1
   

Single payer plan. Socialism?

 
 
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 07:04 pm
In the news. The provence of Ontario, Canada, now has more workers making cars than the state of Michigan. What is the major reason for this state of affairs?

Answer: The single payer plan in Canada relieves the Canadian manufacturers from having to pay the enormous health benefits that US manufacturers do. The conservative corporations will begin to back the concept of a Single Payer Plan -

What kind of mental gymnastics will the rightwingers create to get over the hurdle of corporations backing Socialist programs?
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,394 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 08:25 pm
They'll do an about-face and, instead of saying that the Government must help big business to keep the economy healthy, will now say that the Government helping big business to cut costs would be bad for the taxpayer in the lower income brackets. You can't win with these dudes.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 08:44 pm
Merry Andrew wrote:
They'll do an about-face and, instead of saying that the Government must help big business to keep the economy healthy, will now say that the Government helping big business to cut costs would be bad for the taxpayer in the lower income brackets. You can't win with these dudes.


As long as a company makes money good for them. It is the only reason companies exist.
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 09:39 pm
Baldimo wrote:
Merry Andrew wrote:
They'll do an about-face and, instead of saying that the Government must help big business to keep the economy healthy, will now say that the Government helping big business to cut costs would be bad for the taxpayer in the lower income brackets. You can't win with these dudes.


As long as a company makes money good for them. It is the only reason companies exist.


That's right. Companies don't exist to provide goods and services, they exist to make money for themselves.
0 Replies
 
Instigate
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 09:53 pm
goodfielder wrote:


That's right. Companies don't exist to provide goods and services, they exist to make money for themselves.


Is there something ignoble about that?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 09:57 pm
goodfielder wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
Merry Andrew wrote:
They'll do an about-face and, instead of saying that the Government must help big business to keep the economy healthy, will now say that the Government helping big business to cut costs would be bad for the taxpayer in the lower income brackets. You can't win with these dudes.


As long as a company makes money good for them. It is the only reason companies exist.


That's right. Companies don't exist to provide goods and services, they exist to make money for themselves.


Making a product was a means to make money. Sure people needed it but making money is also a primary concern.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 10:09 pm
Canadian plants have been shown to be more efficient, their workers easier to train, and work for less money...meaning higher profits for the corporate *ahem* individuals.
High productivity with low pay however is a recipe for disaster.
Watch for this one to blow up during future negotiations.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 10:22 pm
For once, candid1, you're probably right. However, the initial posting was in re: health care, rather than productivity.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2005 11:21 pm
BBB
bm
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2005 02:23 am
Instigate wrote:
goodfielder wrote:


That's right. Companies don't exist to provide goods and services, they exist to make money for themselves.


Is there something ignoble about that?


Why do you ask?
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2005 02:26 am
Baldimo wrote:
goodfielder wrote:
Baldimo wrote:
Merry Andrew wrote:
They'll do an about-face and, instead of saying that the Government must help big business to keep the economy healthy, will now say that the Government helping big business to cut costs would be bad for the taxpayer in the lower income brackets. You can't win with these dudes.


As long as a company makes money good for them. It is the only reason companies exist.


That's right. Companies don't exist to provide goods and services, they exist to make money for themselves.


Making a product was a means to make money. Sure people needed it but making money is also a primary concern.


As you pointed out Baldimo, making money is the only concern for a company.
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2005 09:09 am
...unless you're an airline.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2005 09:38 am
BBB
The "for profit" sector of the medical care delivery system, including the Insurance and Pharmacutical industries, is destroying the US health care system.

The single-payor system is the only thing that can save it.

BBB
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 05:26 am
candidone1 wrote:
...unless you're an airline.


Is that because they can plunder the pension fund?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 07:35 am
Re: BBB
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
The "for profit" sector of the medical care delivery system, including the Insurance and Pharmacutical industries, is destroying the US health care system.

The single-payor system is the only thing that can save it.

BBB


Nope,
The best way to fix it,IMHO,is to get the insurance companies,govt,the pharmacutical companies,and everyone else out of it.
It should be between you and your doctor,nobody else.
0 Replies
 
goodfielder
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 07:55 am
Re: BBB
mysteryman wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
The "for profit" sector of the medical care delivery system, including the Insurance and Pharmacutical industries, is destroying the US health care system.

The single-payor system is the only thing that can save it.

BBB


Nope,
The best way to fix it,IMHO,is to get the insurance companies,govt,the pharmacutical companies,and everyone else out of it.
It should be between you and your doctor,nobody else.


Simplistic. An impoverished response. You, your doctor and nobody else? More like you, your doctor, the surgeon, the anaesthetist, the surgical theatre personnel, the hospital.....We aren't talking a wound, a knife run through the fire, a bottle of whiskey and something to bite on.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 08:03 am
Re: BBB
goodfielder wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
The "for profit" sector of the medical care delivery system, including the Insurance and Pharmacutical industries, is destroying the US health care system.

The single-payor system is the only thing that can save it.

BBB


Nope,
The best way to fix it,IMHO,is to get the insurance companies,govt,the pharmacutical companies,and everyone else out of it.
It should be between you and your doctor,nobody else.


Simplistic. An impoverished response. You, your doctor and nobody else? More like you, your doctor, the surgeon, the anaesthetist, the surgical theatre personnel, the hospital.....We aren't talking a wound, a knife run through the fire, a bottle of whiskey and something to bite on.


But,it should be up to me and my Dr to decide what health care I need,not some beurocrat in Washington or some faceless,nameless,official in some HMO or insurance company.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 07:06 pm
Re: BBB
mysteryman wrote:
goodfielder wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:
The "for profit" sector of the medical care delivery system, including the Insurance and Pharmacutical industries, is destroying the US health care system.

The single-payor system is the only thing that can save it.

BBB


Nope,
The best way to fix it,IMHO,is to get the insurance companies,govt,the pharmacutical companies,and everyone else out of it.
It should be between you and your doctor,nobody else.


Simplistic. An impoverished response. You, your doctor and nobody else? More like you, your doctor, the surgeon, the anaesthetist, the surgical theatre personnel, the hospital.....We aren't talking a wound, a knife run through the fire, a bottle of whiskey and something to bite on.


But,it should be up to me and my Dr to decide what health care I need,not some beurocrat in Washington or some faceless,nameless,official in some HMO or insurance company.


That is the reason I use PPO for my insurance. I don't have to bother with no where near the red tape as those in HMO's.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 07:59 pm
Me too, Baldino.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Aug, 2005 08:15 pm
However, I consider myself lucky I can do that, though it is a big stretch for me, how big you don't want to know, as a selfemployed person with fairly low income - I have liked having the md's I wanted to choose, and my general fortunes over time with that system.

Hard to change insurance even if I hated it at this point.. once one is older and has previous health issues racked up.
(I hate it, but it is the debilitating life of payments I've hated, not my options.)
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
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Single payer plan. Socialism?
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/09/2024 at 12:04:38