What Is Americas Biggest Problem?

[iNow]

On 9/19/2017 at 7:21 AM, iNow said:

In case anyone's wondering why support from a state governor for a senate bill matters here, it's because Ducey is from Arizona, the same state Senator John McCain represents, and McCain previously said he'd vote for or against GOP healthcare bills based on what Ducey wants for his state.

McCain famously turned his thumb downward in dramatic fashion on the senate floor just a few short weeks ago and saved millions of Americans from losing their coverage. It's not very promising that he'll repeat that show of strength and character this time  

The fact that McCain has stated he will align with the wishes of his state governor on this, coupled with the fact that this bill is being driven by his absolute best friend in congress...essentially a brother in everything but genetics... Senator Lindsay Graham... coupled with the fact that citizens seem to have lost interest in this topic and news coverage is absent (focused instead on hurricanes and North Korea and DACA and Trumps speech at the UN and ad infinitum...) has many quite worried we'll have a much different outcome with healthcare protections this time.

We all know the old saying: If at first you don't succeed, try 73 more times, lie about what you're doing, do it when nobody's watching, and act contrary to the wishes of the majority until you do!

Phew. Sigh of relief here. McCain officially came out against Graham-Cassidy today!

 

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2017/9/22/16351494/john-mccain-graham-cassidy-obamacare-repeal

Quote

“I believe we could do better working together, Republicans and Democrats, and have not yet really tried,” McCain said. “Nor can I support it without knowing how much it will cost, how it will effect insurance premiums, and how many people will be helped or hurt by it.”

 

[zapatos]

27 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Do you recall the Republican primary debates in 2012 where cheers erupted when someone in the audeince shouted out "let them die" while Ron Paul was answerig a question about who should pay for a sick person who required care but didn't have coverage? That type of attituded has permeated healthcare discussion since the ACA was past and was popular amongst various tea party circles. In my opinion such attitudes are what Phi for All is referencing.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T9fk7NpgIU

You are cherry picking the worst attitude of those who call themselves conservatives and trying to pass it off as representative of "the GOP concept of healthcare in this country".

I won't even bother to debate it.

[waitforufo]

58 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Edit: Would it be misleading to say the Democratic concept is that not all Americans deserve to keep the money they earn?

Not misleading at all.  Democrats believe that people, who provide me no goods or services, are entitled to my earnings.  How could I possibly deserve my earnings if there are others who provide me nothing in exchange but are still entitled to to my earnings?

[zapatos]

6 hours ago, Phi for All said:

"... the GOP concept that not all Americans deserve to have access to healthcare..."

 

9 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

"...Democrats believe that people, who provide me no goods or services, are entitled to my earnings..."

 

Maybe this is America's biggest problem. People on two sides of the political spectrum who see things in black and white with no subtlety or nuance, refusing to see things from the other's perspective.

[Ten oz]

17 minutes ago, zapatos said:

You are cherry picking the worst attitude of those who call themselves conservatives and trying to pass it off as representative of "the GOP concept of healthcare in this country".

I won't even bother to debate it.

This is a problem conservatives have faced for sometime. Rational consevatives have attempted to distance themselves from the bigoted and anti science views of the tea party for years and now find themselves doing the same with Trump but clearly with the tea party caucus having solid influence in Congress and Trump living in the White House their views are not obviously outliners which only a small minority of Conservatives support. It is misleading to pretend they are in my opinion. One shouldn't call themselves a Conservative, Liberal, Demorcrat, Republican, or etc but then cherry pick which views amongst popularly supported those ideologies they are willing to conced exist.

[CharonY]

In a strange turn of events McCain announced that he would be voting against the new repeal. Considering how close he and Graham are, I did not expect that.

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, zapatos said:

I just feel if you are going to say the "GOP concept is that not all Americans deserve to have access to healthcare", then you'd better have at least some of the GOP leadership either saying those words, or agreeing those words represent their concept when it comes to healthcare. 

What about GOP Rep Mo Brooks from Alabama? He's on record saying people who lead "good lives" deserve to pay less for healthcare. Isnt the flip side of that record exactly what I said earlier? 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/articles.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/rep_mo_brooks_people_who_live.amp

I'll find more, it was easy, but I'm on vacation enjoying the New England autumn, and mobile linking sucks.

