Monday, February 9, 2009

Is "a little socialism" ok?

The foundation of America was not built upon Communism or Socialism. However, we have incorporated a number of socialistic into our government and society.

Are we able to cherry pick from socialism without turning our backs on the country our forefathers provided to us? Is it possible to dabble in socialism without necessarily drinking the cool aid?

We have government funded social services, such as police, firemen, and schools. Yet we are able to provide those without allowing the government to decide where you live, what type of job you have, or how many children you can have. Even though most of those services are broken in some sense, we still have them and they are usually considered better than not having those services.

Sure there are some police officers that are corrupt and on the take. Sure there are some firemen that perform illegal activities in their down time, but still fight fires when the alarm goes off. Sure, the public school system is often broken, fails the children, and is used as a tool for indoctrination by overzealous nut jobs. But, at least there are police, firefighters, and public education?

How do we decide which of societies needs are "safe" to socialize? As a practice of large government, one would presume that it will continue to expand until it reaches critical mass and collapsed. We have education and some services available at no cost.

If so, would we consider health care a "basic human right" and let the government provide that to citizens at no cost? Obviously our capitalized health care system is broken in that you have to work for a large company with a decent salary in order to afford good health care. Our current system provides people with service only during their peak working years.

Before you land that good job, you're kinda screwed. While you work for that company you're somewhat in the clear unless you end up with one of the many conditions that are denied coverage. After you retire and no longer in that position, you're kinda screwed again. Except for that cushy window in the middle of you're life, health care will be a problem.

Our system is based on profit. From the doctor/surgeon to the production of medicine and machines, every level has a healthy markup. By the time you spend 10 minutes inside a room getting minimal attention from a busy doctor, you will easily spend $400 for that 10 minutes with the doctor, $400 for a small amount of medicine, at least $200 for the hospital room (of course you wait in there 45 minutes to get the doctor for 10 non-consecutive minutes) and various other charges.

It is obvious that something needs to change, but the arguments continue on "what" needs to change. Do we socialize medicine? Do we cap profits for each segment of the industry? Do we subsidize medical insurance? Do we attempt to regulate the denial of treatment?

If we look around the globe, we find various forms of socialized medicine. Canada and France are obvious examples. Depending on who you ask, those systems are either great or entirely broken. One citizen of those countries might be unable to comprehend why American citizens cannot get health care since they take it for granted. Another citizen of that same country might wonder why people think his system is a model as his experiences would lead you to believe that the socialized medicine in his country is broken.

Do we need to so something?

Is medical care a "basic human right"?

Is there a fix that doesn't include socialism?

Can we dabble in socialized medicine w/o becoming socialists?

No comments:

The Mortgage Crisis

The mortgage crisis could not have been an accident. The people that "approved" the mortgages KNEW that:

  1. Were going to have prohibitive payments in 12 to 24 months
  2. Were going to be on property worth far less than what they sold for within 12 to 24 months
  3. Would be forclosed on because they couldn't sell for the amount of the mortgage

Bankers blame it on homeowners making bad decisions or not having foresight. However, those bankers get very uncomfortable when you point out that these mortgage were all approved by bankers that get PAID to know the market and it's trends.

When you point out that regular people like you and I saw this coming back in 2004/2005, they start to tap their fingers and look around nervously.

The short answer is that they set us up and we don't know "why".

Mortgages traditionally require people prove they can make the payments even when the market is not headed down. The banks knew exactly what they were doing...

The Media On It's Knees

Why is it that the mainstream media is clamoring on their knees in front of Obama as if their unwarranted affection will somehow lower his zipper and give them what they so desperately seem to want?