Wasn't a dig at you, or anyone Right, but they recieved food and water enough to live, shelter enough to not worry about predators. I can't profess to know exactly what circumstances were like in africa back when slaves were being rounded up, but I'd be surprised if it was anything more than a hunter/gatherer tribal lifestyle. Basic mudhuts, predators being a real danger, food supply being a major concern, likewise with water. They got given what they were judged to need to exist. Similarly, we get given what we are judged to need. We get given more, but we still have a part of our lives taken from us forcibly and in return, like the black slaves, are given what we are judged to need by people other than ourselves. It's against the law though isn't it? And if the government catch you they treat you like living in a hut in land you own and subsisting, or working for cash is wrong. The only reason you can do that is for lack of technological ability on the part of the government to catch people who do that. It's no different than being a slave who runs away.
I don't know where you got that number from, but it is incorrect. By our standards I am paid quite well, making in excess of the equivalent of $100000 a year, and I pay a tax-rate of 34% (of which I always get return tax. Not sure if this is the right term, but it works like this: by paying a little too much in taxes we get a surprise cheque every summer where the state refunds the excess) - in my mind very reasonable considering all the benefits this gets me. It is not only free universal healtcare, the tax percentage also includes our future pension (pention?). However, there are a few hidden taxes which I am not so happy about; the inflated fuel costs (due to the new environment tax), tax on sugary goods (not really bothered by this though), tax on tobacco (don't care about this one either tbh) which goes directly towards healthcare and treatment of tobacco related illnesses. There's the tax on alcohol (which in my mind could very well be lower), the tax on electronics and not to mention the road use taxes. However, not owning a car would eliminate a great portion of these, and similarly cutting down on sugary goods (which aren't good for us anyhow) eliminates those. What we consume influences the collective tax-income to the government. Obviously many people over here disagrees with a lot of these, but most norwegians will certainly say that they consider their income tax to be reasonable and that they gladly pay it for the betterment of the nation and our society. We like to complain about the government as much as the next guy - of course we do, after all; that's what keeps them on their toes. Being norwegian though, I am obviously biased. I do like this country (why shouldn't I?) and I do like living here in spite of the fact that the cost of living here is quite high compared to many other countries. But then again; the average income is also quite higher compared to many other countries. The point I want to make is that how can any government defend putting the desires of the few over the needs of the many. I'm having great trouble believing that the great majority of americans do not want free and universal healthcare. I know there will always be some who does not want the state to govern our lives as much as might be implied by this, but surely most people see the reasons for it, the good in it and how it helps build a better society. I do realise that the US and norway (or Cuba for that matter) are very different cultures with very different beliefs, but still I'm having trouble understanding the aversion towards the word "socialized" (that is spelled with a z right?).
Journeyer, 44% of your GDP is taxed. Not 50% true, but there's more to tax than basic rate income tax. Also, I had no idea Norway was that much of a nanny state. I had a feeling it wasn't quite as awesome as it was cracked up to be, but a tax on sugary foods? Jeez.
Pardon me, but I do believe I know how much of my paycheck goes towards income tax. Well, not sure I would say "nanny state" but I do see your point. However, there is another side to it; I don't have to worry about certain things - like healthcare (since that is what this discussion was about). But you are quite right, I do agree with the point that the state in some cases over-administrate a little, and that is the one major beef most of us have with the govt. That said, it also has to be mentioned that the govt do get their humps spanked every now and then if they suggest legislations the people certainly do not agree with. Most of us like to complain and not do (sometimes I wonder where the "can-do" mentality of the vikings have gone to), but we also make damn sure that the govt knows who put them in power in the first place if they overstep their authority. We like being comfortable, and we know that the money we pay towards different kind of taxes will eventually be for our own good - and that we would have had to spend more should we have to pay it to private organizations offering the same thing (Hope that made sense). Yes, it is something of laughable thing that whole sugar-tax business, but I for one do see the sense and reason in this. Also excessively fatty foods are taxed (like MacDonalds, Burger King etc) which I also see the sense in though I myself have never (knock on wood) eaten anything in either of those places. Furthermore (to alleviate the nanny-state stamp) you will find no large clusters of CCTV-cameras on every street corner over here. You do not have to worry about which books you borrow from the library. You do not have to worry about what you say on the telephone, on internet fora, in e-mails or wherever. It really does not matter if some of our female politicians debut as nude models. We don't really care if our politicians had a habit of smoking joints in uni or high-school. You can do as you please while on-line as long as you stay well clear of kiddie-porn obviously, and no-one will make a record of your surfing habits, what you download or who you download it from. And we certainly do not have 1 out of 100 citizens in prison. Also, the books for school are free.