[beecee]

Let me say something as an outside observer. We have a system in Australia where every wage and salary earner contributes 1.5% of his wage or salary for health care, with another 1% surcharge on top of that if income is above $180,000/PA. Individuals then if they like can take out private health insurance  if they prefer adding a few bells and whistles to the excellent basic health care, such as a private room, as against in the usual 4 to 6 in a ward for those without the additional insurance. The unemployed, retired and Pensioners are automatically covered for health care if and when it is needed.

This has been the way in Australia since 1972 and actually works. Isn't that the important outcome of a health care system? The "F&*% you Jack, I'm alright" mentality some seem to be presenting is in my view totally immoral.

From where I sit, it appears many in your country despise that system simply because it smells of Socialism. That in my opinion is crazy, particularly in a place where there are next to no gun and firearm laws. 

Edited September 22, 2017 by beecee

[MigL]

Seems cruel when applied to people's health insurance, Phi.
But yes, if you have a good driving record, your auto insurance premiums are lower, same with house insurance.

Maybe if people's health insurance rates went up every time they visit the local Hospital's Emergency ward to get an antibiotic for a viral infection, or a Band-Aid for a cut, we might not have the long wait times for needed hospital services.
( yes, wait times are one of the problems with the Canadian system )

[iNow]

8 minutes ago, MigL said:

yes, wait times are one of the problems with the Canadian system

Now... Imagine how much lower those wait times could be if you started spending as much as we do in the US, where not even everyone is covered!

[rangerx]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

( yes, wait times are one of the problems with the Canadian system )

Yes it is, but not in the way Americans think it is. They've spun it to have everyone believe it's across the board and people lay bleeding on the floor while they interview foreign doctors, but it's only for elective procedures. If you have a bone spur on your foot, you're not disabled or going to die any time soon. You can wait until a surgeon is available. In our system, we have the luxury of preventative medicine by having the ability to see a doctor if you suspect problems, hence early detection enhances the overall health of the population. Wait times can be used as long term schedules for things like colonoscopies, regular breast or prostate screening etc. We pay private clinics for a lot of procedures and services, like eye glasses, dentistry, chiropractors and physiotherapists. It's not a free-for-all on the slippery slope to the gulags as American Republicans would have everyone believe.

The great thing about the Canada Health Act, everyone is covered by law. Emergency services are conducted using the military triage system, not economic class. Under Trumpcare in America, if you are predisposed or have pre-existing conditions, you are a second class citizen. A lot of Americans seem content with accepting that, out of partisan spite rather than the public interest.

It's far from perfect, but it's saved my life and put me back to work more than once and it didn't cost my home or children's  education.

[Phi for All]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

Seems cruel when applied to people's health insurance, Phi.
But yes, if you have a good driving record, your auto insurance premiums are lower, same with house insurance.

That's another big problem in the US, people thinking about insuring health the way they insure cars and houses.

[Phi for All]

20 hours ago, zapatos said:

Maybe this is America's biggest problem. People on two sides of the political spectrum who see things in black and white with no subtlety or nuance, refusing to see things from the other's perspective.

I definitely want everyone to stop assuming things about either party and its members. waitforufo has shown me time and time again that his perspectives on my views are completely wrong since he's usually arguing against an assumed caricature of liberal stances. And I know from past threads that many people who think they oppose each other are actually quite well aligned, if only they'd stop making dumb assumptions.

But the GOP is obviously prejudiced against People they consider strange/different/other. They consider them WRONG, and to me that says they consider them not as deserving as a "normal" person. As evidence in support, I invite you to read this year's GOP Platform. Count the number of times they chastise gay lifestyles. It's ridiculous, like a jackhammer, they just won't let up. They seem adamant about caring only for those "who respect traditional family values" [emphasis mine]. For education and healthcare, they equate social structure with dependency and addiction; the government helping strange/different/other People causes them to be dependent, and also robs normal people by redistributing their normal wealth to the unworthy strange/different/others. There is also language that suggests "natural marriage" between one man and one woman is the best way to insure you don't have damaged children.

