1
   

House Headed Toward "Socialized Medicine"

 
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 09:46 am
BBB
Those who use the term "Socialized Medicine" do so deliberately to hint that it is SOCIALISM!

BBB
0 Replies
 
Coolwhip
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 09:50 am
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Those who use the term "Socialized Medicine" do so deliberately to hint that it is SOCIALISM!

BBB


Which, in America, is a negatively charged term. Much like communism.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 09:53 am
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
You said it was a pejorative phrase, but then in your second post saying something else... So which is it?


Maybe it's only a pejorative term in American English. Just as "liberal" means something entirely different in the rest of the world.

Why don't we ask you, McGentrix - do you consider the term "socialized medicine" to be

- pejorative
- neutral or
- positive

(check one.)


Descriptive.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:09 am
McGentrix wrote:
Descriptive.


Which is, obviously, not an answer to the question.

I take it that you agree with BBB and Coolwhip, then....
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:25 am
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Descriptive.


Which is, obviously, not an answer to the question.

I take it that you agree with BBB and Coolwhip, then....


You asked me what I consider the term "socialized medicine" to be. I told you. I am sorry I didn't opt for one of your stupid assed answers.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:28 am
McGentrix wrote:
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Descriptive.


Which is, obviously, not an answer to the question.

I take it that you agree with BBB and Coolwhip, then....


You asked me what I consider the term "socialized medicine" to be. I told you. I am sorry I didn't opt for one of your stupid assed answers.



What was stupid assed about the answers? Seriously?

Do you think it was unreasonable to ask you whether the term was invoking positive, neutral or negative connotations?


And "descriptive" obviously doesn't answer the question - I can call somebody a friggin idiot, it could be descriptive, and it would still be a pejorative term.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:35 am
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
old europe wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
Descriptive.


Which is, obviously, not an answer to the question.

I take it that you agree with BBB and Coolwhip, then....


You asked me what I consider the term "socialized medicine" to be. I told you. I am sorry I didn't opt for one of your stupid assed answers.



What was stupid assed about the answers? Seriously?

Do you think it was unreasonable to ask you whether the term was invoking positive, neutral or negative connotations?


And "descriptive" obviously doesn't answer the question - I can call somebody a friggin idiot, it could be descriptive, and it would still be a pejorative term.


Don't mistake McG for someone who is willing to actually engage the topic with productive conversation, OE.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Coolwhip
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:36 am
There isn't anything wrong with the term "socialized medicine" per se, it's the feeling the word socialism invokes.
0 Replies
 
old europe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 10:49 am
Yeah.

Well, it's not even really about the term. You can call it "socialized medicine", and, in the context of American politics, it will have that pejorative ring to it. You can also call it "welfare health care", or whatever other term you can come up with.

Of course, if you oppose "welfare health care", you'll also have to oppose the VHA, for example.


But that's not even the question at the bottom of this. The question is: do you favour or oppose universal health care? And not all "socialized medicine" is universal health care - and not every universal health care system is necessarily state run or "socialized".

So that means: Are you in favour of letting someone die in the streets if he can't afford the trip to the ER? Are in favour of denying somebody some essential, necessary treatment because he cannot pay for it? And even: are you in favour of letting the veterans bloody well pay for their own health care?


Now, if the answer to even one of those questions is "no", then you're not in favour of a "free market model" for the health care system. Easy as that.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 11:51 am
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
In case anyone hasn't noticed, the vast majority of physicians already work for HMOs and other health plans directly or indirectly through contracts or payment methods. The trend started in the 1970s and has escalated ever since.

BBB


And that is the ROOT of our current problem. This is why many a physician in the US is telling his/her son/daughter not to go into medicine.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 11:53 am
Re: Miller
old europe wrote:
Miller wrote:
old europe wrote:
Do you consider universal health care to be "socialized medicine", Miller?


We have "Universal Health Insurance" in the commonwealth of Massachusetts. For those individuals living above the poverty level, this plan is not "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE".

For those living in POVERTY, their health plans are part of the
MEDICAID program and as such, are considered to be either
WELFARE or "SOCIALIZED MEDICINE".


Well, then the VHA is welfare "socialized medicine" as well....

So, are you in favour of universal health care, similar to what Massachusetts has implemented? Or only of the part that you don't consider to be "socialized medicine?"

Or do you not oppose "socialized medicine?"

(It's a bit hard to figure that out, from your posts.... You seem to like the Massachusetts universal health care system, but you seem to hate "socialized medicine"... That about right?)


Miller wrote:
Old Euorpe; You often don't sound like an American. Are you
a citizen of the United States of America? Cool


IRL, people often tell me I sound Irish.


Are you an American citizen?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 11:55 am
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
Those who use the term "Socialized Medicine" do so deliberately to hint that it is SOCIALISM!

BBB


If it isn't socialism, then what is it?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 11:58 am
Re: BBB
Miller wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
In case anyone hasn't noticed, the vast majority of physicians already work for HMOs and other health plans directly or indirectly through contracts or payment methods. The trend started in the 1970s and has escalated ever since.

BBB


And that is the ROOT of our current problem. This is why many a physician in the US is telling his/her son/daughter not to go into medicine.


Miller, you speak the truth among those who went into medicine to acquire wealth. Those whose reason is different will have a different attitude.

I always found it interesting that the employee-contract trend started at the same time large numbers of women entered medical school instead of nursing schools. Women traditionally earn less than men in the same profession. Is this a coincidence?

BBB
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Thu 2 Aug, 2007 12:16 pm
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
... large numbers of women entered medical school instead of nursing schools.


Large numbers of women entered medical school and Vet school, when discrimination based on gender ended. And of course, more American Indians, Afro-Americans and other minorities entered medical school, when affirmative action was instituted to increase the numbers of practicing physicians from these groups. At one time, very few med schools accepted women, and as a result woman-only medical schools were established.

Aside from discrimination against woman, please don't forget the overbearing discrimination against Jews, who tried to enter medical school. At one time, for example,the University of Illinois School of Medicine in Chicago had a quote for Jewish applicants, in order to control the number of Jewish MDs practicing primarily in the Chicago ( and Illinois ) areas.

Aside from discrimination against Jewish medical students, please don't forget the discrimination against Jewish doctors in cities such as Boston (!), where discrimination forced Jewish doctors to establish their own hospital ( Boston's Beth Israel )

As far as women in Veterinary medicine, their numbers increased dramatically when discrimination based on gender ended. It was long believed that woman should not be allowed to be Vets, because they couldn't carry or manage large animals (such as those found on farms). As a result of this discrimination, women were often unable to obtain internships in vet medicine and thus it was concluded that vet medical school was a waste of time, since woman vets couldn't even pratice what they had gone to school for...
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Aug, 2007 08:04 pm
Quote:
U.S. ranks just 42nd in life expectancy
Lack of insurance, obesity, racial disparities to blame, experts say


Updated: 4:13 p.m. CT Aug 11, 2007
WASHINGTON - Americans are living longer than ever, but not as long as people in 41 other countries.

For decades, the United States has been slipping in international rankings of life expectancy, as other countries improve health care, nutrition and lifestyles.

Countries that surpass the U.S. include Japan and most of Europe, as well as Jordan, Guam and the Cayman Islands.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20228552/

Go America!
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Aug, 2007 08:28 pm
Will do! Drunk
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/27/2024 at 05:01:32