Re: [Off topic] Socialized Medicine

[Guest guest]

You paid for this pamphlet? Propaganda like this is freely available.

>

> Greetings All:

>

> The following is the text of a pamphlet that I bought off of EBay. It makes

> some very interesting points and describes a system remarkably similar to

> the Canadian medical system. Keep in mind that it was written in 1938.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> Family Doctor or Federal Agent?

>

> It's 3:20 A.M. You've just been awakened. In the next room, your child is

> crying. You slip into a robe. In a moment, you're at her bedside.

> " What's the matter, dear? " you whisper anxiously.

> The poor youngster is doubled up with pain. She can hardly talk.

> " My side, " she moans. " It hurts awful. "

> You rush to the phone. There's one person you must see. Your family

> doctor....

> Later when your fears are soothed and your child sleeps comfortably after

> his treatment, perhaps you exclaim to yourself:

> " What would I ever do without Dr. ! "

> Imagine, if you can, being deprived of you private family physician.

> Suppose for a moment that medicine were socialized. That most physicians

> were federal agents on the government payroll.

> What kind of treatment could you expect then?

> Let's see....

> Under socialized medicine, patients flock to the doctor. Their complaints

> may be trivial. But they're taxed for the cost of treatment whether they're

> ill or not. So they want their money's worth.

> You can imagine the result.

> " Illness " naturally increases. The number of cases to be treated shoots

> skyhigh. The burden on the physician is staggering. He runs from patient to

> patient. He is constantly making rounds at the hospital. His office is

> jammed.

> A doctor's time belongs properly to his patients. But under socialized

> medicine, a large proportion of it has to go into book-keeping. There are

> authorizations to be obtained, government reports to be filled out in

> duplicate and triplicate, a multitude of records to be kept, and endless

> correspondence to be entered into.

> The ill-effects of this overwork on the physician are obvious. Less obvious

> - yet far more serious - are the ill-effects on the patient. For example:

> The harassed doctor is often unable to answer calls promptly. If the case

> isn't serious, this may not make much difference. But suppose it is serious.

> The patient may then find himself in a grave predicament.

> Even when the doctor does finally arrive, his treatment is bound to be

> hurried and impersonal. Demands on his time are such that he must rush off

> as quickly as possible on his next call. This means that the patient will

> receive a quick once-over at best, followed by some handy stock

> prescription.

> Seldom does the socialized physician get an opportunity to study his

> patient the way he should. You, for instance, are not the Mr. or Mrs. Brown

> he knew since the day he delivered you. To the government agent you are

> merely ledger entry No. 1397.

> If you go to the doctor's office you have to wait indefinitely. When your

> turn finally comes, he can seldom give you more than three or four minutes

> of his time. Naturally, he'll do his best under the circumstances. But lack

> of time for proper diagnosis and treatment is a severe handicap. It may

> outweigh his most conscientious efforts.

> Remember, too, that under socialized medicine the physician is not paid by

> you. He is paid by the government, to whom he is responsible . Whether you

> live or die, therefore, has little effect on his material success.

> But - you suggest, at least the doctor won't send me any more bill!

> True. He won't. But the government will. Of course, they won't be the

> familiar white slips of paper. They'll take the form of taxes. And they'll

> hurt!

> In this country today, you pay for medical care only when you're sick.

> Under socialized medicine, you pay all the time. And you're responsible for

> the medical bills of millions of other people besides yourself.

> Nor do you pay only for treatment. You pay the fat salaries of useless

> political appointees. You pay for the waste and mismanagement always

> associated with bureaucratic control.

> Of course, you may figure:

> Socialized medicine costs more. Therefore, the care I receive should be

> better.

> It should. But is it?

> Examine the vital statistics of countries that have had socialized medicine

> for years. Look at their death and sickness rates. See how much higher they

> average than those of the United States. The record is enough to any

> American thank God for our present system of private practice.

> Oh, well, you may say, why should I worry? We don't have socialized

> medicine in the United States.

> Quite right. We don't - yet. But even as you read this, certain Congressmen

> and state legislators are planning to foist such a system on the public!

> Legislation with socialized medicine as its aim has already been introduced

> in Washington and in several state capitols!

> But why is such a scheme being promoted? The reason is easily found. Our

> politicians are not interested in health. They're interested in creating

> jobs. And as a job-creating machine, socialized medicine can scarcely be

> equalled.

> Who will be hurt the most by such a system?

