Health Care In US & UK,Differences Between Left-Right Views On It & Taxes,Capitalism VS Socialism,Abuse Of Power

[Luna Bliss]

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 10:41 AM, Phorumities said:

On ‎7‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 10:35 AM, Luna Bliss said:

Religion is my other favorite topic...:)  Well...spirituality.

Maybe I just need to learn to ignore our resident Libertarian who constantly interjects his political views...not take the bait maybe? But he got me to thinking about some things I was trying to sort out....hence my conversation with him...and wanting it to continue in a polite manner.

its a sad commentary on our times when libertarian is considered a dirty word.

omg you believe in individual rights and responsibility? you must be some right wing nut

There are Libertarians...and there are Libertarians.

I actually get along fairly well with some of them...there are lots in my neck of the woods. I think many became embarrassed to say they were Republicans anymore and so had to define themselves a different way.

Actually, I don't consider you a Libertarian. With your talk of the white race being the only one to sacrifice for the world, and questioning why anyone should give up power, along with a few other comments....this indicates your beliefs put you in some other category.

[Luna Bliss]

22 hours ago, Phorumities said:

our ever growing social welfare system doesn't reflect the will of the people as much as it reflects the realization that politicians can buy votes by giving away ever larger amounts of other peoples money.

Hilary Clinton in her first presidential debate said vote for me and I will introduce a program of providing a free university education to every american that wants one.

Thank goodness enough Americans had the good sense to stand up to her socialist blathering and vote for a candidate that wants to build America up again by increasing opportunities instead of increasing handouts.

What do you think of Madelaine's link, describing how countries that actually pay MORE in taxes have happier people?

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world-also-pay-a-lot-in-taxes.html

[Paul Hexem]

49 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Phorumities, millions of children go to bed hungry each night IN THE US. Homeless people freeze to death in the streets. I think of my little 2-year old grandson and imagine if he felt the pain of hunger day after day and it tears me up. Yet in the US we just increased tax breaks to the wealthy and the Republicans have been doing everything they could since Trump came into office to cut services to the needy.
Let's say you had a million dollars and could live comfortably the rest of your life...can you tell me why your need for freedom and control regarding paying taxes is more important than the suffering of these people? Freedom is important yes, but there are greater values than freedom...'love' is greater.

Few things, if anything, are more important than freedom.

That said, I think most decent people are all for being generous and reducing the suffering of previously mentioned people. Many millionaires regularly donate to charities or start foundations and funds of their own, to assist less fortunate people.

Once you start forcing people to be generous though, it's no longer generosity, it's theft. And I guarantee you it's going to make people even less likely to be truly generous. 

[Paul Hexem]

30 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

What do you think of Madelaine's link, describing how countries that actually pay MORE in taxes have happier people?

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world-also-pay-a-lot-in-taxes.html

The thing about those countries is that their governments are actually committed to helping their citizens equally, which is why it works so well there. In the US at least, I sincerely doubt that it'd be the same. More likely it'd be helping certain classes of people at the expense of others. A problem we already have now, as a matter of fact.

[Bent Luik]

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

What do you think of Madelaine's link, describing how countries that actually pay MORE in taxes have happier people?

Maybe one reason that we here in denmark are so happy is that we have the world record in using antidepressants, in denmark called lykkepiller which mean happy pills.
I don't have a link for that fact (if it is a fact) but i heard it in QI, so it must be true. 

[Phil Deakins]

Stephen Fry was a tough act to follow, but your countrywoman, Sandy Toksvig, is doing excellently. So good in fact that, imo, she's actually better than Stephen Fry was.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Phil Deakins

[Ceka Cianci]

32 minutes ago, Bent Luik said:

Maybe one reason that we here in denmark are so happy is that we have the world record in using antidepressants, in denmark called lykkepiller which mean happy pills.
I don't have a link for that fact (if it is a fact) but i heard it in QI, so it must be true. 

The world record? Holy crap..

If so,that's got to be a lot of anti depressants..Because the U.S. is loaded with people on those..Let alone tons of other kinds of prescription drugs..

I mean we have commercial after commercial after commercial for prescription drugs on tv,like non stop..

 

I just thought it was pretty wild hearing that another country holds the record..hehehehe

[Madelaine McMasters]

On 7/19/2018 at 1:57 AM, Aethelwine said:

The USA founding declaration in the very first sentence contradicts you..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. "

The fact of the matter is the USA was founded on the Lockean principle of a Social Contract.

I'm gonna nit pick here, Aeth. Our Declaration says we have the right to pursue happiness, not the right to have it. In that, Phorumites is correct. That said, it's not hard to find Locke's influence in the Federalist Papers and the resulting Constitution. I wonder if Phorumites would find more comfort in "The Complete Anti-Federalist". By tone and temper, they seem a better fit.

[Madelaine McMasters]

2 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:

The thing about those countries is that their governments are actually committed to helping their citizens equally, which is why it works so well there. In the US at least, I sincerely doubt that it'd be the same. More likely it'd be helping certain classes of people at the expense of others. A problem we already have now, as a matter of fact.

Yep.

ETA: I'm too lazy to look, but I once saw a survey asking people from first-world countries to assess their own health care systems and those of the others. Not surprisingly, most (all?) liked their own system best. Although US residents ranked their own health care system well below the first-world average, they still thought it was far superior to anyone else's.

We might not have the best health care system, but maybe we have the best illusory superiority?

Edited July 20, 2018 by Madelaine McMasters

[Phorumities]

3 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Phorumities, millions of children go to bed hungry each night IN THE US. Homeless people freeze to death in the streets. I think of my little 2-year old grandson and imagine if he felt the pain of hunger day after day and it tears me up. Yet in the US we just increased tax breaks to the wealthy and the Republicans have been doing everything they could since Trump came into office to cut services to the needy.
Let's say you had a million dollars and could live comfortably the rest of your life...can you tell me why your need for freedom and control regarding paying taxes is more important than the suffering of these people? Freedom is important yes, but there are greater values than freedom...'love' is greater.

actually if i had a million dollars and didnt invest it i wouldnt have to pay any income taxes at all

since people are recomending books i sincerly recommend Ayn Rands book on the evil of socialism Atlas Shrugged

She talks about love a lot in it too.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Phorumities
added stuff

[Phorumities]

28 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Yep.

ETA: I'm too lazy to look, but I once saw a survey asking people from first-world countries to assess their own health care systems and those of the others. Not surprisingly, most (all?) liked their own system best. Although US residents ranked their own health care system well below the first-world average, they still thought it was far superior to anyone else's.

We might not have the best health care system, but maybe we have the best illusory superiority?

there are things that could make the american health care system better but giving it to the government to run isnt one of them

Edited July 20, 2018 by Phorumities
spelling

[Madelaine McMasters]

1 minute ago, Phorumities said:

there are things that could make the american health care system better but giving it to the government to run isnt one of them

And Gadget described why that might be. The question for me is whether the US is capable of constructing a system that outperforms, or at least performs as well as, other countries. Health care expenditures act like taxes and tariffs, and are a competitive disadvantage of our own making.

[Bent Luik]

1 hour ago, Ceka Cianci said:

The world record? Holy crap..

I googled it, and the good old us of a is number one, we are only in fifth place.
I will never again trust anything i hear on a tv show. 

[Tari Landar]

I don't feel like quoting, so.... (early warning..it's long, took forever to type up too)

On utilizing funding from the "wealthy" to assist the less than wealthy..and taxes- In theory, this *can work, but that is in theory alone, and its effectiveness or usefulness is entirely dependent upon the willingness of those "with", to assist those "without". In the US, while the idea of helping those less fortunate is one that a great deal of people hold near and dear, it isn't always put into practice. I'm not certain that we could actually force it to be put into practice in an effective manner, either. Which, again can be attributed to whether or not the willingness to participate exists. When it is forced, it is not acceptable to a lot of people, dare I say most. When it is freely given/offered, it can be far more acceptable.  I am saying this as someone that has both had to rely on the assistance of those "with", as well as someone that has both willingly and unwillingly been afforded the opportunity to help those "without". This is why we, in the US, have such a disconnect between the two groups (with and without)..it's the nature of the beast when people are "forced" to do more versus when they willingly volunteer to do more. Other countries may or may not experience the same thing, but I am inclined to believe that they do, human nature and all that.  Do I believe those with should assist those without? I do, on some levels, simply from a humanitarian point of view, and preservation of our species(not that we are in any form, at this moment, at risk of being endangered, of course, it's simply in my nature to believe people helping people is a good thing). 

