we hear about all kinds of polls from knun.
here are some results from real polls:
Nine out of 10 Americans think the U.S. health care system needs at least fundamental changes, including 36% who think it needs a complete overhaul – and Democrats are twice as likely as Republicans to say the system needs one.
U.S. HEALTH CARE SYSTEM NEEDS… All Reps Dems Inds
Minor changes 8% 15% 5% 7%
Fundamental changes 54 64 50 51
To be completely rebuilt 36 21 44 40
The Democratic Party has long held a significant edge on handling health care, and that remains in this poll. More than three times as many believe the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party will best improve health care.
PARTY THAT WOULD IMPROVE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
Now 5/2006 7/2002 7/2000 1/1994 6/1991
Democrats 62% 62% 58% 51% 59% 51%
Republicans 19 19 22 28 20 22
Full poll results:
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/CBSNews_p ... h_care.pdf
Most Americans Eager for Healthcare Reform;
Divided on Potential Solutions
As the debate over healthcare reform in Congress continues, a new Time Magazine Poll finds that most Americans (55%) support a major reform of the healthcare system over making just minor adjustments (43%).
The poll does find a sharp partisan divide. While seven in ten (70%) Democrats support major reform, just one third (33%) of Republicans agree that major reform is necessary. Independents however are more divided -- a slim majority (53%) support major reform, while 43% favor making just minor adjustments.
full poll at:
http://www.srbi.com/MostAmericansEagerf ... eform.html
Americans express broad, and in some cases growing, discontent with the U.S. health care system, based on its costs, structure and direction alike — fueling cautious support for a government-run, taxpayer-funded universal health system modeled on Medicare.
full story at:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/U ... _poll.html
Democracy Corps Poll, Jun, 2009
Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the health insurance system in the United States generally? (If Satisfied/Dissatisfied, ask:) (Is that very or somewhat satisfied/dissatisfied?) [ Q.17 ]
14% Very satisfied
26% Somewhat satisfied
27% Somewhat dissatisfied
31% Very dissatisfied
3% Don't know/Refused
Poll at:
http://137.99.31.42/cfide/psearch_v12/w ... 0&x=58&y=7
a nation divided
"americas" in the chart does not mean the "united states of america". the "americas" include all the countries in north and south america.Actually Don's previous posts have alot to do with this topic and even these stats.
But OK, as usual I'll play.
Let's look at a chart from WHO...shall we? Yes we shall!
So when we look at this in chart it's obvious that although Europe has had socialized medicine for over fifty years our capitalist system is just as good. So changing the system for our children serves what purpose? Where is the spike for all those poor American children without care? You would think we would be much lower after hearing all the harping from the ASSHATS. This is a perfect example of the bullshit that is being passed around!
The MAJORITY of Americans are happy with what they have. Rich or poor, they are happy. This chart tells everyone why!
all reputable polls show yanks are not satisfied with their second rate health care system.
Hi Knun,
Im wasnt happy with the way our socialist leaning government does some things when i posted the remarks uyou quoted....I still feel the same now....nothing has changed for me in that respect.
The Nhs can be regarded as a socialist thing I guess,but Britain even under the most right wing government weve ever had here (Margaret thatchers govt) realised the worth and value of the n.h.s and did not try to dismantle it...
The reason the nhs is struggling under the work load is because of the enormous strain put upon it,we have had such an influx of immigrants into this country in recent years,and they all have the right to be treated.....prob a large proportion of those incomers enter the country for no other reason than that..at first.They then find that they can get fed, housed, and god knows what besides by the taxpayer. That in my mind is wrong.....in short the system is abused ,thats not the fault of the nhs system ....its the fault of lily livered politicians who are scared to address the welfare benefits issue.Notwithstanding the problems ,the NHS remains as one of the main supports of our way of life.....ill criticise it from time to time,but id never hope or wish for it to dissapear.
As for waiting lists....yes there are.....its because of the number of people wanting treatment and the ratio of doctors nurses anaethists equipment etc to patients obviously.....itd be ludicrous to expect a ratio of 1 surgeon to each member of the populace for example.
Now the american private health system as you have said allows you to have treatment within few days or whatever.ok. Now what if we suddenly throw the reported 49 million of uninsured american people into the private sector.......a fair proportion of them no doubt have health problems....could the private health system cope? (for the sake of argument im assuming those 49,000,000 americans could afford to pay the health insurance premiums) would there then be waiting lists? would certain treatments need to be rationed? i think the answer is obvious......