Equating the likes of slavery enforced on "black Africans back when they had no rights to speak of at all" is tenuous at best. The government is more liken to a parent and we it's children. We are educated to give us the skills to learn a trade, given food/shelter if we cannot provide for ourselves, also given "free" healthcare. Here in the UK as I'm sure your aware, you don't even need to work and the system will provide for you. You can raise a family as large as you like and the system will meet all your basic needs and your offspring. (some slavery huh). The system also gives you a choice. Work for a living and you will open up choices previously unattainable, legally. If you truely wished to leave the Country and be your own "kingdom" so to speak, the system gives you that opportunity. Here's the catch though, you have to earn the right to those choices. A little bit of research and a bit of good old honest work and within a year you could easily earn more than enough for a passport and flight out of the Country and pursue your own goals. The system has many flaws but it provides a damn good springboard for anyone to earn a living and create more choices for themselves. In someways it's too good, as we seem to have a culture of people that choose not to work and contribute to the system, but accept all the benefits of being in the UK tribe. I love this Country.
Slavery throughout history has often been a fairly benign if hard system, but our New World colonists commercialised it; black slaves had fewer rights than a serf a thousand years ago. However, you have a point. "Freedom" is largely illusory. That's not changed. ----------- Interesting footnote to Magna Carta. Runnymede & 1215 are "lies to children". 1217 was the important SP1 for us peasants.
Our system seems different than Norway's system in that the US isn't designed to allow everyone to live comfortably. It's designed so that if you work your ass off, you can get very rich. Otherwise you'll be as poor as you want to be. Of course it's not exactly that simple, but we believe that if you work hard for money, no one can take it from you. Just by earning money you create wealth for others. Whether it's a "good" idea or not, we don't like to spread that wealth in the form of mandated healthcare. On a side note, I'd like to visit Norway!
You havn't edited that out yet, so I'll simply respond by saying that I suspect the language barrier may have caused you to misunderstand what I said there. I said that 44% of your Gross Domestic Product is taken in tax, and that there is more to tax than basic rate <income tax>. I assume the language barrier is what got in the way there.
But insurance companies are taking that hard earned money away from you anyway. How many people "who thought" they were covered have been denied treatment due to red tape. I could at least understand a private system if people paid a set amount from there earnings and were guaranteed treatment. The situation is crazy in the US because you have insurance underwriters actively seeking to deny the customer care. It makes a mockery of the whole system. Very few people I imagine in the US could say they are properly covered should the worst happen. This is your life they're playing with here. The socialist healthcare system is flawed but at least everyone is guaranteed some sort of treatment and people will actively seek help when they are ill rather than try and weather the illness to save a few pence. /P.S You should take that trip to Norway.
