are better prepared to solve our nations problems because when the majority of us are retired, I'm pretty sure i speak for us all when I say I don't want a bunch of idiots in government making laws we have to follow. Now I'm not saying we should completely ignore the healthcare issue, but Universal Healthcare has some serious flaws that are constantly overlooked.
tman916x 2 years ago
I would agree friend. Good points. I like the idea of a DUAL system.
kailabreece 2 years ago
3. You can't honestly believe that extending coverage to more people will result in better care, competition breeds the best quality and with only 1 nationalized healthcare provider there will be no standard on which to base healthcare coverage.
4. Like food stamps and WIC programs, this is just another incentive for lazy people to live off of taxpayer dollars and not find a job.
5. It's unfair for healthy Americans/taxpayers to pay for the ailments of those who don't take care of theselves.
tman916x 2 years ago
The U.S. healthcare system is far from perfect, but that does not mean universal healthcare is the answer.
1. Yes it might be cheaper, but there is also less coverage. The U.K. and Canada pay less, but their citizens do not have dental, chiropractic, or optometric coverage.
2. Eliminating the private health insurance field will result in vast job losses, can we afford that in todays economy?
tman916x 2 years ago
Human rights are largely a confused concept. If it becomes a claim on someones survices, it becomes a claim to the right to enslave someone. Ayn Rand said that you cannot claim such a right without giving yourself in to being a slave as well. I think there is truth in this. There is a difference between accepting health care, and forcing someone to provide it. How many people will become doctors once they realize that to do so is a sentence to a life of servitude? Shortages will be next.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
Ayn Rand is a little out there, lol. Here view of humanity is cold. You say there is a "difference between accepting health care, and forcing someone to provide it." I agree, but I see it differently. Anyone can accept it... I accept my healthcare... but providing it requires work. Can we provide it to those who do not have the fortune to merely accept it? U assume doctors will become sentenced to a life of servitude... I say they would be so lucky. As a piublic servant, I consider it an honor.
kfherrmann 2 years ago
Saying Ayn Rand is "a little out there,lol" is a simple way of stepping on the idea without really addressing it. So far as the honor goes, I agree that there will be those who regard servitude as such. But you're not really addressing the problem I'm trying to bring up here. 1. Have you ever tried to assess the competance of a public servant? 2. How many competant people will choose another career because they don't want the restrictions imposed. You will end up standing in ques for care.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
I opologize for the way that sounded. Incompetance can exist in any area of life. And I wont deny that there are issues I've had with Ayn Rand's tendency to be calouse in regards to aspects of humanity.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
Apology accepted... lol.
1. I have accessed the competence of public servants, and it is the SAME as those choosing monetary servitude. The difference, in my opinion, is moral accountability versus the bottom line.
2. I agree that lines will get longer, but I feel that is more an issue of our lack of youth pursuing medical and science fields... we r short staffed.
* I advocate for a public universal health care system... alongside the private sector. Let both systems compete. Your Thoughts?
kailabreece 2 years ago
1a. Incredibly, I find youth seems to be taken for a financial ride. You don't suppose the educational institution has a financial course that teaches them how good a lifetime of debt is for their future, do you?
But in seriousness, I find peoples views on morality often stops at the buck. So I find myself in agreement with #1. Having been a public servant many years ago, I'd left it because of the predominance of the "the world owes me everything", and "I want more for less" outlook.
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
2a. "More for less". It's an inversion of the whole process that has become institutionalized. Unfortunately people have come to believe that free markets can be made to produce an isolated desire without concern for all the underlying processes by proxy, or decree alone. Very similar to decreeing goodness by pointing a gun at everyone's head. By doing so, good will disapears, and is replaced by suspicion and resentment. Continuation of this inversion doesn't get fixed with these patches...
RichardRoy2 2 years ago
First of all, I love all your videos! As you say "A fellow intellectual". When I was a kid I wanted to be a doctor so I could help heal people. One of the main problems with health care in the US is that the driving force is money! It's more about a big fancy house and nice car in the driveway. Then when you get the government involved you end up with a real clusterf***! It becomes "How can we capitalize on one more necessity"?! Fixing it? Remove the greedy bone of all those involved! Peace! :-)
jerami101 2 years ago
The problem is not how we are going to pay for it but having a monopoly run our health care will lead to the same corruption that other programs that government creates. We need to turn our health care system into a competing market with competing prices.Health insurance will become a thing of the past as prices for medicines operations will become cheaper.Enforced Taxation is a form of slavery.Their will be no freedom until we get rid of government through agorism
alk222111000 2 years ago 2
Fair comment, however, having a private sector only competition, in my opinion, does not carry with it ANY moral accountability or responsibility, the bottom line and for profit is not an alternative that leads to the freedom that you mention. Why could the profit sector not remain and compete with the public sector? As for forced taxeation... there is no other kind. Taxes r not an evil, they do get abused, but they r not an evil, my opinion. Taxes are like club dues. Thanks for sharing friend.
kailabreece 2 years ago
You can't compare it to a club because A) you are born into it, and B) you can not leave without entering the ground of another club, and for that you will require a passport (which, partially, is a permit to leave the club and enter another).
Don't you think that if it was possible, anarchists would stop bitching and just leave nations behind?
Mastikator 2 years ago
Mmmm... good point. The club dues was a bad analogy.
As for anarchists... no. Most that I know personally too lazy and would merely continue to bitch... lol. But, I can see the anger with taxation, however, so long as there is taxation WITH representation, than all that is being done is creating community wealth to be ditributed for communal needs (roads, education, defense, health, safety, etc.)
I support taxes... to an extent.
kailabreece 2 years ago
Honestly, I, as a self-proclaimed anarchist, wouldn't have a problem with governments if they didn't have monopoly on the services they provide for the taxes (membership fees) they want, and if they weren't obligatory.
If government really were like clubs, then you could be an anarchist (anarcho-capitalist specifically) if you supported them.
Mastikator 2 years ago
I like the way you think. I would be cool with such a gov't... those who chose NOT to pay taxes, would either pay into a private use fees or go without certain services... I like it. I'm gonna sit and think on that for a bit. Any suggested reading material?
kailabreece 2 years ago
Kailabreece, good to see the channel again...we disagree again however. Id like to ask you to consider one thing. The private company providing a service can never compete with the public service provider long term and be successful in todays environment for many many reasons. A) Long term its not a fair fight because the government makes all the rules (as the go along!) B) Too many lazy people looking for a handout C) Many people who are paying for adequete care now will take advantage
kenandjasha 2 years ago
of the "free system". This has happened almost every time, and the government projections never take it into account. Think about it- why would anyone stay on the private system long term when the free one is available? Would you keep paying for a private cable company when there is a free government provided cable service alternative? A few channels are different ok, but you get the point. What happened to a republic? What happened to a free market? Also the little problem we cant afford it
kenandjasha 2 years ago