> Not the doctor. He is essential to any medical system. The real victim will

> be you, the American Patient.

> ly, that's the reason for this pamphlet. To give you the facts. To

> show you the vital importance of helping yourself.

> It's you who stand to lose the most if socialized medicine is admitted to

> the United States. It's up to you, therefore, to keep it out!

>

> Copyright 1938, Medical Economics, Inc., Rutherford, N.J.

>

>

[Guest guest]

You paid for this pamphlet? Propaganda like this is freely available.

>

> Greetings All:

>

> The following is the text of a pamphlet that I bought off of EBay. It makes

> some very interesting points and describes a system remarkably similar to

> the Canadian medical system. Keep in mind that it was written in 1938.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

> Family Doctor or Federal Agent?

>

> It's 3:20 A.M. You've just been awakened. In the next room, your child is

> crying. You slip into a robe. In a moment, you're at her bedside.

> " What's the matter, dear? " you whisper anxiously.

> The poor youngster is doubled up with pain. She can hardly talk.

> " My side, " she moans. " It hurts awful. "

> You rush to the phone. There's one person you must see. Your family

> doctor....

> Later when your fears are soothed and your child sleeps comfortably after

> his treatment, perhaps you exclaim to yourself:

> " What would I ever do without Dr. ! "

> Imagine, if you can, being deprived of you private family physician.

> Suppose for a moment that medicine were socialized. That most physicians

> were federal agents on the government payroll.

> What kind of treatment could you expect then?

> Let's see....

> Under socialized medicine, patients flock to the doctor. Their complaints

> may be trivial. But they're taxed for the cost of treatment whether they're

> ill or not. So they want their money's worth.

> You can imagine the result.

> " Illness " naturally increases. The number of cases to be treated shoots

> skyhigh. The burden on the physician is staggering. He runs from patient to

> patient. He is constantly making rounds at the hospital. His office is

> jammed.

> A doctor's time belongs properly to his patients. But under socialized

> medicine, a large proportion of it has to go into book-keeping. There are

> authorizations to be obtained, government reports to be filled out in

> duplicate and triplicate, a multitude of records to be kept, and endless

> correspondence to be entered into.

> The ill-effects of this overwork on the physician are obvious. Less obvious

> - yet far more serious - are the ill-effects on the patient. For example:

> The harassed doctor is often unable to answer calls promptly. If the case

> isn't serious, this may not make much difference. But suppose it is serious.

> The patient may then find himself in a grave predicament.

> Even when the doctor does finally arrive, his treatment is bound to be

> hurried and impersonal. Demands on his time are such that he must rush off

> as quickly as possible on his next call. This means that the patient will

> receive a quick once-over at best, followed by some handy stock

> prescription.

> Seldom does the socialized physician get an opportunity to study his

> patient the way he should. You, for instance, are not the Mr. or Mrs. Brown

> he knew since the day he delivered you. To the government agent you are

> merely ledger entry No. 1397.

> If you go to the doctor's office you have to wait indefinitely. When your

> turn finally comes, he can seldom give you more than three or four minutes

> of his time. Naturally, he'll do his best under the circumstances. But lack

> of time for proper diagnosis and treatment is a severe handicap. It may

> outweigh his most conscientious efforts.

> Remember, too, that under socialized medicine the physician is not paid by

> you. He is paid by the government, to whom he is responsible . Whether you

> live or die, therefore, has little effect on his material success.

> But - you suggest, at least the doctor won't send me any more bill!

> True. He won't. But the government will. Of course, they won't be the

> familiar white slips of paper. They'll take the form of taxes. And they'll

> hurt!

> In this country today, you pay for medical care only when you're sick.

> Under socialized medicine, you pay all the time. And you're responsible for

> the medical bills of millions of other people besides yourself.

> Nor do you pay only for treatment. You pay the fat salaries of useless

> political appointees. You pay for the waste and mismanagement always

> associated with bureaucratic control.

> Of course, you may figure:

> Socialized medicine costs more. Therefore, the care I receive should be

> better.

> It should. But is it?

> Examine the vital statistics of countries that have had socialized medicine

> for years. Look at their death and sickness rates. See how much higher they

> average than those of the United States. The record is enough to any

> American thank God for our present system of private practice.

> Oh, well, you may say, why should I worry? We don't have socialized

> medicine in the United States.

> Quite right. We don't - yet. But even as you read this, certain Congressmen

> and state legislators are planning to foist such a system on the public!

