what's BAD about democracy(for once)?

[Shoden]

Which Democracy?

American or British?

[Madame Adequate]

socialised health care is not a form of democracy. and in fact it touches the wealth of noone as all implenting it would do is remove the purpose of health insurance. and if people started having less money then inflation slows down anyway and people catch up.

It is my choice to have or not to have a healthcare insurance plan. It's not your choice, it's not my mother's choice, it's not my friend's choice. It is affected, of course, by my partner and by children, but the ultimate decisions remain mine.

[bipper]

socialised health care is not a form of democracy.

yes, but it does have to be voted in by the public. If it is implemented in our government, it is a form of democracy.

and in fact it touches the wealth of noone as all implenting it would do is remove the purpose of health insurance. and if people started having less money then inflation slows down anyway and people catch up.

Made no sence to me really. Touches the wealth of no one? So if we pay the gov't to care for our medical needs it becomes free? It is taken out of taxes. It also affect the health insurance industry I would say. As well as having government involved, health care would prolly be under stricter guidlines.

watching america and the eu starve africa is not comparable.

You make me care about Africa less. I know it is an issue, and I am sorry I have not fixed it yet (what was i thinking!) I do agree with you, there is not a reason to compare this to that.

as for...

and psychotic. comparing hair to death is not the same. it is not a want. it is a right and need.

It is a closer metephor, but yes, I agree

It is my choice to have or not to have a healthcare insurance plan. It's not your choice, it's not my mother's choice, it's not my friend's choice. It is affected, of course, by my partner and by children, but the ultimate decisions remain mine.

I do agree, it is your choice. I just think that it is a null choice. Why say no? I think that if you asked everyone if they would want health insurracne, they would prolly say yes.

I think it should be openly available, at least a low level of it. Sure I don't want to see every little doctor visit covered, but I belive in yearly checkups, and bi-yearly physicals. Dental coverage, as they are finding so much of you health is corrilated to your jaw. Eye care and emergency services should be covered as well. Anything further than that (and I don't mean just that, but i was just listing several basics) should be covered under privte policies.

I say all this Milf, is very related to your thread on you little question. Where you ask somthing to the extent on making decisions for people. I see this as a simpler question, because its not like we would FORCE a person to go get healed (some Amish and such usually don't go for hosptials). However, the offer would be on the table. I do say to support it because of my belief in your same question; If it affects others. Haveing some unhealthy person (homless or not) who cannot afford health care causes a public health hazzard. A person who cannot see well does this as well.

Though I think there is a fine line on what we do for people whom could be hazardous, I beleive that the humanity of the subject is enough to doubly warrent a minimal socialized health care system. Much like a lot of American cities host, as far as free clinics etc. go.

[Madame Adequate]

Made no sence to me really. Touches the wealth of no one? So if we pay the gov't to care for our medical needs it becomes free? It is taken out of taxes. It also affect the health insurance industry I would say. As well as having government involved, health care would prolly be under stricter guidlines.

Well I dunno if it is actually due to being socialised (More likely the Nanny State, a close friend of Socialism.), but over in England we can't buy half the medication you can here (The USA), and several things which are taken for granted here are entirely illegal there. This is especially horrid when one is at the dentists.
as for...

It is my choice to have or not to have a healthcare insurance plan. It's not your choice, it's not my mother's choice, it's not my friend's choice. It is affected, of course, by my partner and by children, but the ultimate decisions remain mine.

I do agree, it is your choice. I just think that it is a null choice. Why say no? I think that if you asked everyone if they would want health insurracne, they would prolly say yes.

Ah, let me add something: The people I get health insurance from is my choice, as are the people I go to healthcare for. The government doesn't answer to anyone half the time, and look at the NHS in the UK. It's a shoddy mess.

I think it should be openly available, at least a low level of it. Sure I don't want to see every little doctor visit covered, but I belive in yearly checkups, and bi-yearly physicals. Dental coverage, as they are finding so much of you health is corrilated to your jaw. Eye care and emergency services should be covered as well. Anything further than that (and I don't mean just that, but i was just listing several basics) should be covered under privte policies.

But see, I don't have any objection to any particular amount of free healthcare, that's not the issue. It's simply that private systems work better than state-owned ones.

[Cloud No.9]

the british government and the eu doesn't like people buying drugs which are stupid and they don't need. like prozac or other ssri's. it is not good to have them widely available. which is why we don't advertise script only meds either.

my point about social health care affecting noone. okay lets say taxes went up and you lose £20 a month. but now you have social health care. so why have health insurance? so you can stop your $20 a month health insurance plan. and if overall the country is poorer because some people don't have insurance then inflation slows down because it is harder for inflation to rise when people don't have money to keep up.

and cuba and many eu countries have lovely nhs schemes.

and bipper what did you do for africa before i made you care less?

and when it comes to live, death and disease the ultimate responsibility is the states.

[Madame Adequate]

the british government and the eu doesn't like people buying drugs which are stupid and they don't need. like prozac or other ssri's. it is not good to have them widely available. which is why we don't advertise script only meds either.

Oh, I'm sorry. I missed that part where I gave them the power to decide what I do with my own body. I certainly don't remember telling them to go ahead and decide what I need. Hey, Cloud. What happens when the government decides society's problems need fixed by killing all the Jews?

my point about social health care affecting noone. okay lets say taxes went up and you lose £20 a month. but now you have social health care. so why have health insurance? so you can stop your $20 a month health insurance plan. and if overall the country is poorer because some people don't have insurance then inflation slows down because it is harder for inflation to rise when people don't have money to keep up.