So no i dont feel ive contradicted myself,ive just tried to be non-political in my opinion ,and honest about both both the benefits and the obvious shortcomings of the nhs........
Im wasnt happy with the way our socialist leaning government does some things when i posted the remarks uyou quoted....I still feel the same now....nothing has changed for me in that respect.
The Nhs can be regarded as a socialist thing I guess,but Britain even under the most right wing government weve ever had here (Margaret thatchers govt) realised the worth and value of the n.h.s and did not try to dismantle it...
The reason the nhs is struggling under the work load is because of the enormous strain put upon it,we have had such an influx of immigrants into this country in recent years,and they all have the right to be treated.....prob a large proportion of those incomers enter the country for no other reason than that..at first.They then find that they can get fed, housed, and god knows what besides by the taxpayer. That in my mind is wrong.....in short the system is abused ,thats not the fault of the nhs system ....its the fault of lily livered politicians who are scared to address the welfare benefits issue.Notwithstanding the problems ,the NHS remains as one of the main supports of our way of life.....ill criticise it from time to time,but id never hope or wish for it to dissapear.
As for waiting lists....yes there are.....its because of the number of people wanting treatment and the ratio of doctors nurses anaethists equipment etc to patients obviously.....itd be ludicrous to expect a ratio of 1 surgeon to each member of the populace for example.
Now the american private health system as you have said allows you to have treatment within few days or whatever.ok. Now what if we suddenly throw the reported 49 million of uninsured american people into the private sector.......a fair proportion of them no doubt have health problems....could the private health system cope? (for the sake of argument im assuming those 49,000,000 americans could afford to pay the health insurance premiums) would there then be waiting lists? would certain treatments need to be rationed? i think the answer is obvious......
So no i dont feel ive contradicted myself,ive just tried to be non-political in my opinion ,and honest about both both the benefits and the obvious shortcomings of the nhs........
Don update your email address
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Unbiased???????
lbj,
[Democracy Corps Poll, Jun, 2009
Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the health insurance system in the United States generally? (If Satisfied/Dissatisfied, ask:) (Is that very or somewhat satisfied/dissatisfied?) [ Q.17 ]
14% Very satisfied
26% Somewhat satisfied
27% Somewhat dissatisfied
31% Very dissatisfied
3% Don't know/Refused]
__________________________________________________________________________
"Democracy Corps is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to making the government of the United States more responsive to the American people. It was founded in 1999 by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg. Democracy Corps provides free public opinion research and strategic advice to those dedicated to a more responsive Congress and Presidency."
_________________________________________
You can add Bob Shrum to the two Democrats mentioned above.
_________________________________________
"The organization was born out of outrage over the impeachment of President Clinton when the leadership in Congress preferred radical partisanship to addressing the issues which really matter to American families. Following the 2000 election, Democracy Corps rededicated itself after the presidential candidate with the most votes and the most popular policy agenda did not become the President of the United States."
__________________________________________
No doubt their poll was not slanted to a particular segment of the population......Say like residents of New Jersey. After all, who could be more fair minded or unbiased than James Carville?
By the way......Where is your chart reflecting only citizens of the United States?????
I am beginning to understand Knun's constant reference to "Ass Hat's" and "handlers". It's becoming obvious that you are "all hat and no cattle".
Joe Ribaudo
[Democracy Corps Poll, Jun, 2009
Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the health insurance system in the United States generally? (If Satisfied/Dissatisfied, ask:) (Is that very or somewhat satisfied/dissatisfied?) [ Q.17 ]
14% Very satisfied
26% Somewhat satisfied
27% Somewhat dissatisfied
31% Very dissatisfied
3% Don't know/Refused]
__________________________________________________________________________
"Democracy Corps is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to making the government of the United States more responsive to the American people. It was founded in 1999 by James Carville and Stanley Greenberg. Democracy Corps provides free public opinion research and strategic advice to those dedicated to a more responsive Congress and Presidency."
_________________________________________
You can add Bob Shrum to the two Democrats mentioned above.
_________________________________________
"The organization was born out of outrage over the impeachment of President Clinton when the leadership in Congress preferred radical partisanship to addressing the issues which really matter to American families. Following the 2000 election, Democracy Corps rededicated itself after the presidential candidate with the most votes and the most popular policy agenda did not become the President of the United States."
__________________________________________
No doubt their poll was not slanted to a particular segment of the population......Say like residents of New Jersey. After all, who could be more fair minded or unbiased than James Carville?
By the way......Where is your chart reflecting only citizens of the United States?????
