• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Socialism -- a pathway to disaster

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
As someone who lived in Venezuela and married a Venezuelan, have friends in Cuba and was in the neighboring countries when the Socialist Sandanistas were in power, I can't help but wonder how people can follow Socialism with Bernie Sanders leading the charge.

I have seen it again and again. They promise utopia, using real-life issues, and it ends up being worse than what they had when they started.

Example: Bernie's "Great education with Cuba -- you can't throw out the good of what he did"... really?

It was an education in communism and not in growing in education. It was an elimination of faith-religion and the promotion of the state religion of communism. Yes, graduated doctors in medicine with no medicine to treat the people. Yes, it was agriculture... but for export while each family had delegated 2 chickens a months (to eat), a few pounds of coffee, and other bare minimal sustenance to get you by while the cows were exported and if you killed one, certain prison time.

BUT THEY DID HAVE HOSPITALS FOR ALL AND EVERYONE WAS EQUAL... equal in poverty unless you were in the upper echelon and medicine shelves were bare.

I still remember in an interview with a Cuban pastor in the US (year ago when it was a rare event) - as he began to perspire profusely when asked questions about Cuba. Why? Because his family was still in Cuba and a wrong statement heard by other Cubans (who might be plants by the government) would mean disaster for their family.

So, what do we have today? What is the carrot on the hook of Socialism?

1) Free university education (as long as you don't mind getting the same pay as one who didn't go)
2) Free medical for all (as long as you don't mind not getting the treatment you want when you want it - IF - there are medicines
3) Everybody gets minimum wages $20/hr - you keep $10/ hour and then the government parcels out your monthly need.

See it happen again and again--and they say it would never happen! That is what THEY ALL PROMISED!

Bernie and the rest of them are no different. They are simply adding some heat to the frog in the water.

Are people blind?

better to be the poor servant of a poor jesus than to think otherwise.
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
They're capitalist countries.
716.jpg
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Which I have now, but I understand not everyone does. So, how do you provide healthcare for everyone without destroying what millions of Americans already have? That's where it gets complicated.

The same way they do it in most of the developed world. What is it that you think is so incompetent about the people in the United States that makes us incapable of adopting a system that most other nations have implemented with little difficulty? Currently millions of Americans have access to relatively affordable healthcare. Under universal healthcare everyone will have access to relatively affordable healthcare. How would this be 'destroying' what millions of Americans currently have?
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
Bernie's policies would make us basically a social democracy a la Scandinavia. Not exactly dirt poor countries. Better healthcare than us, for example.

Why do people constantly fall for this equivocation between Bernie and Venezuela, or Bernie and the USSR? Are they blind?
Simple answer: it's not about the facts. It's about using propaganda to try to frighten people.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
The same way they do it in most of the developed world. What is it that you think is so incompetent about the people in the United States that makes us incapable of adopting a system that most other nations have implemented with little difficulty? Currently millions of Americans have access to relatively affordable healthcare. Under universal healthcare everyone will have access to relatively affordable healthcare. How would this be 'destroying' what millions of Americans currently have?
The right thinks: poor us. We're just not capable of doing what so many nations can do. It's not our fault. We're just too sensitive about such things and we are so terribly frightened.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
As someone who lived in Venezuela and married a Venezuelan, have friends in Cuba and was in the neighboring countries when the Socialist Sandanistas were in power, I can't help but wonder how people can follow Socialism with Bernie Sanders leading the charge.

I have seen it again and again. They promise utopia, using real-life issues, and it ends up being worse than what they had when they started.

Example: Bernie's "Great education with Cuba -- you can't throw out the good of what he did"... really?

It was an education in communism and not in growing in education. It was an elimination of faith-religion and the promotion of the state religion of communism. Yes, graduated doctors in medicine with no medicine to treat the people. Yes, it was agriculture... but for export while each family had delegated 2 chickens a months (to eat), a few pounds of coffee, and other bare minimal sustenance to get you by while the cows were exported and if you killed one, certain prison time.

BUT THEY DID HAVE HOSPITALS FOR ALL AND EVERYONE WAS EQUAL... equal in poverty unless you were in the upper echelon and medicine shelves were bare.

I still remember in an interview with a Cuban pastor in the US (year ago when it was a rare event) - as he began to perspire profusely when asked questions about Cuba. Why? Because his family was still in Cuba and a wrong statement heard by other Cubans (who might be plants by the government) would mean disaster for their family.

So, what do we have today? What is the carrot on the hook of Socialism?