Let me make this clear. I'm not arguing for the Democrats, since I believe they suffer from the same stress of trying to cover too many ideologies. But it seems very obvious that the Republicans are much more interested in driving wedges into our society that promote hatred and prejudice, and are pushing agendas which can't end in anything but misery for the majority. Unless they think all the homosexuals will line up for conversion therapy, where do they think this strategy is going? I'd like to see some bipartisan compromises, and the GOP doesn't seem interested in the least. 

[interested]

On 7/4/2015 at 1:58 PM, Pozessed said:

In your opinion, what is Americas biggest problem?

I have been asking this question for a couple days. The answers are very diverse. I am curious on what everyone in this community may have to say.

I realize the question is broad, but I appreciate any thoughts you may have to offer.

Big Businesses the media and none elected lobby groups controlling political decisions, has to come high on the list.  

The media not just in the USA and reporting of world events appears biased leaving people with one sided world views, unless people check what is being reported, they will invariably ignorant of any alternative truth. I stumbled across this, this morning giving a slightly different view of the Korean problem  https://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/sociopol_asia14.htm . with a load of other mumbo jumbo.

America may have provoked the Koreans to behave the way they do. Warfare is big business in the USA, could the weapons companies be trying to provoke a war? What global benefit could there be to exterminating a country that does not obey the USA. What did the Iranians do to provoke America other than having a revolution and kicking out the Shah, who was responsible for torture to maintain control. What did the Libyans do to upset America? Does America have the right to police the world, and is it in the interests of the American people to do so? I suspect it is not. 

You are right this is a big question, but the buck must always stop at the top, the political leaders in America are the problem. They may like to deflect attention outside of their own boundaries and alienate other nations buy manipulating the media, but they are the problem. 

Edited September 24, 2017 by interested

[John Cuthber]

On 9/22/2017 at 10:02 PM, MigL said:

Seems cruel when applied to people's health insurance, Phi.
But yes, if you have a good driving record, your auto insurance premiums are lower, same with house insurance.

Maybe if people's health insurance rates went up every time they visit the local Hospital's Emergency ward to get an antibiotic for a viral infection, or a Band-Aid for a cut, we might not have the long wait times for needed hospital services.
( yes, wait times are one of the problems with the Canadian system )

Well, that's just fine, but where do you draw the line?
Obviously those who are very young, very old or who have chronic health problems are going to be the ones who visit doctors most often, are they the ones who can actually pay the highest premiums?
 

If doctors are prescribing antibiotics for viral infections, then that's a problem of education (on both sides) rather than the payment system.

[MigL]

It happens for convenience and because we've become 'addicted' to medication.
Doctors know antibiotics won't do anything for a flu, but it conveniently gets people out of their office.
Patients get a 'placebo' and think they are doing something for their flu.
Ensuring that patient is back next time he/she has the flu and clogging up the system.

But hey, it's still way better than the American system.
( oh wow, I'm sorry, I'm turning into a typical member, always bashing Americans )

[John Cuthber]

10 minutes ago, MigL said:

It happens for convenience and because we've become 'addicted' to medication.
Doctors know antibiotics won't do anything for a flu, but it conveniently gets people out of their office.
Patients get a 'placebo' and think they are doing something for their flu.
Ensuring that patient is back next time he/she has the flu and clogging up the system.

But hey, it's still way better than the American system.
( oh wow, I'm sorry, I'm turning into a typical member, always bashing Americans )

And all the bugs get antibiotic resistance.
It's a pity that Drs don't say to the patient with the sore throat.

"I can prescribe antibiotics- there's about a 1 in 10 chance that they will do you some good and about a 1 in 3 chance that they will give you the sh1ts: do you want them or not, your choice".

I rather suspect that this problem is pretty much the same on both sides of the pond.

[CharonY]

On 9/24/2017 at 0:54 PM, John Cuthber said:

And all the bugs get antibiotic resistance.
It's a pity that Drs don't say to the patient with the sore throat.

"I can prescribe antibiotics- there's about a 1 in 10 chance that they will do you some good and about a 1 in 3 chance that they will give you the sh1ts: do you want them or not, your choice".

I rather suspect that this problem is pretty much the same on both sides of the pond.

Actually, it is. In the US MDs make more money if patients come in (and return) frequently. Telling them that they won't get anything is just a bad business model. 

[iNow]

But, isn't that what's most important in healthcare... profit? I mean, if docs can't get rich doling out ineffective treatments, then what's the point of going to med school?   </sarcasm tag for the oblivious>

[MigL]

Don't know how I missed it earlier ( I have been visiting irregularly lately ), but that link you posted, Interested, makes it sound like it was the evil Americans who invaded North Korea in 1950, and the world should be sanctioning the US.
In fact, it was the North Koreans who were the aggressors, invading the southern peninsula, almost totally, before the UN forces , of which the US was part, pushed them back. There was no peace treaty, but simply a cessation of hostilities ( armistice ), as is witnessed by the North's 4000 artillery pieces aimed at the southern capital.
The reporter of that link is simply one of KJU's useful idiots ( see Stalin's useful idiots ).
The people of North Korea may be innocent, but its leadership certainly isn't.

[Ten oz]

9 hours ago, MigL said:

Don't know how I missed it earlier ( I have been visiting irregularly lately ), but that link you posted, Interested, makes it sound like it was the evil Americans who invaded North Korea in 1950, and the world should be sanctioning the US.
In fact, it was the North Koreans who were the aggressors, invading the southern peninsula, almost totally, before the UN forces , of which the US was part, pushed them back. There was no peace treaty, but simply a cessation of hostilities ( armistice ), as is witnessed by the North's 4000 artillery pieces aimed at the southern capital.
The reporter of that link is simply one of KJU's useful idiots ( see Stalin's useful idiots ).
The people of North Korea may be innocent, but its leadership certainly isn't.

Korea was ruled by the Japan for decades prior to WW2. As Soviets moved in to parts of the North the U.S. moved in to the South. Both the Soviets and the U.S. viewed themselves as liberators who freeing Koreans from Japan. The split between between North and South was a product of the Cold War. Because Japan had ruled prior to that point there wasn't clear ruling govt who could resolve issues of sovereignty and both the North and South took umbrage with the borders. Both sides feeling they were the legitimate Korea. Absent the involvement of USSR and U.S. the Korea war can be described a civil conflict over new leadership in the power vaccum left by the fall of Japan. Unfortunately what happened in Korea is akin to what we have seen in the Middle East where regions were divided up without careful enough considerations for the people vice resources and culture and war has followed for generations. This was done across the globe during the Cold War. It is part of the reason why there is a conflict between China and Tiawan, why U.S. doesn't have normal relations with Cuba, and was a driver for the Vietnam War.

 

None of that excuses Kim Jung-un. He is an evil person in my opinion who leads a regime that is opressive to its people. I just think it is important to keep in mind that more often than not all sides involved in a war believe they are the good guys though. One side being evil towards the righteous for generations isn't how we got to where we are. It almost never is. I think the need to blame and hold each other accountable for sole responsibility of a conflict is a major barrier to peaceful resolutions. It was more than Hilter's speech giving abilities and racist beliefs of the German people that accounted for the rise of the Third Reich. Economic conditions following WW1 created an unsustainable situation which proved to be a terrific breeding ground for Hilter's visceral. Perhaps a few rounds of economic bail outs in the 1920's and early 1930's would have defeated Hilter without shots fired?

[MigL]

You can call it a civil war if you like, but the fact remains that it was North Korea, backed by the USSR and China, which crossed the 38th parallel, and invaded South Korea, backed by the US, on June 25, 1950.
On June 27, the UN Security Council passed a resolution authorizing the use of UN forces to repel what was recognized as a North Korean invasion.
Before UN forces arrived, the North Koreans had control of most of South Korea, having pushed South Korean/American forces all the way back to the tip of the peninsula, the Pusan perimeter.
Once UN forces Arrived, after about 2 months, the Incheon counter-offensive was launched, which pushed North Korean forces all the way back to the Yalu river at the Chinese border; That is when China sent massive troops into the conflict, and initiated the back and forth movements which lasted the next two years, and was finally settled with the armistice resetting everything back to pre-war, boundaries at the 38th parallel.

This is all out of Wiki and not my personal opinion.
The North was clearly the aggressor, caused more than two years of strife, devastation and death, and never had reparations forced on them.
But they have continued to act like belligerent jackasses and the world has imposed sanctions on them.

In this case I really don't see what America has to be apologetic about.

[Ten oz]

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

You can call it a civil war if you like, but the fact remains that it was North Korea, backed by the USSR and China, which crossed the 38th parallel, and invaded South Korea, backed by the US, on June 25, 1950.
On June 27, the UN Security Council passed a resolution authorizing the use of UN forces to repel what was recognized as a North Korean invasion.
Before UN forces arrived, the North Koreans had control of most of South Korea, having pushed South Korean/American forces all the way back to the tip of the peninsula, the Pusan perimeter.
Once UN forces Arrived, after about 2 months, the Incheon counter-offensive was launched, which pushed North Korean forces all the way back to the Yalu river at the Chinese border; That is when China sent massive troops into the conflict, and initiated the back and forth movements which lasted the next two years, and was finally settled with the armistice resetting everything back to pre-war, boundaries at the 38th parallel.

This is all out of Wiki and not my personal opinion.
The North was clearly the aggressor, caused more than two years of strife, devastation and death, and never had reparations forced on them.
But they have continued to act like belligerent jackasses and the world has imposed sanctions on them.

In this case I really don't see what America has to be apologetic about.

Yes, the North back by USSR pushed into the South which was backed by U.S.. I didn't attempt to dispute that. My point was that neither the North or South were natural sovereign entities. Japan controlled Korea through both world wars and the decades between. North Korea and a South Korea were created by the USSR and U.S. as a byproduct of Cold War politics. It is an important consideration when attempting to understand the views and motives of all parties involved. Simply pointing the finger and labelling things right vs wrong or good vs evil almost never cuts it when dealing with long standing international disputes. Neither the North or South were pleased at the time with the borders created. 

[dimreepr]

On 22/09/2017 at 6:08 PM, waitforufo said:

Why make it so complicated.  I pay for health care for me and my family.  Why should I be forced under penalty of law to pay for you and yours?  Now I'm sure I'm going to hear all the socialist clap trap about how it's an investment that will make it so the needy can eventually, in the far away future, one day become contributors.  Well that one day never comes.  A common weakness of human nature is to expect that free things stay free.  If all one needs to do to get the necessities of life for free is to remain needy, many people will work hard to say needy.  Being needy is their path to success.  It puts a roof over their head, clothes on their back, food in their belly and now health care.  

Like I said, I have needs too.  I'm self actualizing.  Why isn't self actualizing a right?  It sure is expensive.  Where is my free stuff?  Where are the other people with bottomless pockets we can force to pay for my self actualizing?  Who do I need to vote for to get the goodies I'm entitled to as my birth right?  

I'll make my investments in the stock and bond markets.  Those investments make jobs for people contributing to society.  

Well aren't you the lucky one, you had enough advantages from your social standing, family, access to a good enough education etc...

Congratulations you won the lottery, but instead of being grateful and helping someone else, to be as lucky (or even a tiny bit lucky), you choose to be selfish, instead of humility you choose pride and sneer at those whose only advantage is to be born in your country and you choose to degrade even that advantage.

You're just afraid that karma catches you up; the irony is, it's that very fear that ensures it will.

I think that's Americas biggest problem...

 

[MigL]

Is there a 'duration' limit on when you'll let us know, Scherado?
Put us ALL on your ignore list. Please !

"Neither the North or the South were pleased at the time with the borders created."

But it wasn't the South that invaded the North.
Nor oppressed its people under a ruthless ruling dynasty which consider themselves gods ( in the 21st century ).
Nor been given foreign aid by the US to discontinue nuclear development, but continued it because they claim the US threaten them.
Nor fired on other nation's ships in international waters.
Nor assassinated uncles and half-brothers who they thought were a threat to their 'god' status.
Nor fired missiles into other countries ( Japanese ) airspace in what most would consider an act of war, while saying US aircraft, in international airspace, constitute an act of war against them.
And the list goes on and on...

Maybe if we had the balls to dispose of madmen, before they developed means to wage retaliatory war, a lot less people would die.
If North Korean aggression had been countered in the 70s, when they first started getting 'uppety', we wouldn't be in the situation today where millions of people's lives are at stake.

Seems like 1936 all over again.

Edited September 26, 2017 by MigL