Mace,

The problem is, who's going to pay for millions of dollars for every broke ass person? What about the effect this has on willingness to work? I don't know about the culture of your part of the world, but there are tens of millions of residents in the USA happy to live on government assistance for their every need for their whole lives. Whole generations are raised with this understanding of how life in America works.

What's an actual reasonable level of assistance? We can't cover everyone for everything. Nobody, even the uber rich, has the money for this many people. And every increase in the level of free services leads to more people less motivated to ever be productive and higher costs for aiding the poor.

I agree that we should offer decent care to the poor. But our systems for doing this are already monumentally fraud-ridden and unsustainable. If everyone wanted to work, we'd have no problem helping those who really need it with a high quality of care. But literally tens of millions have absolutely no interest in doing anything. And bringing our level of care down to that of socialized nations is hardly justified by catering to their sorry asses.

If we were a nation of laws, not thugs, we wouldn't have this problem.

Liberal autocracy is a contradiction by itself. By the nature of autocracy, tyrants are motivated to be illiberal. Learn history.

Free market gives the best to everyone: It increases the quality of care available to everyone, and brings down the price of this care.

I had more than a million dollars of medical care done little more than a decade ago, 100% covered on my father's lower-middle-class healthcare plan (I was 16 at the time). His premiums didn't go up a dime. And they'd be lower if our federal government didn't stifle competition and restrict coverage options.

This was top-end care using top-end imaging equipment and specialists. Even other hospitals nearby (in the USA) didn't have the stuff used to save my life. Nobody is donating top-end equipment, specialists, or surgeons to nations with state-run healthcare. They just don't have it. And, stuck with bureaucratic rationing boards, most individuals in these nations don't even have the option to prioritize medical insurance/care to gain access to better care. It's harder for people in nations with socialized care to attain top-level care than it is for people in freer nations; in nations with socialized care, individuals' purchasing power is diminished by higher taxes used to finance their inefficient and low quality state-run care.

Objections to socialized care are both pragmatic (free market delivers better care for less money) and moral (loss of choice, loss of liberty: Even if you prioritize healthcare, your ability to attain it is greatly diminished by taxes and the increased price of high-end care in these nations).

You're just making up how supposedly "out of reach" top end insurance, and thus access to top end care, is in America. And ignoring that most of us support safety-net programs to aid the poor.

You're ignoring all the mechanisms by which the free market provides better work/service/products at lower prices. Stop ignoring them.

Mr. Yell,

"Who do you think you're kidding?  Seriously?  How come no free states came to that same understanding of overarching federal power?"

Who cares? Your question misses the point. The fact is we have overarching federal power now, far beyond what the Constitutional lawfully permits. The fact is that founders intended state sovereignty to be a bigger check on federal power than splitting up federal power into branches. The fact is that many educated Southerners articulated this position on why they waged war.

At the time, most northern state were going to get what they wanted out of the new tyrannical federal power. It's been biting them in the ass ever since, more so than ever today.

The fact is that many educated Southerners were against slavery. Many Union generals owned slaves. Lee said, in 1856:

xeno syndicated,

Nobody cares that I call you on arguing things both ways. Keep whining. It's funny.

If referencing your own positions, which you stated and argued many times, enrages you so much that you want me banned, maybe you shouldn't be posting on a forum. Your schizophrenia is irritating to us as well.

We NEED to tax corporate profits to cover the deficit! I NEVER SAID THAT! We NEED more equal incomes! I NEVER SAID THAT! We NEED wealth redistribution! I NEVER SAID THAT! We NEED enforced equality of opportunity! I NEVER SAID THAT!

It's just stupid. And you've said far more bizarre things.

You've called for nobody to have to work. Ever. Thanks to self-replicating robots which should be doing ALL work for ALL of mankind. And this technology came from aliens.

You've called very directly for massive wealth redistribution and income redistribution. Maybe you're right. Maybe that's not communist. Maybe there's some other way to steal most of people's things! Like MAGIC! Maybe you're not a Communist. Maybe I owe you an apology. Maybe you're a MAGICIAN!

I'm just pointing out the insane things you've said. Don't take it out on me. You said them.

I like cute foreigners like Mace who think that everything in the USA is uniform across the nation.

Newsflash: The USA is made up of 50 states. It's a big place. With a big population. And many differences across the nation.