I am beginning to understand Knun's constant reference to "Ass Hat's" and "handlers". It's becoming obvious that you are "all hat and no cattle".
Joe Ribaudo
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
lbj, Spinmaster..........
lbj,
Your information is out of date, or from partisan sources.
___________________________________________________
Support for Congressional Health Care Reform Falls to New Low
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. Voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.
More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed. Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.
Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it. Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
Despite the loss of support, 51% of all voters still say it is at least somewhat likely that the health care proposal will become law this year. That figure has hardly budged since the debate began and now includes 18% who say passage is very likely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say passage of the plan is unlikely, but only 10% say it is not at all likely.
Congress is now in recess until early September, but Democratic congressional leaders have vowed to pass some form of the health care plan when they return to Washington. Town hall meetings many of the congressmen are holding to get public feedback on the plan have turned into protest sessions, and the New York Times reports today that the president and Democratic leaders are revamping the sales strategy for the reform effort because they find themselves on the defensive.
As for the protesters at congressional town hall meetings, 49% believe they are genuinely expressing the views of their neighbors, while 37% think they’ve been put up to it by special interest groups and lobbyists.
The latest polls shows that 26% of voters believe that passage of the Congressional health care plan will lead to a better quality of health care. But most voters (51%) disagree and say the quality will get worse. Seventeen percent (17%) expect it to stay the same.
Voters ages 18 to 29 are closely divided on the question of quality, but those in all older age groups by sizable margins expect quality to worsen.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans and 59% of unaffiliated voters say passage of the health care plan will cause the quality of health care to go down. Among Democrats, 41% say quality will improve, 25% get worse and 26% stay the same.
Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters say the cost of health care will go up if the reform proposal passes. Nineteen percent (19%) say costs will go down, and 21% say they will stay the same.
Voters in all age and income groups, again by large margins, believe passage of the reform measure will drive up health care costs.
Republican voters overwhelmingly say costs will go up with the new plan. By a two-to-one margin, unaffiliated voters agree. Democrats are fairly evenly divided as to whether costs will go up or down.
When it comes to health care decisions, 51% of voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies. But 41% fear the insurance companies more.
Yet only 25% agree with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that health insurance companies are "villains."
While Congress has debated reforms to the U.S. Health care system, Americans have begun to show greater confidence in it. Forty-eight percent (48%) of adults now say the health care system is good or excellent, and only 19% say it’s poor.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters say tax cuts for the middle class are more important than new spending for health care reform, although the president’s top economic advisers have indicated that tax hikes may be necessary to fund the reform plan. That helps explain why 76% say it is likely that taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of health care reform, and 59% say it’s very likely.
Thirty-two percent (32%) favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone, but 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs are available to Premium Members only.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... to_new_low
One of your polls was conducted in 2003, another from 2007.
This is from another of your polls:
This Time Magazine poll was conducted by telephone July 27 - 28, 2009 among a national random sample of 1,002 Americans, age 18 and older throughout America The poll includes limited interviews with cell phone respondents.
The margin of error for the entire sample is approximately +/- 3 percentage points. The margin of error is higher for subgroups. Surveys are subject to other error sources as well, including sampling coverage error, recording error, and respondent error.
The sample's partisan distribution is as follows:
Democrats: 34%
Republicans: 23%
Independents: 32%
__________________________________________________
You certainly do fine work! Are you related to Carville???
Joe Ribaudo
Your information is out of date, or from partisan sources.
___________________________________________________
Support for Congressional Health Care Reform Falls to New Low
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Public support for the health care reform plan proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats has fallen to a new low as just 42% of U.S. Voters now favor the plan. That’s down five points from two weeks ago and down eight points from six weeks ago.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that opposition to the plan has increased to 53%, up nine points since late June.
More significantly, 44% of voters strongly oppose the health care reform effort versus 26% who strongly favor it. Intensity has been stronger among opponents of the plan since the debate began.
Sixty-seven percent (67%) of those under 30 favor the plan while 56% of those over 65 are opposed. Among senior citizens, 46% are strongly opposed.
Predictably, 69% of Democrats favor the plan, while 79% of Republicans oppose it. Yet while 44% of Democratic voters strongly favor the reform effort, 70% of GOP voters are strongly opposed to it.
Most notable, however, is the opposition among voters not affiliated with either party. Sixty-two percent (62%) of unaffiliated voters oppose the health care plan, and 51% are strongly opposed. This marks an uptick in strong opposition among both Republicans and unaffiliateds, while the number of strongly supportive Democrats is unchanged.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? If it's in the news, it's in our polls). Rasmussen Reports updates are also available on Twitter or Facebook.