Remember that if you actually want to use those money to buy something you have to pay 25% MVA as well. (on most things, not all) Yes you do have to worry. If you get sick you could run into the risk of not getting to a hospital because the ambulance (yeah, the one...) is at another job. And if you get to the hospital nobody is able to operate on you because the one who knows how to handle a knife is on a vacation in the Caribbean. The government is useless. They are always opposing each other, making them incredibly inefficient. (Norway officially got color TV in 2001 i think. It has been a test project until then...) Doesn't help much when the healthy foods like vegetables are more expensive. If they actually took the tax incomes from the unhealthy food and reduced the tax on healthy food, then it's OK. But as the situation is now, it's way cheaper to live unhealthy. Besides, people tend to eat what they want, not what's cheapest. No, not as long as you do legal things. POT tend to know what people do... You are more watched than you think. ...But if a politician know somebody in the government (they even went to the same party once! ), then you are in deep **** and loose your job... I don't know when you went to school, but books certainly aren't free. Hmm. Maybe Blitz do have a point? Edit: this post was written with a bag of sarcasm and half a cup of irony added to the mix. If you like the ingredients, just don't read it. (although this is probably to late now. )
You could argue we're on the road to a better way and have been for centuries. We build labour-saving machinery for home and workplace leaving more free time for education and leisure. You could also argue we don't take useful advantage of that free time and that the majority of people are happy to be members of the club but don't want to put themselves out and help run it. The American way encourages greed. That's never been a nice sin.
in capitalist USA there is always an ambulance and a doctor to operate you, they never go on vacation
Yes, I was - as I pointed out - talking about income tax, and summing up a fair amount of the others further on. Yeah, this is true - though it varies of course. I'll agree with this on our current administration, but not in general. If they didn't, we wouldn't be where we're currently at. This is also true, though a certain chain is continuing to cut mva from the prices of vegetables. Of course, after all that's their job. What I'm saying is that when you abide by the law you are left to go about your life knowing that the govt isn't watching your every step. Yeah, that was an entertaining month. Though I tend to believe the actual reasons ran a little deeper than that - or more to the surface of things, depending on your point of view. They weren't free when I went to school either, but they are now. Still. I'm not saying everything is perfect over here, far from it. Still, despite its flaws and the rather high cost of living here, I love this country. I mean not in the "getting at 0500 in the morning to salute the flying of the flag whilst dressed in bunad" sort of way, but rather an "alcohol fueled sensation of warmth and fuzziness you get after having five tequila shots in a row" kind of way... If you know what I mean. That kind of thing which makes you able to dance bare-chested on the table at the annual christmas party at work, which you sure as hell will not admit to when getting sober. Well, the whole thing started out with healthcare and the benefits of universal healthcare versus the kind of insurance system they've got in the us. Pardon my digression.
Yes, I did misunderstand you. I was referring to income tax, but I touched upon the other taxes placed upon certain goods. As I pointed out in an earlier post, living here is quite expensive, but the money that goes to the state will in turn be for the good of ourselves.
Actually, there aren't that many level 1 trauma centers. There are only two for the entire northwestern US (Oregon, Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho). Hospitals that meet certain requirements for staffing are rated in levels 1 through 4 for specialty trauma care. Our local hospatal recently slipped from level 2 to 3 because we couldn't get doctors to respond quickly enough when called. As for insurance mattering in emergency situations, it doesn't. Well, it shouldn't anyway. Under the Emergency Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) any hospital which recieves medicare or medicaid patients must take and treat any and all patients in need of emergency care regardless of their ability to pay. The act also prohibits transferring patients to another facility unless medically necessary (ie dumping them). Speaking of ambulances, those too are pretty close to what you would expect under a nationalized health care system. If you call, we have to show up. By law, we also have to take you to whichever hospital you request. It doesn't matter if you can pay or not. You call, we haul, no matter what. My point is that a lot of the foundations for national healtrh care are in place thanks to medicare and medicaid and the government is already the largest single payer for health care, we just haven't made that last step to have it apply to everyone. The reason we are in a crisis is that it doesn't apply to everyone. If everyone was covered and everyone paid, you would have young, healthy people funding older, sicker people. That's the system we have now, except the young people recieve no benefit now and so are unwilling to keep paying enough to fund the system.
