ninja_lord666 Posted March 11, 2008 Share Posted March 11, 2008 Wow, calm down. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I value you as a friend, but that doesn't mean we have to agree on everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Slyther Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I'm going to say privatized. Why the hell should I waste my money on some thief expecting to get it? I bet he wants to drug himself on purpose, and there's NO way he ain't getting my money. He's the one who got himself in that mess. Nobody else. Socialized healthcare would not always suit best. Because some druggies are asking for it, they did it to themselves. Waste of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ResidentWeevil2077 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Wow, calm down. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I value you as a friend, but that doesn't mean we have to agree on everything.Yes I know ninja, but this issue is much to personal to me, so I will let this one go, as I don't want to cause any friction between anyone, alright? Good :thumbsup: KTHNXBAI! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marxist ßastard Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Would someone who voted "Socialized" like to explain their reasoning?Religious reasons. Please do not debate me on this. If anyone replies to this message, they will be reported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Humanitarian reasons. The percentage of people that abuse a public health service is minimal. People do not only find times financially hard because of their own actions. Those who think they do need their heads examined. I'd rather subsidise a few cheats among the hundreds of genuine cases than deliberately contibute to the unnecessary suffering of others because I'm too selfish to part with the cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrestus Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I chose "other." I certainly believe that privitized is better, but it's come down to being purely a business to keep things in the black for the shareholders dividends. So, we end up with higher premiums and CEO's who get $50 million dollar severences. It ain't right, and it does need to be reformed, but socialism isn't the way to go - that will just create new problems with big business trying to get it's share of the pie somehow. The real issue comes down to corporate lobbyists that are telling our representatives it has to be this way, and the people simply aren't able to do a damn thing to counter it. We all have lives that don't revolve around waiting in the halls of congress or state legislatures to testify. The representative system itself has been perverted, the current state of the healthcare system is simply a manifestation of the disease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninja_lord666 Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 Humanitarian reasons. The percentage of people that abuse a public health service is minimal.You obviously don't know much about the US. Brittan is different than America, as America is the number country for drug consumption. Every American town has druggies, especially the suburbs. In fact, there's an area of Philadelphia (I forget which neighborhood) where there are actually 'drive through' heroin dealers. People can just pull up to a corner, pay the money, grab the dope, and drive off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xeniorn Posted March 12, 2008 Share Posted March 12, 2008 I do believe what you say to a certain degree, but regardless of the fact USA has so many drug users their numbers diminish when compared to the number of poorer people that aren't able to pay for the full or even partial medical care. It's cold, rock-hard statistics. Of course the poor:junkie ratio for GB is a few times greater then in USA but it is still sufficiently large in USA to be something that can influence the need for social healthcare. Besides, for rich people it's nothing to pay a few dozen bucks, while for the poor it's a matter of life and death, or having lunch this week. The only real reason any one of you can allow themselves to be against social healthcare is the fact you can pay for it yourself. If you couldn't it'd be a different story, wouldn't it? As with all things, a nice little mixture of both would be ideal, so I choose "other". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freddycashmercury Posted March 13, 2008 Author Share Posted March 13, 2008 I agree, the best form of healthcare would be a bit of both. I found this article while browsing blogs and such. I would encourage you to read it as it is quite thought provoking. I am still thinking about it, myself, so please do not attack me. Yet. I would also like to point out that this article only really deals with Canada's healthcare system, and I have no idea what other's are like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malchik Posted March 13, 2008 Share Posted March 13, 2008 I don't know what the different percentage rates are between the UK and the US but what percentage of the US population are 'druggies'? How does that compare with the percentage that cannot afford regular private health care who are not druggies? I'm happy to reconsider my views if I find a huge percentage of public health care in the US would be spent on drug cases but I need some reasonable proof. ATM it seems like a gut reaction. The wording of posts from several US posters gives the impression that public health care is spent 100% on drug users and I find that impossible to believe. Are you sure you aren't succumbing to media pressure? There are other things to consider too. What exactly is the US health budget used for 'druggies' spent on? What in any case is a drug - do you include alcohol and cigarettes? How about computer games or sex? I don't wear rose coloured specs suggesting abuse does not exist. I just feel it is being exaggerated. But, as I said, I am willing to be persuaded otherwise if the facts support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.