Rising fascism in the US

@Lash,

Lash wrote:

How valiantly people on this thread fight universal healthcare.

I don't.

Lash wrote:

Not paying insurance premiums would help a lot.

:
But I do not think that is possible ... or works anywhere

NHS is funded by general taxation and National Insurance contributions (NICs).
The German health funds are financed through wage contributions at 14.6% shared equally by the employee and employer. (That's the very same funding since 1883, only the percentage of contributions went up.)

Good healthcare isn't nowhere and wasn't ever free.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

(That's the very same funding since 1883, only the percentage of contributions went up.)

The same kind of funding.

Initially, two thirds of the funding was provided by the workers (and later by employees, when they also had to take out compulsory insurance) and one third by the employers.
This financing model was adopted by the first German health insurance fund founded in 1773 (That became the Deutsche Angestellten Krankenkasse DAK ["German Employees Health Insurance"].)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

This financing model was adopted by the first German health insurance fund founded in 1773

That's amazing. Nothing like this was even remotely considered when the USA was being put together around the same time. For whatever reason, there's been a strong cultural resistance to both publicly financed social welfare and privately run compulsory insurance in this country. Ever notice how, in interviews with Trump supporters, it doesn't take long for condemnations of Biden's "socialism" to show up, along with the baleful predictions of the inevitable descent into "communism"?

The preferred model, I suppose, is to put your nose to the grindstone and get rich. The peculiar thing is that even many of the people whose only likelihood of achieving prosperity is to win the Powerball Lottery are still fundamentally opposed to the concept of spreading society's wealth. It's "I'm alright, Jack, keep your hands off of my stack". Witness the refusal of Medicaid funds by red state governments – it's a point of pride! For some reason, Lash seems to think that pointing out this cultural peculiarity is tantamount to endorsing it. But until there are big changes in the judiciary, in the electorate, and probably in the Constitution, UHC just isn't going to happen.

Daniel DeLeon wrote:

The “practical” man sneers at socialism as visionary, unattainable, and without any immediate social value.

Immersed in his own private affairs, and judging the world from the limited horizon which they afford, he fails to perceive that socialism is the only vital economic, political and moral force of modern times.

What are the laws enacted in the interests of labor—however sporadic and futile they may be—if not concessions of capitalism to the growing power of socialism? And what apparition induces the plutocrats of all countries to grant a measure of relief to their expropriated victims, if not the apparition of socialism?

It can be said that, whatever good there is in the various social panaceas—in “welfare work,” “social service,” municipal beautification, tenement house and factory improvement—has been achieved largely through the pressure brought to bear upon capitalism by socialism. The necessity for quieting and suppressing dissatisfaction favorable to socialist agitation is always present with the capitalist class.

Just as the American nation was impossible as long as King George ruled, so also is socialism impossible of complete demonstration as long as capitalism holds sway. To have asked the exponents of American independence to prove independence practical under King George would have been unjust; yet, the opponents of socialism ask socialists to prove socialism practical under capitalism.

"Is Socialism Practical?" Sept. 3, 1906

1 Reply

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

Quote:

I understand the reasons for all the replies to and arguments against Lash, but this has become a group doing exactly what she wants...giving her as substantial a platform as possible for her politically focused mendacity.

I know.

You're right.

She seems to enjoy her role here as a political punching bag but there's no real substance to her positions on anything. No matter how many times she's shown to be misguided or completely wrong she just springs back up again like some hideous jack-in-the-box. I think it's her semblance of wit and that quasi-epigrammatic writing style which fuel my running dialogs with her – at a certain point I have to admit to myself that, not only is prolonged discussion worthless, responding with anything more than a dismissive sentence or two is a fool's errand!

I realize how difficult it is to stop. I've certainly done my fair share of giving people like Lash what they want...which is to engage with someone unwilling to concede anything.

"Don't feed the trolls" is MUCH, MUCH easier advice to give...than to follow.

0 Replies

@hightor,

hightor wrote:

That's amazing. Nothing like this was even remotely considered when the USA was being put together around the same time.

We here in Germany have been dealing with this for almost centuries:

As early as the Middle Ages, the guilds supported their members in emergencies, for example in the event of illness or disability, from their assets acquired through contributions.
The guild system is, so to speak, the origin of private health insurance. For example, craftsmen and miners collected money for their invalids, sick and surviving dependants. However, it was not possible to guarantee adequate care for all sections of the population.

In 1843, the "Health Support Association for Tobacco Factory Workers" was founded in Germany and in 1848 the "Health Insurance Fund for Civil Servants of the Berlin Police Headquarters" (private health insurance) was established.