Despite the loss of support, 51% of all voters still say it is at least somewhat likely that the health care proposal will become law this year. That figure has hardly budged since the debate began and now includes 18% who say passage is very likely. Thirty-nine percent (39%) say passage of the plan is unlikely, but only 10% say it is not at all likely.
Congress is now in recess until early September, but Democratic congressional leaders have vowed to pass some form of the health care plan when they return to Washington. Town hall meetings many of the congressmen are holding to get public feedback on the plan have turned into protest sessions, and the New York Times reports today that the president and Democratic leaders are revamping the sales strategy for the reform effort because they find themselves on the defensive.
As for the protesters at congressional town hall meetings, 49% believe they are genuinely expressing the views of their neighbors, while 37% think they’ve been put up to it by special interest groups and lobbyists.
The latest polls shows that 26% of voters believe that passage of the Congressional health care plan will lead to a better quality of health care. But most voters (51%) disagree and say the quality will get worse. Seventeen percent (17%) expect it to stay the same.
Voters ages 18 to 29 are closely divided on the question of quality, but those in all older age groups by sizable margins expect quality to worsen.
Seventy-five percent (75%) of Republicans and 59% of unaffiliated voters say passage of the health care plan will cause the quality of health care to go down. Among Democrats, 41% say quality will improve, 25% get worse and 26% stay the same.
Fifty-one percent (51%) of all voters say the cost of health care will go up if the reform proposal passes. Nineteen percent (19%) say costs will go down, and 21% say they will stay the same.
Voters in all age and income groups, again by large margins, believe passage of the reform measure will drive up health care costs.
Republican voters overwhelmingly say costs will go up with the new plan. By a two-to-one margin, unaffiliated voters agree. Democrats are fairly evenly divided as to whether costs will go up or down.
When it comes to health care decisions, 51% of voters fear the federal government more than private insurance companies. But 41% fear the insurance companies more.
Yet only 25% agree with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that health insurance companies are "villains."
While Congress has debated reforms to the U.S. Health care system, Americans have begun to show greater confidence in it. Forty-eight percent (48%) of adults now say the health care system is good or excellent, and only 19% say it’s poor.
Fifty-four percent (54%) of voters say tax cuts for the middle class are more important than new spending for health care reform, although the president’s top economic advisers have indicated that tax hikes may be necessary to fund the reform plan. That helps explain why 76% say it is likely that taxes will have to be raised on the middle class to cover the cost of health care reform, and 59% say it’s very likely.
Thirty-two percent (32%) favor a single-payer health care system where the federal government provides coverage for everyone, but 57% are opposed to a single-payer plan.
Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free) or follow us on Twitter or Facebook. Let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.
See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs are available to Premium Members only.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... to_new_low
One of your polls was conducted in 2003, another from 2007.
This is from another of your polls:
This Time Magazine poll was conducted by telephone July 27 - 28, 2009 among a national random sample of 1,002 Americans, age 18 and older throughout America The poll includes limited interviews with cell phone respondents.
The margin of error for the entire sample is approximately +/- 3 percentage points. The margin of error is higher for subgroups. Surveys are subject to other error sources as well, including sampling coverage error, recording error, and respondent error.
The sample's partisan distribution is as follows:
Democrats: 34%
Republicans: 23%
Independents: 32%
__________________________________________________
You certainly do fine work! Are you related to Carville???
Joe Ribaudo
Joe,
The info you posted was telling. I have so much more to say but I'm trying to tone it down a bit. Of course your post doesn't really need anything added to it anyway.
Don,
This somehow evolved into a "which is better" conversation. That is not the issue. The issue is wether socialised medicine is something the American people need. Are we willing to pay for it? Are we willing to let 30% of economy be controlled outright by the Gov'mt? Are we willing to take that large a step down the path of socialization. The short answer is no.
The info you posted was telling. I have so much more to say but I'm trying to tone it down a bit. Of course your post doesn't really need anything added to it anyway.
Don,
That is the socialist slant in action. You said it. "they all have the right to be treated, fed, housed..." NO, they have the right to earn a living as best they can with the skills thay have. If they don't have skills they better damn well learn some quick. Why do they have the right? Because it's the "right" thing to do...let's help everyone! You realize this is simply a way to buy votes. The more the better for the socialists and you, a rational person, pay the tab. Your voice becomes more and more diluted as you pay more and more. Do you feed every stray cat that comes to your door.....even if it bites you as you feed it?The reason the nhs is struggling under the work load is because of the enormous strain put upon it,we have had such an influx of immigrants into this country in recent years,and they all have the right to be treated......prob a large proportion of those incomers enter the country for no other reason than that..at first.They then find that they can get fed, housed, and god knows what besides by the taxpayer.