> Legislation with socialized medicine as its aim has already been introduced

> in Washington and in several state capitols!

> But why is such a scheme being promoted? The reason is easily found. Our

> politicians are not interested in health. They're interested in creating

> jobs. And as a job-creating machine, socialized medicine can scarcely be

> equalled.

> Who will be hurt the most by such a system?

> Not the doctor. He is essential to any medical system. The real victim will

> be you, the American Patient.

> ly, that's the reason for this pamphlet. To give you the facts. To

> show you the vital importance of helping yourself.

> It's you who stand to lose the most if socialized medicine is admitted to

> the United States. It's up to you, therefore, to keep it out!

>

> Copyright 1938, Medical Economics, Inc., Rutherford, N.J.

>

>

[Guest guest]

How many people do you have to beg togo see a doctor? No one knows what the

future of socialized medicine will hold. We have the potential to have the most

innovative, modernized health care system in the world.

 

A.

>

> Greetings All:

>

> The following is the text of a pamphlet that I bought off of EBay. It makes

> some very interesting points and describes a system remarkably similar to

> the Canadian medical system. Keep in mind that it was written in 1938.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

Recent Activity

 5

New MembersVisit Your Group

Yahoo! Groups

Everyday Wellness Zone

Check out featured

healthy living groups.

Yahoo! Groups

Dog Lovers Group

Connect and share with

dog owners like you

Y! Groups blog

The place to go

to stay informed

on Groups news!

..

[Guest guest]

--- Randy wrote:

> You paid for this pamphlet? Propaganda like this is freely

> available.

I have an interest in vintage material. I like to compare how they looked at

things in earlier days. Despite the fact that it's propaganda, they make some

valid points, and like I said, their description is remarkably similar to the

Canadian medical system which I live under.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

We needto learn from the current systems and improve on them.

 

A.

> How many people do you have to beg togo see a doctor? No one

> knows what the future of socialized medicine will hold. We

> have the potential to have the most innovative, modernized

> health care system in the world.

Those of us who live under a socialized medical system like described in that

pamphlet know what the future holds, because the future is here and know for us.

It's pathetic. I'm not suggesting that the present American system is any

better, but socializing the American system will only replace one bad system

with another.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- McGuire wrote:

> We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> them.

What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything is

with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government for a

solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- McGuire wrote:

> We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> them.

What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything is

with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government for a

solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- McGuire wrote:

> We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> them.

What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything is

with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government for a

solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is not a statement on

socialized medicine generally, it is only a statement of the system in Canada.

Perhaps more specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual experience

with socialized medicine in Canada, because other people in Canada do have a

different experience, if we are to believe what they tell us.

And there are other countries where socialized government and medicine work

quite well.

Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on nearly every front.

Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and a right, just like

education for instance -- at least in a civilized nation, like we are supposed

to be.

>

> > How many people do you have to beg togo see a doctor? No one

> > knows what the future of socialized medicine will hold. We

> > have the potential to have the most innovative, modernized

> > health care system in the world.

>

> Those of us who live under a socialized medical system like described in that

pamphlet know what the future holds, because the future is here and know for us.

It's pathetic. I'm not suggesting that the present American system is any

better, but socializing the American system will only replace one bad system

with another.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is not a statement on

socialized medicine generally, it is only a statement of the system in Canada.

Perhaps more specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual experience

with socialized medicine in Canada, because other people in Canada do have a

different experience, if we are to believe what they tell us.

And there are other countries where socialized government and medicine work

quite well.

Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on nearly every front.

Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and a right, just like

education for instance -- at least in a civilized nation, like we are supposed

to be.

>

> > How many people do you have to beg togo see a doctor? No one

> > knows what the future of socialized medicine will hold. We

> > have the potential to have the most innovative, modernized

> > health care system in the world.

>

> Those of us who live under a socialized medical system like described in that

pamphlet know what the future holds, because the future is here and know for us.

It's pathetic. I'm not suggesting that the present American system is any

better, but socializing the American system will only replace one bad system

with another.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is not a statement on

socialized medicine generally, it is only a statement of the system in Canada.

Perhaps more specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual experience

with socialized medicine in Canada, because other people in Canada do have a

different experience, if we are to believe what they tell us.

And there are other countries where socialized government and medicine work

quite well.

Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on nearly every front.

Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and a right, just like

education for instance -- at least in a civilized nation, like we are supposed

to be.

>

> > How many people do you have to beg togo see a doctor? No one

> > knows what the future of socialized medicine will hold. We

> > have the potential to have the most innovative, modernized

> > health care system in the world.

>

> Those of us who live under a socialized medical system like described in that

pamphlet know what the future holds, because the future is here and know for us.

It's pathetic. I'm not suggesting that the present American system is any

better, but socializing the American system will only replace one bad system

with another.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the problem.

And I learned this, not through propaganda, but through experience and

education.

>

> > We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> > them.

>

>

> What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything

is with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government

for a solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

>

> I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the problem.

And I learned this, not through propaganda, but through experience and

education.

>

> > We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> > them.

>

>

> What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything

is with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government

for a solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

>

> I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the problem.

And I learned this, not through propaganda, but through experience and

education.

>

> > We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> > them.

>

>

> What you need to learn is that the only way you're going to improve anything

is with freedom, not socialist control. People are looking to the government

for a solution, when it's very often the government who is the problem.

>

> I want to point out that I'm politically neutral. I didn't bring this subject

up to present a political position. I just think it's an interesting topic for

discussion.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

--- McGuire wrote:

> the old system does not work. Healthcare costs are out of

> control. How do you respond to this very real threat to the

> economy?

Aside from the fact that there is no Healthcare, but rather medical care, the

fundamental reason why it doesn't work is because there is no freedom and

competition. If there was, costs would not be out of control. If there was

freedom, a lot of doctors, probably the majority, would not be practicing

pharmaceutical drug therapy, which costs so much. If there was freedom, with

its accompanying competition, drugs wouldn't cost so much. If there was

freedom, frequency therapy would be available and practiced far and wide, at

comparatively low cost. If there was freedom, the populace would be more

individually responsible and take better care of themselves. If there was

freedom, there would be more effective therapies available and the medical

system would perform better.

The solution that you're looking for is not to be found in bureaucratic

socialistic control, but in freedom. Even then, you'll never have a perfect

solution; only God can provide that. But in an imperfect world, freedom is

always the best solution. It never ceases to astonish me how in this day and

age, so few understand and appreciate the concept of freedom. And that includes

Americans in their " land of the free " . You would think that at least Americans

would understand and appreciate the concept of freedom because their nation was

fundamentally founded upon it.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Doctors in this country, despite their lack of success, have an ego that defies

reason. We should ask all of them when consulting, what their " success rate " is.

Doctors are illness managers. They prescribe medications that subdue symptoms

and causes others. What else can you expect, when big pharma educates and pays

them to do so?

I'm not sure if it's just me, but I have observed that chronic illness is on the

rise. I remember when I was a child, my parents were quite healthy when they

were my and my siblings age. Now they're not doing so well. But, their 5

children broke down well before they did--in early - mid adulthood with

different illnesses, some requiring surgery, some just chronic, one with cancer.

We're a sickly lot, and we came from pretty healthy stock.

This is the problem. Why do we all need doctors? People didn't used to have so

many ongoing issues.

> >

> > > We needto learn from the current systems and improve on

> > > them.

> >

> > .

> >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

--- weisstreasure wrote:

> In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the

> problem.

<snip>

The problem is the people who allowed the " greedy Corporation " to become the

problem that it is, viz., you the people.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- weisstreasure wrote:

> In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the

> problem.

<snip>

The problem is the people who allowed the " greedy Corporation " to become the

problem that it is, viz., you the people.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- polo wrote:

> What you don't understand here in USA is that you can

> lose everything you

> have worked for all of your life in days in our Hospitals.

> If that doesn't

> bother you, then you are far more independently wealthier

> than most people

> in this country.

I understand the situation in the USA very well, and yes, it bothers me very

much. If I were American and didn't have the type of job that I do now, I would

be among those without insurance.

> You have no idea how lucky you are to have

> socialized

> medicine in Canada.

Considering that we have a monopolistic system like yours, we are better off

than you. But I would hardly call it " lucky " to be under a system where there's

no freedom or choice, just because we don't have to pay directly.

> I might add, you are the only Canadian,

> I have come in

> contact with that seems very unhappy with your system. The

> only one!

When it comes to understanding and appreciating the finer points of liberty, the

average Canadian is worse than the average American. Canadians have been

brainwashed into thinking they have some sort of entitlement, that they have a

" right " to live at the expense of someone else.

> All of

> my other Canuck friends are actually scared to travel down

> here should they

> become sick.