In 1845, the Prussian Industrial Code authorised the establishment of health insurance funds for factory workers as a forerunner of the later social insurance and allowed the municipalities to force the assistants and journeymen employed locally to join the health insurance funds.

In 1854, the Prussian law authorised the municipalities to introduce compulsory insurance and health insurance funds for journeymen, assistants and factory workers. After Prussia, other states also enacted regulations on the auxiliary health insurance system. In 1876, the law on registered auxiliary health insurance funds standardised regulations for the Reich.

With his social legislation (laws for the protection of workers), Otto von Bismarck created three essential pillars of today's social insurance system based on the principle of carrot and stick: health insurance, accident insurance, pension insurance.

Otto von Bismarck introduced the world's first compulsory health insurance (law on health insurance for workers), which covered workers in the event of illness.
Accident insurance for workers was also part of his reform. This provided for financial compensation for workers regardless of whether they were at fault or not (e.g. accidents on the way to and from your or at your workplace are insured).
(The last important pillar of social legislation was the statutory pension insurance, which also provided financial security for workers in old age.)

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

Btw: our Westphalian badger became the American groundhog via emigrants: (Sonnt sich der Dachs in der Lichtmesswoche, geht auf vier Wochen er wieder zu Loche "If the badger suns itself in Candlemas week, it goes back in the hole for four weeks").

Thanks for that interesting piece of history, Walter.

And did you know that Satan arrived in the New World by smuggling himself in the underwear of Catholics?

1 Reply

@blatham,

Thanks for valuable news (for me).

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

How valiantly people on this thread fight universal healthcare.
The rest of the Western world has worked it out.
The US is wealthier than those countries.
Yet, we just don’t have the money for healthcare for our citizens.

How odd...I haven't seen anyone on this thread fighting against UHC. I have seen people explaining why the US has not adopted it - most of whom, to me, seem in favour of it. Though even if a poster or two wasn't in favour of it, that would be fine - that is what democracy is about. Interest groups who are prepared to vote as a block do hold a great deal of power.

Your views of the world seem very skewed, and I've never seen you able to admit when you are factually wrong...you ignore any argument you don't like (or as appears more likely, that you can't form a rational argument against), and you engage in exageration and double standards...no doubt all of these tactics you use contribute to you believing such skewed views.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

hightor wrote:
That's amazing. Nothing like this was even remotely considered when the USA was being put together around the same time.

We here in Germany have been dealing with this for almost centuries:

As early as the Middle Ages, the guilds...(snip)

Actually, the concept has been around for a lot longer than that, Walter. Archeologists have found the skeletons of humans who lived 10’s of thousands of years ago…with fractures that obviously healed while the individual was still alive.

Obviously, the person had to be cared for by someone. The person was unable to hunt or forage. So, he/she had to count on others in a group to attend to those things in his/her stead…to insure his/her survival.

It happened.

I am of the mind that the only way it will happen here in America is if we start to treat the medical necessity the way we do our military necessity.

Offer a free medical education to anyone who wants (and qualifies) for it…and pay them to attend classes. Sorta like we do with individuals we select for the Army, Navy, and Air Force academies, but greatly expanded. Then require them to serve for a period of time (five to ten years) servicing the public free…or for nominal pay. Give them a decent wage. Try to get as many to stay in that service as possible.

We have to get rid of the insurance companies…and the waste that some doctors indulge by requiring unnecessary return visits and such. It is one way to do it.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

The topic had already interested me decades ago during my history studies. As a lot of things are now easier to research thanks to the internet, I started looking through the local newspapers in my state.

On Sunday 4 November 1849, there were two interesting advertisements in the "Täglicher Anzeiger" ['Daily Announcer' for a part of what is now 'Wuppertal']:
the 'Weaver Master Guild' invited people to discuss the statutes of the new guild health insurance fund. And in the advert directly below, the Handwerker-Arbeiter-Verein had invited all journeymen in the town to discuss the establishment of a health insurance fund. (I know from later newspaper reports that this then became the 'Local Sickness Fund').

Quote:

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

We have to get rid of the insurance companies…and the waste that some doctors indulge by requiring unnecessary return visits and such. It is one way to do it.

The takeover of hospitals by private equity firms and venture capital is also part of the problem. But healthcare facilities have become so costly to operate that without these takeovers many communities wouldn't even be served. Our local hospital was once the pride of the peninsula, with a huge endowment. Over the past few years it offered less and less services until the facility was actually torn down this year and replaced with a downsized "Primary Care" hospital. The nearest full service hospital is now an hour and a half away.

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

You seem to enjoy punching.

I prefer sparring.

