They all suck!!!!!!!!!!!

What's a "huckter"?

 

Socialism is a political ideology that isn't incompatible with capitalism. You are confusing socialism with communism.

You are also completely uniformed about socialist "systems".

Every highly developed democratic country outside the USA have socialist governments to one degree or another and capitalistic economic systems. Some failure.

Broken down to it's simplest from, socialism is simply a social contract by the people of a country that they wish to ensure that everyone playing by the rules gets to enjoy a decent standard of living. In no way does it stand in the way of one bettering themselves. In fact, thru the promise of easier to obtain education and health care to ensure someone is healthy enough to take advantage when opportunity knocks socialism makes it easier for everyone to climb the ladder of success.

 

oops, left out the S

Huckster, HTH

 

Nice try, that entire article even uses the word communism, total bait and switch. What is a central planner? Give me a break.

Now lets see how well conservatism has worked.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

 

I tried responding to this post with a link to a paper by a college professor of sociology but it is waiting admin approval.

I don't want to wait to push back on the article you posted so here is that part of my response.

Nice try, the article even refers to communism, he is conflating the two to scare people and he has no real clue or is pushing his agenda when it comes to socialism. What is a central planner? Never heard of that before. We already have socialism in the US btw, it's call Social Security, only the most successful program ever created by the US government.

Now lets talk universal health care. Did you know that .32 cents of every dollar sent to a private health insurance company is used for something other then providing health care(i.e. profit, advertising, CEO bonuses, ETC). Now compare that to medicare, where only .04 cents of every dollar goes to non care expenses. Now which system do you think is more efficient.

 

You've shot your credibility in the foot. Good bye!

And don't get me started on universal health care. That's another failed idea just like all the socialists' ideas.

 

Of course, because Medicare puts all of those responsibilities on the doctor or patient.
Also, due to price controls Medicare does not fully cover the costs to Doctors to perform most procedures. No wonder many Doctors won't accept new Medicare patients.

 

Wow you got the FOX defection down pat.

I give it an 8.5.

If you are talking about the pending short fall of SS all that has to be done is lift the cap and it's solvent, hmmm, lets see, oh yeah, FOR EVER!

So single payer Universal Health Care is a failure, wonder if any of our north of the border friends care to tell us what they think of it.

(Every Canadian I've ever talked to say it's not perfect but would never trade it for the mess we have)


So what you are saying is you prefer a system that allows companies to eliminate your benefits at anytime and deny you coverage for pre existing conditions when you switch jobs?

 

Oops, you messed up on that one, If they paid full price then what you are saying is that the non-health services cost would be even lower then 4 cents per dollar.

GOTCHA

 

You'll have to walk me through your logic.

If who paid full price? Medicare already performs zero health services.