Would a "europeanized" America be a good or bad thing?

Status
Not open for further replies.
$5 Submissions

$5 Submissions

New member
Jun 27, 2006
1,956
15
0
Global
www.webmasterlabor.com
Much has been said about the prospects of an Obama presidency and the threshold it represents in the US' political economic evolution. IF Obama's policies do move the US towards a more collectivist future, is it necessarily a bad thing? Do developed economies necessarily have to evolve to a more collectivist solution?

Let's take Europe's experience for example.

Plus side: Socialized health care. Welfare/unemployment/vacation/job protection benefits.

Negative side: Higher unemployment. Lower GDP growth. Higher taxes. Sometimes erratic delivery of 'guaranteed' services
 


It's funny when people always point out higher taxes in countries with socialised health care, like the U.S doesn't have to pay for it or something.

Whether it's a tax or an upfront payment, you're paying money for your healthcare - socialised is a much fairer and safer system.

I don't know about erratic delivery of garunteed services? Do you mean long waiting lists for elective surgeries? In Australia we have a part private (U.S system) and part public health insurance (like canada or UK system) so if you have the money you can go private and get your surgery, just like in the U.S you need the cash to get your surgery, only difference is here in Aus we can fall back on our public health insurance during tough times.
 
pax said:
Whether it's a tax or an upfront payment, you're paying money for your healthcare
Click to expand...

No educated person really thinks health care is free either under a socialized system or a free market system. The critiques of socialized health care are usually in regards to the efficiency in which government allocates resources. The free market provides well stocked grocery stores, more reliable cars, and pretty much anything else under the sun for cheaper than a centralized system. There are very few things that become more efficient as a result of pooling money in government and reallocating it rather than letting people make their own individual decisions so it would be a fallacy to assume that $x amount of spending is going to yield the same net benefit under either system.
 
pax - walk into any hospital in the USA and need to get operated on. I 100% promise you that you will get operated on. It does not matter if you can pay or not. (sometimes worse if you have insurance) In germany at the moment doctors are refusing to treat people over an age in the 60's unless the patient can pay out of pocket because there is no money in the system. The european system is a bust! Look at france, they have high unemployment, they had riots because people could not get jobs. Go live there for a few years after living in America. They have bigger problems than we do!
 
Where do you get higher unemployment from? Sure the European Union as a whole has a higher unemployment rate than the US, but lots of European countries (both in and out of EU) have a lower one (recent OECD figures, I'm sure I can dig up a link if required). The same goes for GDP growth as far as I can remember.

Europe is currently extremly diversified, with huge gaps between the different countries, which makes a direct comparison difficult. Italy is a totally different society, both economicly, cultural and politicly from for instance Scandinavia.
 
There are more countries in europe than Germany and France ya know. I don't think anyone is disputing that if you have the money, you can have the best treatment possible within no time... and that's where the problem lies.
 
Financially, bad for entrepreneurs and rich people, good for poor people and the working class. It might be good for the rich people in the way that, more equally distributed wealth and less poverty means less crime.
 
Dullspace said:
No educated person really thinks health care is free either under a socialized system or a free market system.
Click to expand...

I'm educated and I totally think health care is free ... for the poor people. For middle and upper class it means you pay a premium for mediocre benefits that most of us would choose not to use.

Small Government FTW!!!
 
losser said:
pax - walk into any hospital in the USA and need to get operated on. I 100% promise you that you will get operated on.
Click to expand...
Ahhh, but the real issue is whether or not you will be crippled by debt for the rest of your natural days if you don't have the health insurance.
Germany is an outlier, and I think you're talking abotu that Turkish woman who had as stroke. Am I right? That's more about doctors not treating patients because they weren't citizens, and therefore not entitled to the use of the health system. Still fucked up though.
 
pax - walk into any hospital in the USA and need to get operated on. I 100% promise you that you will get operated on. It does not matter if you can pay or not. (sometimes worse if you have insurance) In germany at the moment doctors are refusing to treat people over an age in the 60's unless the patient can pay out of pocket because there is no money in the system. The european system is a bust! Look at france, they have high unemployment, they had riots because people could not get jobs. Go live there for a few years after living in America. They have bigger problems than we do!
Click to expand...

You are talking bullshit. Literally.

There are more countries in europe than Germany and France ya know. I don't think anyone is disputing that if you have the money, you can have the best treatment possible within no time... and that's where the problem lies.
Click to expand...

I agree with PatJ.

And you guys have a wrong opinion on Europe. We are not the united states of Europe, we are a geographically close and totally varied group of different cultures. Things going on in one country, are nowhere to be seen in another.

Anyway, what obama wants to do is good for you in the long term, even if you dont know it yet.

Let the flames begin...
 
Read about overcrowding in Canadian and UK hospitals and you might think a little differently about government health care and EUtopia.
 
PinstripeRambo said:
Read about overcrowding in Canadian and UK hospitals and you might think a little differently about government health care and EUtopia.
Click to expand...

Why do you think they are overcrowded?

Wait, wait! Could it be that not only people that can afford it can get treatment? You know.. like it should be.
 
There are still "public" overcrowded hospitals, and "expensive" normal ones. And healthcare is not the only issue. US economy is huge bubble, that is why it burst.

There have to be country regulations in everything. For example, what enron did, was unacceptable. No private company should be able to arbitrage electricity prices. And the same goes for all basic resources, water, highways, public transportation, even phone lines.

Europe regulates all that, there are laws and restrictions on everything. It doesnt always run smoothly, but the big picture is a lot clearer. The endgame is good for the little guy. The big guys have no problem anyway.
 
pat J said:
Why do you think they are overcrowded?

Wait, wait! Could it be that not only people that can afford it can get treatment? You know.. like it should be.
Click to expand...

Or possibly it could be because people abuse a free system. No longer do you go to the emergency room for serious issues, you also head there for bad headaches, fever blisters and 100 degree temperatures (yes that's fahrenheit ya metric bitches).

Another issue with this is that when the government regulates the system some of the brightest minds decide not to become doctors because the income isn't what it used to be. Great, more laywers at Scott Richter's disposal. That's good news, right Jon?

Also glowleaf mentioned enron as a terrible evil. True, but we the people will pay a MUCH higher price for the FANNIE/FREDDIE fiasco. Expect more of this shit as the democrats grow the government.

This thread is full of European fucktards (yes pat, I'm looking at you) trying to cut us down to their level. Fuck that, we're a better system and all you can do is whine about it. So head on out and cast your vote for Obama ... ooh wait, you can't.
 
Wow, is the question really "Is collectivism preferable"?

Absolutely un fucking believable.

Thousands of years, striving for personal and economic liberty, and people want to know if we should go back to gulags, mass poverty and collective serfdom.

Fucking brilliant. Party on democracy, rule of the mass of idiots, over the minority of competent, productive individualists.
 
pat J said:
Why do you think they are overcrowded?

Wait, wait! Could it be that not only people that can afford it can get treatment? You know.. like it should be.
Click to expand...
Because there's no incentive to improve service when there's no alternatives (competition). Rampant abuse doesn't help things either.
 
From a collectivist perspective, ALL wealth is a product of the legal, economic, and social resources produced by the collective. Hence, the "individual" owes the collective for becoming 'wealthy'. Following this 'social products' theory, tax rates that would be deemed confiscatory in 1980s Reagan era USA would be perfectly fine since "individual" wealth is just going back to its collectivist source.

It sounds good and everything but does it comport to how human individuals deal with incentives (or disincentives)?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom