I know this is not what people want to hear but we need universal health care like the rest of the civilized world. No not like Canada but like Japan and France. Improve on those. Yeah I know every body labels is socialism. What is social security, Medicare, Medicaid ? Private industry has got to greedy. MRI`s and all those test cost many times more than what other countries charge for she same procedure.
Yes! Yes! Yes! for The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act!
Americans have many reasons to feel shame; as a nation we lag behind other developed nations in education, infant mortality, and more. We surpass most of the world's nations in our enthusiasm for war and violence.
We the no-longer-sovereign people (When were we last sovereign?) have long allowed a few people to run America, and those few are pathological, even psychopathological, in their disregard for us. Many of them say democracy is socialistic.
I'm politically active and I know many people who care. So many seem to not care that I ask "Do we have any self esteem?"
Yes! Yes! Yes! for The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act! It might help us develop political self esteem.
BTW: For all of my adult life I had health insurance only when an employer provided it. One doctor told me I have designer genes.
PS to the above.
In my not-at-all-humble opinion, religion inhibits the normal development of self-esteem. My opinion is not humble because Catholicism had its talons in the family.
Domestic violence also inhibits the development of self esteem, and conservative xianity supports domestic violence.
How many times did Christopher Hitchens say it? According to the christian doctrine, mankind was created sick, then ordered to be well. Take that statement one step further and say that man cannot even cure himself but requires the external agency of god or god's putative son. Such a paradigm doesn't seem to leave much room for self-esteem at all. Instead, it creates a race of depressed, dependent thralls, a most convenient commodity for the RC hierarchy.
"Good for capitalism" doesn't mean "good for people." Its better than nothing, but not good. Single payer would be "good."
Yes. I agree with Park. Single-payer is good.
It's a mixed bag. For some people costs will go up (I probably will be paying more), some kinds of policies will be (bizarrely) no longer available. It could alter the way employers hire, either by contracting out or using overtime rather than taking on new employees. They also banned low cost plans with high deductables (i.e insurance only kicks in after a threshhold of say 2500 or 5000 is reached. Just like auto plans with higher deductables these can save a lot of money for people willing to take some of the risk.
A couple of simple things could have made things more efficient. Allowing plans to compete across state lines would make a big difference. And it's really about time that we de-couple insurance from employment. Our employers are not involved in our home or car insurance, why should they be involved in something far more personal.
You might also want to read the Time article on hospital costing a few weeks ago, If you think insurance companies are costing us, take a look at how hospitals bill.
We are not a capitalist nation. Obamacare IS awful. Obamacare is not capitalist.
I find it interesting that meditation has been PROVEN to alleviate or cure a HOST of illnesses. Meditation is free. It can be learned and within three months, the new practitioner will notice that something profoundly different has happened to them.
Have you noticed that your government is not encouraging the use of meditation (like it discourages smoking or obesity). Why do you think that is?
Illness is profitable. Insurance companies and Big Pharma LIKE illness. They're in the business of illness. Wellness is not profitable for those who fund political campaigns to get rascals reelected. Instead of telling you about how to make yourself healthier naturally, it tells you how to reduce costs that effect profits of contributors.
It is now a growing thought that chronic stress (that is eliminated through meditation) may be the cause of ALL human illness.
Our culture lives in a state of chronic stress. Stress (and the fear that it includes) causes increased activity in the amygdala (the anxiety center) at the same time that it reduces activity in the frontal cortex (that part of the brain that makes rational decisions). So, by preaching a message of fear about illness, rather than talking to you about how to be healthy through something so simple and free as meditation, your government is encouraging you to get sick.
It's a really sick situation, really.
Gail, I can easily find information to support this thesis: America is not a democracy.
I don't know where to find information to support your three opening theses. Can you help?
I agree that health is less profitable than illness.
I would agree that our (American) capitalism facilitates stress but you said we are not a capitalist nation. You owe readers here a definition of capitalism.
Capitalism is a system of free enterprise, driven by the free market. Capitalism does not allow a part of the market to exist if it requires government subsidies or favored tax treatment in order to do so.
The current 10-year price tag for direct subsidies (cash payments) to corporate agribusinesses alone is 46 BILLION dollars. WE pay these subsidies so that food can be sold on the global market place because too many countries also subsidize businesses. If we were a capitalist nation, when farmers stop being competitive in the global market place without taxpayer assistance, then they don't trade in the global market place and prices drop for Americans at home. Tarrifs would protect American farmers from other non-capitalist nations artificially lowering prices to put American farms out of business. So in America, we subsidize agribusinesses with taxpayer dollars so that those taxpayers have to pay more for the food we subsidize.
If I produce widgets, and there is no market for them, then my business closes. In the USA, if a big enough business (that pays LOTS in political donations) fails because of poor business practices, the US taxpayer keeps the poorly run business afloat rather than allow the market to fill the void with better business managers.
Consider Exxon. It pays almost no taxes. (in 2009 and 2010, ExxonMobil reported $9,910 million in pretax U.S. profits. But it enjoyed so many tax subsidies that its federal income tax bill was only $39 million—a tax rate of only 0.4 percent.
Now, I don't believe that ANY piece of paper (corporate charter) should pay taxes. Businesses pass their expenses (taxes included) on to the end user. They're pass-through entities. So taxing businesses is only a way to prevent YOU from seeing how much YOU are really paying in taxes - this keeps you silent in the face of gross atrocities. Consider how many taxes are included in the price of a car as each company along the way adds its taxes, both direct and hidden, onto the cost of the goods that it sends to the next buyer (from the iron mines to YOU).
In a capitalist society, you would know exactly how much you are paying in taxes, contrary to what we have, where most of your income goes to taxes built into the products and services that you buy (in addition to sales taxes and income taxes) and you don't even know it.
With respect to Obamacare, capitalism does not allow a government to force people to buy a product, nor does it make deals with Big Pharma denying our own country the right to buy drugs on the open market in the global marketplace (such as Canada where those drugs are MUCH cheaper). That is the absolute antithesis of capitalism.
So if, in an economy, business owners bribe legislators to get laws favorable to them (subsidies or favorable tax treatment), that economy is not capitalist?
Yes, it's called a Plutocracy - government of, by, and for wealthy people that exists to transfer money (that is invented into existence by banks that have been given the exclusive right to print money into existence) to the wealthy while legally extracting it from the poor using duplicitous methods.
By the way, the Heritage Foundation says that the subsidies amount to 25 BILLION PER YEAR