Or that's 20 quid I might want to spend elsewhere. Like investing in a doctor I actually have faith in. Or maybe not investing in a doctor at all because it's my right not to.

and cuba and many eu countries have lovely nhs schemes.

And it's already been shown what that cost Cuba. The EU is a joke, too. If laws don't change the EU will not be first-world for more than another 20 years or so.

and when it comes to live, death and disease the ultimate responsibility is the states.

When it comes to protecting those from other forces, I agree. So that's why I support a police force and a system for national defense. Those are uses of governmental power I agree with and can happily give money to.

[Cloud No.9]

so you want to be protected against the nasty muslims but not cholera?

and cuba is in fact hampered by sanctions because of it's economic system. not because of it's economic system.

and milf what happens when the government decides that starving africa is a great policy? or starting an aggressive illegal war? or has it's leaders wanting world control?

a state's duty is to stop death not to cause it.

[bipper]

Cloud, the whole argument is frivilous. The econmy would be minimally effected at best. That is, if people were spendin $20 on health insuracnce, and the gov't took it over, logic would sugges thtat taxes would increase. As I said before, it all depends on implimentations.

and bipper what did you do for africa before i made you care less?

Why must you instigate so? I may not know everything about this situation, but the general unfair trade has been an issue on my plate for a while. Here is a news flash for you, it is not just Africa getting screwd. Here constant whining about it is actually having the adverse effect.

Placing blood on my hands, when you really don't know much about me is entirly wrong, and hypocritical. You are basically saying that you know I hate people in Africa because I alone cannot get my government to run the way you want it to. sad.

Milf, while I really do respect your outlook, I honestly think that this is one thing that would take a lot of trust for the government. Its one cavet. I guess this could easily be avoided by a credit system, where the health cares stays on private systems, but the government funds minimal plans. Implimentation.

[DarkLadyNyara]

It is my choice to have or not to have a healthcare insurance plan. It's not your choice, it's not my mother's choice, it's not my friend's choice. It is affected, of course, by my partner and by children, but the ultimate decisions remain mine.

Yeah, it's my choice to have quality healthcare. It's also my choice to be rich, beutiful, and living in Hawaii and going to a prestigious university. Instead, I'm at a community college in the meth capitol of california, with less than five dollars to my name. And soon to be off Medi-cal due to age.

[Cloud No.9]

darklady. take heart that you if you die it will because you are poor and have less right to live then the rich. you will die for their tax dollar. smile. feel proud in that.

and yes bipper america and the eu also screw over asia and south america. this is a good thing?

there is no adverse effect in making those who refeuse to help refuse to help. and the blood is on the hands of people who stand back and watch people die. political might or money can both help. failing to do either is taking part in genocide.

[bipper]

and yes bipper america and the eu also screw over asia and south america. this is a good thing?

there is no adverse effect in making those who refeuse to help refuse to help. and the blood is on the hands of people who stand back and watch people die. political might or money can both help. failing to do either is taking part in genocide.

I never said that it is a good thing, I just mean why dwell on Africa, and coninually make people feel like hell for it? I do my part to represend fair trade, and a stable global economy. My stress is more towards sweatshops, but I agree with your stance.

[Cloud No.9]

africa is best to dwell on as it is bigger and people know it better. and making them feel like hell constantly and brining up the issue keeps it in their mind. if you keep telling the public it is their fault 30,000 children died today everyday then one day they will see the problem in that.

[DarkLadyNyara]

darklady. take heart that you if you die it will because you are poor and have less right to live then the rich. you will die for their tax dollar. smile. feel proud in that.

Remind me to use that sometime.

there is no adverse effect in making those who refeuse to help refuse to help. and the blood is on the hands of people who stand back and watch people die. political might or money can both help. failing to do either is taking part in genocide.

So true.

[Teek]

so you want to be protected against the nasty muslims but not cholera?

What a loaded question. Due to its crude nature, I can only respond: Yes.

take heart that you if you die it will because you are poor and have less right to live then the rich. you will die for their tax dollar. smile. feel proud in that.

More propaganda.

Darklady, take heart in knowing that you never held a gun to the rich and demanded to live in exchange for their prosperity. Smile, feel proud, know that you lived your life according to your own ability, not need.

[Madame Adequate]

and cuba is in fact hampered by sanctions because of it's economic system. not because of it's economic system.

Cuba doesn't exist in a vacuum. Isolationism is not a possibility. Ergo, if a system is one which other nations do not wish to concern themselves with then one needs to either have a system strong enough to survive on its own or to change one's system. (Of course, I do actually disagree with sanctions and such, so I have to concede that point.)

and milf what happens when the government decides that starving africa is a great policy? or starting an aggressive illegal war? or has it's leaders wanting world control?

Read my signature (Or hey, the actual UN documents.), the war was legal, only propoganda has told you otherwise.

And that is the flaw with the state. That is exactly why we don't like big government.

a state's duty is to stop death not to cause it.

A state's duty is to protect the people within its borders from any infringement on their right to self-jurisdiction, with the sole exception of this same objective, which takes precedence through necessity. Believe me, if I thought it'd actually work for a second, I'd be an anarchist all the way.