As with anything the devil is in the details. A large portion in that raw number are those very people you are complaining about. They are illegals that struggle to come up with fake ID's to get free care. It also includes folks that can but choose not to get insurance. The true number is something like 15 million. That's based on what I've read. But it is less than 49 mil. Your question has also been used for the single payer idea. How could we afford to cover 49 mil under the rebuilt system. A system in which ALL 49 mil would be included.Now what if we suddenly throw the reported 49 million of uninsured american people into the private sector.......a fair proportion of them no doubt have health problems....could the private health system cope?
This somehow evolved into a "which is better" conversation. That is not the issue. The issue is wether socialised medicine is something the American people need. Are we willing to pay for it? Are we willing to let 30% of economy be controlled outright by the Gov'mt? Are we willing to take that large a step down the path of socialization. The short answer is no.
joe,
you still have not responded to the posts where i caught you red handed.
regarding:
you still have not responded to the posts where i caught you red handed.
regarding:
you are right. the poll is partisan because republicans are much lower than 23% of the population.javascript:emoticon(':P')The sample's partisan distribution is as follows:
Democrats: 34%
Republicans: 23%
Independents: 32%
joe,
i checkout rassmusen reports and was stunned by the intellectual quality of his research. i dont know how i could have survived without knowing
i nearly signed up but ran out of time because "as the stomach churns" started playing.
i checkout rassmusen reports and was stunned by the intellectual quality of his research. i dont know how i could have survived without knowing
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ ... hout_abdul17% Say 'American Idol' Will Be Worse Without Abdul
i nearly signed up but ran out of time because "as the stomach churns" started playing.
Hi Knun,Knun wrote:Joe,
That is the socialist slant in action. You said it. "they all have the right to be treated, fed, housed..." NO, they have the right to earn a living as best they can with the skills thay have. If they don't have skills they better damn well learn some quick. Why do they have the right? Because it's the "right" thing to do...let's help everyone! You realize this is simply a way to buy votes. The more the better for the socialists and you, a rational person, pay the tab. Your voice becomes more and more diluted as you pay more and more. Do you feed every stray cat that comes to your door.....even if it bites you as you feed it?
UNQUOTE
EVERYTHING politicians do ,is designed to win votes,thats the same the world over.
We pay more and more ,its true, we pay for politicians expense accounts- politicians lifestyles-nuclear weapons-subsidies to bail out failed banks- we pay out to support failed capitalist ventures yet baulk at paying out to support public services because they are so called "socialised".....we as a public do indeed feed "every stray cat that comes to our door" except that "they" arent known as "stray cats" -they are known as capitalist institutions....or "sharks".....
Id rather pay for something that is in the public interestr as opposed to something that favours vested interests.
This somehow evolved into a "which is better" conversation. That is not the issue. The issue is wether socialised medicine is something the American people need. Are we willing to pay for it? Are we willing to let 30% of economy be controlled outright by the Gov'mt? Are we willing to take that large a step down the path of socialization. The short answer is no.
"The which is better" issue......surely that IS the issue...."better" or "worse" as regards the welfare of the conyntries citizens.That is surely the catalyst for any change, reform or dismantling of the service.Are the american people prepared to pay for it?Im assuming some would and some wouldnt. the question surely is not whether the changes would constitute "socialised" medecine or not,but whether the proposed changes would be for the common good. Unbridled socialism isnt what i personally want,but then again unbridled capitalism isnt something id want either....taken to the extremes both are evil in my opinion.
Maybe the govt should have a referundum on the issue,maybe its too important an issue to be decided by partisan politicians of either ilk alone....let the people decide,and then stick by that decision whether you disagree personally with it or not.
Don update your email address
LBJ,
I read your post. But didn't think it'd be necessary to reply. The answer is just so obvious.
I read your post. But didn't think it'd be necessary to reply. The answer is just so obvious.
Yes, the data includes Canada, the US and every third world country from Mexico to Chile. So the data for all of Europe is comparible to a measurement of the America's which includes a gaggle of third world countries."americas" in the chart does not mean the "united states of america". the "americas" include all the countries in north and south america.