1) Free university education (as long as you don't mind getting the same pay as one who didn't go)
2) Free medical for all (as long as you don't mind not getting the treatment you want when you want it - IF - there are medicines
3) Everybody gets minimum wages $20/hr - you keep $10/ hour and then the government parcels out your monthly need.

See it happen again and again--and they say it would never happen! That is what THEY ALL PROMISED!

Bernie and the rest of them are no different. They are simply adding some heat to the frog in the water.

Are people blind?

Are you defining socialism as the socialism practiced in Venezuela or the socialism practiced in Norway? Or the socialism practiced in the United States, for that matter? There isn't a nation on Earth that doesn't redistribute its wealth in some manner. Here in the US though we foolishly only tend to think of the money that goes to helping individuals as 'socialism', while ignoring the vast amounts of wealth that is redistributed to corporations as subsidies.
 
Last edited:

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
Not sure what this means, sorry.

It means the US should already have enough money to take care of everyone, other countries do. So no need to increase taxes on anyone. Also, while other countries are taken care of everyone, the US just need to pay for those who can't afford it. IOW the US is using more money and doing less with it

It's almost as though universal healthcare is more cost effective! :eek:

In other countries. Somehow the US healthcare system is messed up, but it ain't about the dollars and cents.

So single payer does what exactly? How does single payer fix our broken system? We are not a socialist country, none of these other countries are socialist either. So there no point bringing socialism into the conversation, no point, no point in saying we need to raise taxes.

We have enough money in our current system of capitalism. How does making people who are otherwise covered by private healthcare change to a single payer system fix anything?

Or calling it single payer is silly. It's really asking the government to get involved in everyone's healthcare, whether they like it or not.

Right now I have a choice in health coverage. I can pay for more, pay for less. Not pay anything. How does taking away my choice fix the problem?
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
It's an election year.

Yeah, that too. People keep harping on this single payer as a solution thinking it'll get folks to vote from them. As long as they can get folks to believe that, they don't have to come up with any real solutions.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Yeah, that too. People keep harping on this single payer as a solution thinking it'll get folks to vote from them. As long as they can get folks to believe that, they don't have to come up with any real solutions.
I'm betting it's gonna happen some day.
 

joe1776

Well-Known Member
....Transitioning to a universal healthcare system is going to be costly — in terms of dollars — no matter what.
Right. Where are we gonna get the money to pay for it?. Are they going to raise my taxes?!:eek:

In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US $3,678; in the U.S. $6,714. Why do those damn socialists think we can afford 40% less? We love paying for health care insurance premiums and deduductibles. I love my insurance company.
 
Last edited:

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
It means the US should already have enough money to take care of everyone, other countries do. So no need to increase taxes on anyone.

Not true. Given our aging population, and other factors, healthcare costs are going up regardless of whether we switch to a different insurance system or not. The question is by how much. Universal systems that cover everyone are more cost effective.

IOW the US is using more money and doing less with it

That part is true. Or at least, being much less effective at patient care with it.

In other countries. Somehow the US healthcare system is messed up, but it ain't about the dollars and cents.

So single payer does what exactly?

Removes the profit motive from the provision of health insurance, which brings down costs.

We are not a socialist country, none of these other countries are socialist either. So there no point bringing socialism into the conversation,

On this I actually agree, I don't care what we call it, it's the policy that matters.

no point in saying we need to raise taxes.

The point is to fund the program, as explained.

Or calling it single payer is silly. It's really asking the government to get involved in everyone's healthcare, whether they like it or not.

The government is already involved in your healthcare, hate to break it to you. The question is how.

Right now I have a choice in health coverage. I can pay for more, pay for less. Not pay anything. How does taking away my choice fix the problem?

Insurance, of all types, is a game of pooling risk. Insurance banks on people who use it less paying premiums to fund the services to those who use it more. The more people in your pool, the more widely dispersed the risk, allowing insurers to charge less. When insurance is universal, this effect is maximized. Single payer additionally removes the profit motive involved in private insurance which artificially inflates its cost as well.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Right. Where are we gonna get the money to pay for it?. Are they going to raise my taxes?!:eek:

In 2006, per-capita spending for health care in Canada was US $3,678; in the U.S. $6,714. Why do those damn socialists think we can afford 40% less? We love paying for health care insurance premiums and deduductibles. I love my insurance company.
You already pay more in inflated premiums and copays than what you would in taxes. We can also stand to divert some of the funding that goes into our bloated military budget. Legalizing cannabis and taxing it would also help cover costs.
 
Top