Corporations are an entirely different ballgame, and I believe the methods by which they are taxed are unbalanced, ineffective, and tip the scales in their favor alone. Do I have a solution? Not any one specifically, but i do believe taxation ought to be far more balanced, and equal across the board, not favor one side over the other. I don't believe corporations or organizations ought to be granted tax relief simply because they made poor financial choices, any more than I believe individuals should. But right now, that's not what happens...corporations are, often, given tax relief whether they *truly need it or not. If I, as an individual, cannot pay my taxes or even choose not to because I don't think I should have to I will pay dearly in some way or another, I get no reprieve. The same cannot be said for corporations who are given tax breaks and tax relief whether they need them or not. Taxes I pay go towards services and things that I never use, and could never use...I have all the room in the world to complain about that if I so wish, but I don't. I don't, because I know that somewhere there is someone that does use that service, that item, whatever have you, and as much as I dislike taxes, I am glad I can at least contribute to that in some, albeit small, way. I pay for roads-just as everyone else does-yet I will never have a driver's license and very rarely find myself even using the roads as a passenger. But I'm still okay with that, because other people, far more important than I, do use those roads and do need them kept up and do need.....need I continue?  Would I like it if everyone willingly helped out their fellow man...absolutely I would. Do I think we, as a species, are at least worth that much? I absolutely do. Do I have a solution for making, ok helping, others believe that we, as a country, as humans, are worth that? Nope. If I did, I'd be one of those "with", and be far more able to help those "without". For now, I do what I can, I don't ***** about my taxes, I hope (and work hard) to ensure that I am never in the position I once was, and I remain grateful for that which I do have-some of which was only achieved because those "with" were forced to help me when I was- "without".  It sounds entirely contradictory, I know, but the fact remains that without taxes, without the forced taxation of others, the problems that those "without" experience would be increased exponentially which is a bad thing for the entire country, not just those that are "without", even if only in trickle down effects. 

 

On political parties, and this is merely my opinion, not fact set in stone- I believe that political parties are their own worst enemy, I also believe being affiliated with any one political party makes people biased, sometimes far more than they realize. Is being biased a bad thing? No, it isn't always a bad thing, but that's dependent upon the subject at hand, too. I believe taking the best part of political parties' ideals and using them to help one's own self determine where he/she sits on a topic, is a better idea than towing any party line-and I do mean ANY. Each party, no matter where they stand on any one, or even combined, issues, is always going to assume that other parties(and individuals that associate with them) are wrong-even in cases where their ideals are more similar than different. This, I believe, falls more into the realm of human nature than political bias, because it is human nature-I believe-to never want to be wrong. That doesn't mean we cannot except that sometimes we're wrong, it simply means we don't want to run into those situations. Political parties, in my opinion, exhibit far more of the "we can't be wrong" behavior than most individuals do. This is why I attach to no political party and absolutely refuse to do so. I make my mind up about topics based on facts, research, others' opinions, my own gut feelings, experience, and yes sometimes my own biasses(just like everyone else, I have them too). Political parties are, in my own opinion, the biggest downfall of any government, regardless of how long they have been there, how effective some of the things they have accomplished have been-or even will be. When political parties join in the mix, you run into the whole "tow the party line" bias-which in my very strong opinion is a horrible bias to have. When it becomes about the party, it stops being about the people. Then you have groups of people more focused on fighting each other than fighting injustice, or helping others, or designing a government or governing law(whatever have you) that works for the people as a whole, instead of specific groups. This is where I believe our government fails on an epic level. When our government stops caring about the people, about the individual, regardless of who he or she is, we have a problem. It's also, I believe, where a lot of governments(and the like) go wrong. Do I have a solution? Well, not one that's going to be widely accepted, nor is it one that I think we'd actually be able to manage at this juncture, so far into our country's existence. It's probably not even one that's realistic in effectiveness-again because of our country's history, how we got where we are today, and why people believe we needed-and still need-political parties, etc..

[Ceka Cianci]

1 minute ago, Bent Luik said:

I googled it, and the good old us of a is number one, we are only in fifth place.
I will never again trust anything i hear on a tv show. 

Well,in a way I was kind of hoping we weren't,but then,that would be a lot of drugs for another country..

It's a lot for ours..

I'm just glad I'm fortunate enough to not have to be on any..

 

[Paul Hexem]

56 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Yep.

ETA: I'm too lazy to look, but I once saw a survey asking people from first-world countries to assess their own health care systems and those of the others. Not surprisingly, most (all?) liked their own system best. Although US residents ranked their own health care system well below the first-world average, they still thought it was far superior to anyone else's.

We might not have the best health care system, but maybe we have the best illusory superiority?

Most people in most countries don't research it for themselves and only listen to the (bad) news they see on TV.

6 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

And Gadget described why that might be. The question for me is whether the US is capable of constructing a system that outperforms, or at least performs as well as, other countries. Health care expenditures act like taxes and tariffs, and are a competitive disadvantage of our own making.