And thanks for your stupid straw-man argument about a 13 year old doctor wannabe. Because, clearly, a free-market based healthcare system with safety-net asisstance for the poor inherently means child doctors! I'm enjoying this honest exchange!

Noir,

My basis is availability of specialists at the top of their fields and availability of technology that nations with socialist medicine cannot afford to provide for those on their state plans. My basis is the wealth of Americans purchasing technology in a free market vs poorer people purchasing technology in a free market. As it turns out, more money means more stuff. My basis is life expectancy after diagnosis with various ailments--a measure more of the effectiveness of care, not general life expectancy which is very problematic for a variety of reasons. My basis is people coming to the USA for top-level care a hell of a lot more than they go to Norway (if that's ever happened at all).

The question is, do you have any reason to doubt the consensus among doctors that the USA has the best medical care in the world, and that's why so many people come to the USA every year for care?

Granted, the USA has serious problems with its healthcare system. A lack of socialized medicine is not one of them. If not for massive government meddling and repression of the free market, the USA would have significantly lower costs as well. I do have very serious problems with US government interference in health insurance and medicine in general in the USA. But that's not the topic of this thread, and the solution to most of these problems is less government regulations stifling competition and inflating costs--not communist medicine where my political/bureaucratic overlords decide what I deserve.

Free markets result in better service and falling prices for all. If this is over your head, or you're just too much of a frightened baby to imagine government not wiping your ass, that's your problem. The notion that socialized medicine, not just a safety-net, is somehow advantageous is laughable. There's absolutely no basis except indoctrination and ignorance for these ridiculous claims. You have absolutely nothing to support your wishful thinking.

[TI] Primo,

It's funny how you didn't propose any possible contenders for the top spot. Surely, if you weren't just being a dick, you would enlighten us rather than troll me and demand I research the obvious.

I'm a little pissed off, after reading this thread, that the universities I went to didn't have an asexual studies program. [cluckin'] bigots.

I love how absolutely retarded human beings can be.

I don't like its effects, though.

Mace,

America has the best healthcare in the world because of free markets. It would be better if our markets were freer and our elected officials didn't stifle competition.

Every nation on the earth with socialized care has crappy healthcare because of those systems.

'nuff said.

And no, flawed, dishonest, and downright stupid measures of "availability" are not comprehensive ratings of healthcare.

The ideas behind enslaving people to an authoritarian state are good? The idea that freedom is not inherently good is good?

You enable the monsters. Grow up. You have a brain. By whatever power it came to be yours, it is surely a sin to choose not to use it.

Both, Justinian I. Aristocrats don't distinguish between them. They start talking about one and quickly blend it into the other. The promise of equal outcomes requires more power. So it's always the destination. Duh.

The Confederacy was hastily constructed. Given time, the states could have agreed to a more appropriate level of funding. Or maybe Lee was wrong. In any event, the government today would just show up, tell your kids that homosexuality is perfectly psychologically healthy, tax you whatever they damn-well pleased, and confiscate your property while they were at it.

And they'd tax you to pay for cowboy poetry festivals in other states. And Congressman's subsidized rent. And all kinds of other things which would make for a tedious list and others which I've never even heard of.

Mr. Yell,

You should read about the Confederacy. Most of the intellectuals and leaders of the South were against slavery. They clearly articulated their objections to unchecked federal power--power prohibited by the Constitution.

State sovereignty was intended by the founders to be a bigger check on federal power than the 2.5 branches of federal government. It was obliterated as a check on federal power more than a hundred years ago. How did the Supreme Court do to uphold the law of the Constitution this week? Are you satisfied with our current checks on the unlawful acts of Congress? Anyone who is is an idiot and a pansy willing to give up liberty for security. Not only do they deserve neither, but they'll get neither. Believe it or not, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama are neither brilliant nor valiant. They're not on a crusade to make things right.

Our lack of checks is what has gotten us to this tyrannical state of government. The EPA can regulate you breathing out. They can declare your property a wetland and evict you if a water pipe nearby breaks. Oh, and tax you hundreds of thousands of dollars for it too. They can wage war without the approval of your representatives. They can fine you for failing to buy a product they said you need--and they'll tell you what models are approved, because it's irresponsible for a man to not pay for contraception! He might get pregnant! Oh, wait...