And so am I. But that's because your present system is worse than ours, not

because our system is good.

> They like their system.

I would say they like our system better than yours, but that's not saying much

given only the two options.

> M. couldn't

> find any Canadian

> dissenters either for his documentary.

Invoking is a fatal error for your argument. He's not a

documentarian, but rather a socialist propagandist. I laughed when I saw his

" coverage " of the Canadian system. He obviously didn't look too hard for an

opposing viewpoint.

> I will take your system any day, even with the flaws.

Like I said, given only two options, anyone would take our system over yours.

But that's not saying much. The point I've been making is that freedom permits

far better options than either your present atrocious system or our pathetic

system.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- polo wrote:

> What you don't understand here in USA is that you can

> lose everything you

> have worked for all of your life in days in our Hospitals.

> If that doesn't

> bother you, then you are far more independently wealthier

> than most people

> in this country.

I understand the situation in the USA very well, and yes, it bothers me very

much. If I were American and didn't have the type of job that I do now, I would

be among those without insurance.

> You have no idea how lucky you are to have

> socialized

> medicine in Canada.

Considering that we have a monopolistic system like yours, we are better off

than you. But I would hardly call it " lucky " to be under a system where there's

no freedom or choice, just because we don't have to pay directly.

> I might add, you are the only Canadian,

> I have come in

> contact with that seems very unhappy with your system. The

> only one!

When it comes to understanding and appreciating the finer points of liberty, the

average Canadian is worse than the average American. Canadians have been

brainwashed into thinking they have some sort of entitlement, that they have a

" right " to live at the expense of someone else.

> All of

> my other Canuck friends are actually scared to travel down

> here should they

> become sick.

And so am I. But that's because your present system is worse than ours, not

because our system is good.

> They like their system.

I would say they like our system better than yours, but that's not saying much

given only the two options.

> M. couldn't

> find any Canadian

> dissenters either for his documentary.

Invoking is a fatal error for your argument. He's not a

documentarian, but rather a socialist propagandist. I laughed when I saw his

" coverage " of the Canadian system. He obviously didn't look too hard for an

opposing viewpoint.

> I will take your system any day, even with the flaws.

Like I said, given only two options, anyone would take our system over yours.

But that's not saying much. The point I've been making is that freedom permits

far better options than either your present atrocious system or our pathetic

system.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- polo wrote:

> What you don't understand here in USA is that you can

> lose everything you

> have worked for all of your life in days in our Hospitals.

> If that doesn't

> bother you, then you are far more independently wealthier

> than most people

> in this country.

I understand the situation in the USA very well, and yes, it bothers me very

much. If I were American and didn't have the type of job that I do now, I would

be among those without insurance.

> You have no idea how lucky you are to have

> socialized

> medicine in Canada.

Considering that we have a monopolistic system like yours, we are better off

than you. But I would hardly call it " lucky " to be under a system where there's

no freedom or choice, just because we don't have to pay directly.

> I might add, you are the only Canadian,

> I have come in

> contact with that seems very unhappy with your system. The

> only one!

When it comes to understanding and appreciating the finer points of liberty, the

average Canadian is worse than the average American. Canadians have been

brainwashed into thinking they have some sort of entitlement, that they have a

" right " to live at the expense of someone else.

> All of

> my other Canuck friends are actually scared to travel down

> here should they

> become sick.

And so am I. But that's because your present system is worse than ours, not

because our system is good.

> They like their system.

I would say they like our system better than yours, but that's not saying much

given only the two options.

> M. couldn't

> find any Canadian

> dissenters either for his documentary.

Invoking is a fatal error for your argument. He's not a

documentarian, but rather a socialist propagandist. I laughed when I saw his

" coverage " of the Canadian system. He obviously didn't look too hard for an

opposing viewpoint.

> I will take your system any day, even with the flaws.

Like I said, given only two options, anyone would take our system over yours.

But that's not saying much. The point I've been making is that freedom permits

far better options than either your present atrocious system or our pathetic

system.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- weisstreasure wrote:

> Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is

> not a statement on socialized medicine generally, it is only

> a statement of the system in Canada. Perhaps more

> specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual

> experience with socialized medicine in Canada, because other

> people in Canada do have a different experience, if we are

> to believe what they tell us.

A monopolistic system cannot be " properly " implemented. Totalitarianism cannot

be " properly " implemented.

> And there are other countries where socialized government

> and medicine work quite well.