I doubt we could now. The executives making billions of dollars in profits, and the politicians they own, would never allow a change.

[Bent Luik]

4 minutes ago, Ceka Cianci said:

Well,in a way I was kind of hoping we weren't,but then,that would be a lot of drugs for another country..

it is per 1000 people.
BUT now i will never google again. An other page say iceland is number ,1 denmark is 7 and USA is not even on the list.

http://www.businessinsider.com/countries-largest-antidepressant-drug-users-2016-2?r=US&IR=T&IR=T

https://www.indy100.com/article/these-are-the-countries-that-consume-the-most-antidepressants--WJvJPf5WFx

[Madelaine McMasters]

5 minutes ago, Bent Luik said:

BUT now i will never google again.

The solution isn't to stop googling, but to google again, and again, and again, until you get a sense there's some underlying truth. It's hard work and you must check sources that do not share your biases, but someone's gotta do it.

[Phorumities]

When did profit become a dirty word in America?

[Bent Luik]

10 minutes ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

The solution isn't to stop googling, but to google again, and again, and again, until you get a sense there's some underlying truth. It's hard work and you must check sources that do not share your biases, but someone's gotta do it.

All these web pages are in english and i don't understand english, most of the time I don't even understand donut. Sorry i mean danish.

[Coffee Pancake]

When THREE people have the wealth of 50% of the population, something is very very wrong.

The current situation is no better than a medieval lord in his castle.

[Luna Bliss]

3 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:

4 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Phorumities, millions of children go to bed hungry each night IN THE US. Homeless people freeze to death in the streets. I think of my little 2-year old grandson and imagine if he felt the pain of hunger day after day and it tears me up. Yet in the US we just increased tax breaks to the wealthy and the Republicans have been doing everything they could since Trump came into office to cut services to the needy.
Let's say you had a million dollars and could live comfortably the rest of your life...can you tell me why your need for freedom and control regarding paying taxes is more important than the suffering of these people? Freedom is important yes, but there are greater values than freedom...'love' is greater.

Few things, if anything, are more important than freedom.

That said, I think most decent people are all for being generous and reducing the suffering of previously mentioned people. Many millionaires regularly donate to charities or start foundations and funds of their own, to assist less fortunate people.

Once you start forcing people to be generous though, it's no longer generosity, it's theft. And I guarantee you it's going to make people even less likely to be truly generous. 

Are you saying forcing people to pay taxes is theft?  How would we help others less fortunate in such a complex society? What would your plan be if not taxes?

I know some millionaires contribute to less fortunate people, but I'd guess they're in the minority. And I'm afraid if we didn't force people to pay taxes a good majority wouldn't.

[Luna Bliss]

1 hour ago, Phorumities said:

4 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

Phorumities, millions of children go to bed hungry each night IN THE US. Homeless people freeze to death in the streets. I think of my little 2-year old grandson and imagine if he felt the pain of hunger day after day and it tears me up. Yet in the US we just increased tax breaks to the wealthy and the Republicans have been doing everything they could since Trump came into office to cut services to the needy.
Let's say you had a million dollars and could live comfortably the rest of your life...can you tell me why your need for freedom and control regarding paying taxes is more important than the suffering of these people? Freedom is important yes, but there are greater values than freedom...'love' is greater.

actually if i had a million dollars and didnt invest it i wouldnt have to pay any income taxes at all

Let's say you are earning that money with a well-paying job of $300,000 a year. Why would it be theft to pay taxes...with the goal of helping hungry children in the US and developing better programs for the homeless.

[Phorumities]

3 minutes ago, CoffeeDujour said:

When THREE people have the wealth of 50% of the population, something is very very wrong.

The current situation is no better than a medieval lord in his castle.

who are these 3 people and how by chance did they accumulate this wealth?

did they get it by theft or did they accumulate by offering something people needed and were willing to pay for?

 

[Luna Bliss]

3 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:

4 hours ago, Luna Bliss said:

What do you think of Madelaine's link, describing how countries that actually pay MORE in taxes have happier people?

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/the-happiest-countries-in-the-world-also-pay-a-lot-in-taxes.html

The thing about those countries is that their governments are actually committed to helping their citizens equally, which is why it works so well there. In the US at least, I sincerely doubt that it'd be the same. More likely it'd be helping certain classes of people at the expense of others. A problem we already have now, as a matter of fact.

So are you saying if we did pay higher taxes it would more likely go to something like the military, or something that benefitted the 1% as opposed to helping those less fortunate?