Quote:

Strawman

I don't know what you're referring to, sorry.

0 Replies

WSJ is under fire for a couple of Islamophobic articles less than two weeks after two Muslim women wearing hijabs were denied entry into a Kamala Harris campaign event.

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/wall-street-journal-slammed-over-221148312.html

Wall Street Journal Slammed Over 'Islamophobic' Op-Ed On Michigan City
Shruti Rajkumar
Sat, 3 February 2024, 5:11 PM GMT-5·2-min read

The Wall Street Journal is facing outrage on social media over “Islamophobic” rhetoric in an opinion piece about a Michigan city.

The Friday op-ed referred to Dearborn — a suburb of Detroit with the largest Muslim population per capita in the U.S. — as “America’s Jihad Capital,” saying that people there “side with Hamas” amid the ongoing war between Israel and the Gaza-based militant group.

Since the war broke out last year, people in Dearborn have gathered to protest Israel and condemn the violence against Palestinians, calling for their liberation. An Oct. 7 attack on Israel by Hamas killed around 1,200 people, according to the country, while Israel’s retaliation in Gaza has killed more than 27,000 Palestinians and wounded 66,000, per the territory’s Health Ministry.

The op-ed described the city’s protests as “in support of Hamas” and its allies, and framed the sentiment there as a potential national security issue.

Criticism quickly emerged from countless users on X (formerly Twitter) following the article’s publication, with many suggesting that the op-ed engaged in fearmongering and could perpetuate prejudice against Muslims in Dearborn.

The mayor of the city, Abdullah Hammoud, said that the “inflammatory” op-ed led to “an alarming increase in bigoted and Islamophobic rhetoric online targeting the city of Dearborn.”

“It’s 2024 and the @WSJ still pushes out this type of garbage,” Hammoud wrote on X, using the Wall Street Journal’s handle on the platform. “Reckless. Bigoted. Islamophobic.”

Nina Turner, a former Ohio state senator, also weighed in.

“This is blatant Islamophobia,” she wrote on X.

Mehdi Hasan, a outspoken journalist who has been lauded for his unapologetic coverage of Gaza and critiques of the Israeli government, condemned the op-ed as “horrific” and “racist.”

“How are journalists at the Journal ok with this?” he wrote on X.

The Wall Street Journal did not immediately respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.
____________________

This is particularly frightening coupled with recent reports that msm news articles are frequently submitted to Israel to edit as they choose.

Is the US assisting Israel in fomenting Islamophobia among Americans to make the recent (and coming?) wars against Arab / Muslim countries in the Middle East to benefit Israel more palatable to the public?

0 Replies

Tucker Carlson and his production crew have been spotted in Russia, throwing Twitter & other media into a spin, wondering if Carlson will be interviewing Putin, Snowden, or Reade.

1 Reply

@Lash,

Carlson was also spotted in an airport in Istanbul during a layover on his way to Moscow.
In one of the images posted on Telegram, Carlson is seen attending the Spartacus ballet at the Bolshoi Theater in Moscow.
He's according to that Telegram channel since February 1 in Moscow.

Quote:

К сожалению, вылет был задержан на два часа, но в 16:10 Такер благополучно прибыл в столичное Внуково и уже три дня наслаждается чинной столичной жизнью." ... ... ...[He]has been enjoying the rank and file life in the capital for three days.

1 Reply

Joti Brar guests on Garland Nixon and discusses the difference between real socialism and what’s become of ‘socialism’. Rambling question starts at minute 23, her conversation at minute 25.

I agree with her.

https://www.youtube.com/live/V7T25oVzbQg?si=-Yi6dX9sqwm_tuWj

2 Replies

“The state (government) is a machine in the hands of the dominant class.”

Joti Brar

0 Replies

@Lash,

That's the Chinese definition - no wonder, since she's the leader of the (pro-China) Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist).
This party is a member of the World Anti-Imperialist Platform (WAP), an anti-imperialist international organization created in 2022 - WAP believes that Russia and China are not imperialist powers.

The Communist Party of Britain (CPB), is a member of the International Meeting of Communist and Workers' Parties (IMCWP), and a follow-up party of the original communists.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Joti Brar's comments underscore the incompatibility of M-L socialism with a world composed of nation-states. Which goes back to the struggle between "socialism in one country vs permanent revolution" (Stalin vs Trotsky). We know how that worked out.

0 Replies

I agree with everything she said in that interview. They were my impressions and beliefs before I heard her.

I’ll pick up her book and educate myself more on the group and the precepts / tenets of Communism before I say more.

What she said resonated with me.

0 Replies

Rising fascism in the US

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know