Don,"The which is better" issue......surely that IS the issue...."better" or "worse" as regards the welfare of the conyntries citizens.That is surely the catalyst for any change, reform or dismantling of the service
I think you confusing two issues. I said "The which is better" comment because we had started talking about your socialized system in Brit vs, the US system. The issue is the US system. The merits and misgivings of your system are valid in the discussion only from a "what if" point of view. Nothing more since the discussion is about US healthcare. Your system is simply for comparison and we care not what you think is best.
OK I'll play one more time on this. Who, in your opinion, thinks that dismantling is a viable option for the US? If I told you that the UK system should be dismantled how would you respond? That is what our President is saying to us and we are saying not just no but hell no. You've said before that no Brit would even suggest that the UK go private. We feel the same way about going socialist yet our President has said just that. That is why you are seeing things evolve here as they are.That is surely the catalyst for any change, reform or dismantling of the service.
This is where you simply don't have a clue. Most Americans do not trust the Government to manage anything. They have consistantly proven us correct in that regard. You left leaners think the "common good" is everything. Most Americans do not. We help for the common good. We pay taxes for the common good. But here you are responsible for yourself. Most here believe I have no obligation to pay for anything anyone else needs. That includes a morsel of food for a dying man. I choose willingly to help that starving man. Have we socialized that help? Yes we have. No one goes hungry in the US. No one goes without basic healthcare either. I have no problem paying taxes for those social issues. But I am not willing to pay for everything everyone wants.Are the american people prepared to pay for it?Im assuming some would and some wouldnt. the question surely is not whether the changes would constitute "socialised" medecine or not,but whether the proposed changes would be for the common good.
I have repeatedly pointed out that the poor in this Country have healthcare which is exactly the same as mine. But you continue to discuss this debate as if the poor and infirm do not have access. It's not the poor that should be discussed. They have better care than you do simply because the service you wait for they receive in half the time here. The discussion here is about underinsured, rising costs, pre-existing conditions and cancellation of service.
To rebuild our system because of those things is purely political and a power grab. That will not fly here.
I would think that you would see the danger in socialism since you are living it. But I guess not.Unbridled socialism isnt what i personally want,but then again unbridled capitalism isnt something id want either....taken to the extremes both are evil in my opinion.
un, [/quote]Maybe the govt should have a referundum on the issue,maybe its too important an issue to be decided by partisan politicians of either ilk alone....let the people decide,and then stick by that decision whether you disagree personally with it or not.
I would be willing to live by that decision. It has been prposed here and discounted by the administration.
How did that referendum go for you Brits back in the '40's. Hey you didn't have one.
issue is the US system. The merits and misgivings of your system are valid in the discussion only from a "what if" point of view. Nothing more since the discussion is about US healthcare. Your system is simply for comparison and we care not what you think is best.
unquote
Who exactly is "we"......Id suggest a lot are interested in the so called "socialised health" if only merely to point out its failings and trumpet the merits of the private system....
quote
OK I'll play one more time on this. Who, in your opinion, thinks that dismantling is a viable option for the US? If I told you that the UK system should be dismantled how would you respond? That is what our President is saying to us and we are saying not just no but hell no. You've said before that no Brit would even suggest that the UK go private. We feel the same way about going socialist yet our President has said just that. That is why you are seeing things evolve here as they are.
unquote
Well knun the people voted,maybe the majority Would prefer obamas option.......Im sure you are not suggesting that your views are held by everyone,indeed they cant be because if they were McCain would be in office.I personally dont care whivch system the USA persists with,but when others (Aand im not necessarilly meaning yourself) try to promote american private health by slagging off the NHS as an example of all whats bad,then something s
hould be said.
quote
would think that you would see the danger in socialism since you are living it. But I guess not
quote
Im quite aware of the dangers of socialism,im also aware of the dangers of capitalism ..left to their own devices both systems can be equally bad
Quote:
Maybe the govt should have a referundum on the issue,maybe its too important an issue to be decided by partisan politicians of either ilk alone....let the people decide,and then stick by that decision whether you disagree personally with it or not.
un, [/quote]
I would be willing to live by that decision. It has been prposed here and discounted by the administration.
How did that referendum go for you Brits back in the '40's. Hey you didn't have one.