They work quite well _in comparison_ to the present American system. But they

are not based upon fundamental freedom and justice for all. They are based

upon, as Frederic Bastiat put it, " that great fiction wherein everybody tries to

live at the expense of everybody else. "

> Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on

> nearly every front.

You do not have the free market capitalist system in the U.S. You have a

monopolistic system where the few dominate the many. Socializing medicine is

just going to solidify that domination.

> Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and

> a right, just like education for instance -- at least in a

> civilized nation, like we are supposed to be.

It's not a right to live at the expense of someone else. At any rate,

socializing medicine will not eliminate profit in medicine; it will secure and

guarantee it. And reducing your freedom further will not make you more

civilized, but less.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- weisstreasure wrote:

> Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is

> not a statement on socialized medicine generally, it is only

> a statement of the system in Canada. Perhaps more

> specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual

> experience with socialized medicine in Canada, because other

> people in Canada do have a different experience, if we are

> to believe what they tell us.

A monopolistic system cannot be " properly " implemented. Totalitarianism cannot

be " properly " implemented.

> And there are other countries where socialized government

> and medicine work quite well.

They work quite well _in comparison_ to the present American system. But they

are not based upon fundamental freedom and justice for all. They are based

upon, as Frederic Bastiat put it, " that great fiction wherein everybody tries to

live at the expense of everybody else. "

> Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on

> nearly every front.

You do not have the free market capitalist system in the U.S. You have a

monopolistic system where the few dominate the many. Socializing medicine is

just going to solidify that domination.

> Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and

> a right, just like education for instance -- at least in a

> civilized nation, like we are supposed to be.

It's not a right to live at the expense of someone else. At any rate,

socializing medicine will not eliminate profit in medicine; it will secure and

guarantee it. And reducing your freedom further will not make you more

civilized, but less.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

--- weisstreasure wrote:

> Yes, if Canada's system is poorly implemented, that is

> not a statement on socialized medicine generally, it is only

> a statement of the system in Canada. Perhaps more

> specifically, it is a statement of a person's individual

> experience with socialized medicine in Canada, because other

> people in Canada do have a different experience, if we are

> to believe what they tell us.

A monopolistic system cannot be " properly " implemented. Totalitarianism cannot

be " properly " implemented.

> And there are other countries where socialized government

> and medicine work quite well.

They work quite well _in comparison_ to the present American system. But they

are not based upon fundamental freedom and justice for all. They are based

upon, as Frederic Bastiat put it, " that great fiction wherein everybody tries to

live at the expense of everybody else. "

> Clearly, the US free market capitalism idea has failed on

> nearly every front.

You do not have the free market capitalist system in the U.S. You have a

monopolistic system where the few dominate the many. Socializing medicine is

just going to solidify that domination.

> Profit does not belong in medicine. It's a service and

> a right, just like education for instance -- at least in a

> civilized nation, like we are supposed to be.

It's not a right to live at the expense of someone else. At any rate,

socializing medicine will not eliminate profit in medicine; it will secure and

guarantee it. And reducing your freedom further will not make you more

civilized, but less.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Blaming us for our greedy and corrupt government/corporate system is like

blaming yourselves for the systems in your country that do not work, aka your

socialized medicine, for example, that you did not have control over.

Face it, governments do not represent people. And we have LITTLE control over

their actions. Don't pretend voting gives you much say. We don't vote on

important decisions being made daily. Our elected officials do. And they do what

they want, or what the corporation tells them to do.

We need to stop villifying each other. We are not each other's enemy.

Until we find more that we are united on, instead of fighting each other, we'll

always be the victims.

When people start uniting together, then we will have more power. Governments

have worked to keep us divided in many ways. In the US the two-party system

works to divide us. Libs are fighting repubs for some senseless reason, hating

their neighbors! not stopping to notice that all of the politicians are on the

take, and not really representing us. Some of them are doing a better job, but

they're ALL rich, and ALL on the take, and ALL of them are immune from the law

(check out how diligent they are paying their taxes. Could you do the same?)

They do this so we fight each other, instead of uniting to fight our common

enemy, which is them (government/corporate spokespeople). We are filled with

daily distractions in the news to polarize the people and solidify the

distinctions.

Stop the senseless arguing, please. What is your point?

>

> > In our country, the free and greedy Corporation is the

> > problem.

> <snip>

>

>

> The problem is the people who allowed the " greedy Corporation " to become the

problem that it is, viz., you the people.

>

> Regards,

>

>

>

>