Nationalise Health Care

Discussion in 'Health Care' started by Nonnie, Jul 29, 2018.

  1. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I am mystified as to why the fossil fuel industry, which is one of the wealthiest in the world, doesn't show more interest in investing into the current forms of green energy & take control of that aspect of our global future. Instead, they continue forcing the world further and further from any chance of actually stopping global warming by refusing to allow any investment or even discussion of the dangers and possible fixes, just because they want to protect something that gives them wealth, but endangers humanity. Why on earth do we support such madness?
     
  2. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,311
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I've asked myself the same question. They've had 40 years to adapt. Maybe it's because they have the wells and the refineries and other fossil fuel resources and processing already in place and, well, gosh it would be a shame to waste it. Yeahright.

    But foresight and adaptation over the decades could have been done. As late as 5 years ago the oil companies were advertising their "commitment to alternative energy" as they spent a pathetic and pointless little on it so they could say they were spending something.

    They should be nationalized and minimized.
     
    XploreR likes this.
  3. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Alternative fuel companies should be cleaning their clocks.
    You spelled stolen wrong.
     
  4. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree. But under Trump, fossil fuel companies get massive tax breaks & subsidies, while their potential competitors in green energy don't. That's not a level playing field. And, it's another example of the richest & wealthiest getting the spoils while those who care about the planet and want to help, get shoved aside.
     
  5. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Isn't the government great at effing things up? Of course subsidizing one industry at the expense of another is ridiculous. Subsidizing anyone is ridiculous, and I don't agree with it at all.
     
  6. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think subsidizing financially challenged companies that produce something critical for national security or safety is OK for a limited time. But no subsidies should be continued beyond the immediate need. Farming subsidies are a good example, along with oil company subsidies, that seem permanent far beyond the initial need.
     
  7. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If a firm produces something that is critical to consumers, then consumers will (obviously) buy that product, so there is no need for government intervention.

    All subsidies privilege one firm/industry at the expense of others. They are unfair and create an un-level playing field. They all need to be eliminated.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2018
  8. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Philosophically I agree. However, I can think of times when gov't subsidies might be required. For example, if a pharmaceutical company has a patent on a medicine, but for some reason ceases production of that medication, and it's crucial for the survival of patients around the country, the government should be able to either subsidize that company for production of that specific medicine, or be allowed to give the recipe to a competitor for its production. This would save innocent lives.
     
  9. Longshot

    Longshot Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2011
    Messages:
    18,068
    Likes Received:
    2,644
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It should just revoke the patent. No subsidy involved.

    Do you have any other justifications for the government subsidizing a firm/industry?
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2018
  10. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump doesn’t, ergo, republicans don’t care.
     
    Mr_Truth likes this.
  11. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You make a disturbing but highly valid point. :)
     
    dagosa likes this.
  12. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For sure. Even the left has corporate donors. This is why even Medicare needs a supplemental 20% back up, corps. need to have their cut.
     
    Last edited: Jan 3, 2019
  13. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Even the left has to work within the system that exists in order to help make changes. That's unfortunate, but true. Otherwise, they would always lose for lack of funding. We need new campaign laws to fix the system.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  14. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Funny, lack of funding never slowed the GOP down when it came to spending money . With tax cuts and massive spending, they’re like the guy who quits his job they celebrates by going out on the town on his credit card. Health care was never a priority of the GOP. It will never happen with the gop cooperating and it will only happen when they’re voted out of control and passed in spite of them .
     
    XploreR likes this.
  15. XploreR

    XploreR Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2014
    Messages:
    7,785
    Likes Received:
    2,704
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree. Healthcare has been the issue that has convinced me of the severe limitations imposed on society by adherence to capitalism as we do. I've gradually become convinced that Socialism offers benefits to us as a society & as individuals that capitalism blocks. It's been a process for me personally, but I hope Americans come to the same recognition over time. Capitalism serves only the wealthy of society. Socialism serves all.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  16. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly. There is a place, a big place for full bore capitalism (autos and iPhones ) . There is a place for controlled capitalism ( the airlines) then there is a place where non profits only should be...that’s healthcare. There is nothing more important to mothers and fathers then to provide healthcare for their kids.
     
    XploreR likes this.
  17. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Interesting....green card holders that manage to stay in US can eventually apply for Medicare.


    Well, Trump’s golf course it seems is being investigated ....for giving out fake green cards and fake social security numbers.
    State and FBI investigators are reportedly probing allegations that Trump's golf club gave fake green cards to undocumented workers
     
  18. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Sounds good to me. We can do what other countries do and have some public hospitals along with private ones and public insurance along with optional private insurance.
     
  19. Kode

    Kode Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2016
    Messages:
    26,311
    Likes Received:
    7,461
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Public health should never be up for profiteering schemes! There is no way to profit off the improvement of public health for lower cost. So that goal would be non-existent in a privatized system without very heavy regulation. Without it, the goal would be to find greater and greater profit off the expenses patients must pay for health, and that is immoral and objectionable to the majority of people.

    We need to recognize healthcare as a right. That would solve much of all this.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
    dagosa likes this.
  20. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly. It’s there in black and white in the preamble and Medicare is a worthwhile and exceedingly successful template . A solid majority of Americans want it.
     
  21. Nonnie

    Nonnie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2017
    Messages:
    8,399
    Likes Received:
    7,246
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Trouble is, drug company's research will dry up if there's no big bucks to be made.

    Privatised or nationalised health care suffers.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  22. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nothing wrong with the public option as originally planned. We were just one vote short. There’s plenty of support for it.
     
  23. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Drug companies are a provider. They will survive and prosper just like anyother govt. contractor . Besids, the govt. has always pumped money into medical research.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019
    Kode likes this.
  24. Distraff

    Distraff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    10,833
    Likes Received:
    4,092
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd actually make the public healthcare (almost) free, along with cost-effective public hospitals. The public hospitals and healthcare would be more cost-effective and focus highly on preventative care. If you want something fancy and expensive there is private insurance and private hospitals.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  25. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, it’s proof positive govt. hospitals can do the job. Melania had her serious health issues dealt with at Walter Reed.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2019

Share This Page