UNQUOTE
Its true we didnt have a referendum ,the main reason being there was nothing to have a referendum about really.......the health care situation then was practically non existent for ordinary people......having a referendum would have been much like asking a starving nation whether they wanted to vote for food
unquote
Who exactly is "we"......Id suggest a lot are interested in the so called "socialised health" if only merely to point out its failings and trumpet the merits of the private system....
quote
OK I'll play one more time on this. Who, in your opinion, thinks that dismantling is a viable option for the US? If I told you that the UK system should be dismantled how would you respond? That is what our President is saying to us and we are saying not just no but hell no. You've said before that no Brit would even suggest that the UK go private. We feel the same way about going socialist yet our President has said just that. That is why you are seeing things evolve here as they are.
unquote
Well knun the people voted,maybe the majority Would prefer obamas option.......Im sure you are not suggesting that your views are held by everyone,indeed they cant be because if they were McCain would be in office.I personally dont care whivch system the USA persists with,but when others (Aand im not necessarilly meaning yourself) try to promote american private health by slagging off the NHS as an example of all whats bad,then something s
hould be said.
quote
would think that you would see the danger in socialism since you are living it. But I guess not
quote
Im quite aware of the dangers of socialism,im also aware of the dangers of capitalism ..left to their own devices both systems can be equally bad
Quote:
Maybe the govt should have a referundum on the issue,maybe its too important an issue to be decided by partisan politicians of either ilk alone....let the people decide,and then stick by that decision whether you disagree personally with it or not.
un, [/quote]
I would be willing to live by that decision. It has been prposed here and discounted by the administration.
How did that referendum go for you Brits back in the '40's. Hey you didn't have one.
UNQUOTE
Its true we didnt have a referendum ,the main reason being there was nothing to have a referendum about really.......the health care situation then was practically non existent for ordinary people......having a referendum would have been much like asking a starving nation whether they wanted to vote for food
Don update your email address
Don,
Quite frankly you lost my interest in your point of view when you went from one extreme to the other.No I don't mean that I would perfer one opinion over the other. But one or the other would seem reasonable. Both seem to be....well,....no opinion at all.
You say your not a patriot and yet say this:
Your system has many problems. Ours has problems as well. Both are working at some level. If yours is no better than ours why would we even consider switching to a system that has problems? Why not just fix ours? Yours comes with a price. More so than ours.
People from your system come to ours. People from ours do not go to yours. How does it even make sense to have a discussion?
After that threat subsided there was minimal discussion as to what should remain socialized and what should not be. I learned from that.
Quite frankly you lost my interest in your point of view when you went from one extreme to the other.No I don't mean that I would perfer one opinion over the other. But one or the other would seem reasonable. Both seem to be....well,....no opinion at all.
"We" are all the poeple that have a dog in the hunt. Rational folks and asshats alike. All Americans regarsless of point of view. Your view and comments are simply reference material. This type of hunt ended for you in the forties.Who exactly is "we"......Id suggest a lot are interested in the so called "socialised health" if only merely to point out its failings and trumpet the merits of the private system....
If you want to play you simply have to keep up. All of the polls in this Country say that the MAJORITY of us Americans, regardless of politics, apose this socialist tripe.Well knun the people voted,maybe the majority Would prefer obamas option.......
You say your not a patriot and yet say this:
You are not lost! lolI personally dont care whivch system the USA persists with,but when others (Aand im not necessarilly meaning yourself) try to promote american private health by slagging off the NHS as an example of all whats bad,then something should be said.
Your system has many problems. Ours has problems as well. Both are working at some level. If yours is no better than ours why would we even consider switching to a system that has problems? Why not just fix ours? Yours comes with a price. More so than ours.
People from your system come to ours. People from ours do not go to yours. How does it even make sense to have a discussion?
BE honest. The entire Country was essentially under, what we call, martial law. Everything was socialized. The UK was fighting for it's life and every single thing was used to repel that threat. Food, water, housing, everything was confinscated at will for the common good. And it worked. You Brits kicked ass and perservered as one.Its true we didnt have a referendum ,the main reason being there was nothing to have a referendum about really.......the health care situation then was practically non existent for ordinary people......having a referendum would have been much like asking a starving nation whether they wanted to vote for food
After that threat subsided there was minimal discussion as to what should remain socialized and what should not be. I learned from that.
You are not lost! lolKnun wrote:Don,
Quite frankly you lost my interest in your point of view when you went from one extreme to the other.No I don't mean that I would perfer one
unquote
One extreme to the other? how so? I try to look at things through unjaundiced eyes....ive said before unbridled socialism is as bad as unbridled capitalism....thats not an extreme view.I dislike socialisms petty rules,but appreciate socialist health care....i can see the bad but also see the good...shouldnt everyone try to do the same?
quote
"We" are all the poeple that have a dog in the hunt. Rational folks and asshats alike. All Americans regarsless of point of view. Your view and comments are simply reference material. This type of hunt ended for you in the forties.
unquote
The "rationals" are the guys who want the private i presume and the so -called "asshats" are the guys who dont?
We all have a "dog in the hunt".....the way finance and business works in this world,whos to say we in britain wont have the american health system imposed on us at some time.....if enough palms can be greased by powerful interests it might happen....heaven forbid. but it might.
If you want to play you simply have to keep up. All of the polls in this Country say that the MAJORITY of us Americans, regardless of politics, apose this socialist tripe.
UNQUOTE
Polls? you trust polls?
quote
You say your not a patriot and yet say this:
I personally dont care whivch system the USA persists with,but when others (Aand im not necessarilly meaning yourself) try to promote american private health by slagging off the NHS as an example of all whats bad,then something should be said.
UNQUOTE
What on earth has that got to do with being a patriot?(or not a patriot as the case may be)I was defending the NHS system not the british government..i grew out of the patriotic nonsense years ago.
quote
Your system has many problems. Ours has problems as well. Both are working at some level. If yours is no better than ours why would we even consider switching to a system that has problems? Why not just fix ours? Yours comes with a price. More so than ours.
unquote
the price? we all pay A price
quote
People from your system come to ours. People from ours do not go to yours. How does it even make sense to have a discussion?
unquote
People also go to russia for specialised treatment.....thousand (maybe hundreds of thousands) come from third world countries to britain and europe for treatment....medical students come from all over the world to study medecine in britain,some of the best teaching hospoitals in the world GUYS hosp is but one example....so yes you are quite right it DOESNT make sense to have this discussion im afraid
quote
BE honest. The entire Country was essentially under, what we call, martial law. Everything was socialized. The UK was fighting for it's life and every single thing was used to repel that threat. Food, water, housing, everything was confinscated at will for the common good. And it worked. You Brits kicked ass and perservered as one.
unquote
You seem to have a phobia about socialism,in any shape or form.....Yet i presume tyou are in support of the police for example......what is the police force but "socialised policing".....maybe private police force should be introduced to combat the "red threat " too...but where do you stop?
yes, as i said early, you were correct...there really is no point arguing.the alternatives are pointless.
regards
Don update your email address
Don,
I believe social services are something we need. I know we do not need socialism. I do have a phobia about socialism. Socialism is like cancer. Social services help those truly in need. Can you call social services socialism...of course you can! In that context, we live with many forms of socialism already and most are OK with that. Including me. But when the gov'mt tries to extend collectiveness to the masses....now that is a different story!
I think every social service needs to be watched very, very closely. They are always abused by politicians for votes, or money. They are prone to theft in many forms, as well as abuse by those that supposedly are to be helped, use or provide that type of service.
Don't forget, I do not believe everyone deserves the same lot in life. I believe you earn your lot in life. It's my belief regardless of what you believe. Many here, in the United States, agree with that view.
Maybe you don't believe that. So be it. You live your socialised life on that side of the pond and be happy.
I will live mine here and do what I can to ensure I live mine as I wish. That wish does not include socialism.
You confuse two things.You seem to have a phobia about socialism,in any shape or form.....Yet i presume tyou are in support of the police for example......what is the police force but "socialised policing".....maybe private police force should be introduced to combat the "red threat " too...but where do you stop?
I believe social services are something we need. I know we do not need socialism. I do have a phobia about socialism. Socialism is like cancer. Social services help those truly in need. Can you call social services socialism...of course you can! In that context, we live with many forms of socialism already and most are OK with that. Including me. But when the gov'mt tries to extend collectiveness to the masses....now that is a different story!
I think every social service needs to be watched very, very closely. They are always abused by politicians for votes, or money. They are prone to theft in many forms, as well as abuse by those that supposedly are to be helped, use or provide that type of service.
Don't forget, I do not believe everyone deserves the same lot in life. I believe you earn your lot in life. It's my belief regardless of what you believe. Many here, in the United States, agree with that view.
Maybe you don't believe that. So be it. You live your socialised life on that side of the pond and be happy.
I will live mine here and do what I can to ensure I live mine as I wish. That wish does not include socialism.
knun,
you really are a pea brain
you really are a pea brain
don't you see how idiotic your statement is? do you really need someone to explain it to you?Yes, the data includes Canada, the US and every third world country from Mexico to Chile. So the data for all of Europe is comparible to a measurement of the America's which includes a gaggle of third world countries.