It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
You should, again, do some basic research.
The French healthcare system covers the entire nation. It is well loved by the French and pretty much everyone.
It cost less, a lot less, per person to run than the US system.
It is endlessly less wasteful than the US system.
It's outcomes are better, across the board.
To make all this affordable, France reimburses its doctors at a far lower rate than U.S. physicians would accept. However, French doctors don't have to pay back their crushing student loans because medical school is paid for by the state, and malpractice insurance premiums are a tiny fraction of the $55,000 a year and up that many U.S. doctors pay. That $55,000 equals the average yearly net income for French doctors, a third of what their American counterparts earn. Then again, the French government pays two-thirds of the social security tax for most French physicians—a tax that's typically 40% of income.
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
So you like a lame duck government?
If not what is your point?
Not that you care but people who easily swing party affiliations are too confused to vote properly. They probably should have their voting priviliges revoked. But we live in a make-believe free country dominated by money and secret agendas, so the media is bound to push certain parties and candidates, while totatally ignoring others. This causes the illusion of extremely limited choice.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
So you like a lame duck government?
If not what is your point?
Not that you care but people who easily swing party affiliations are too confused to vote properly. They probably should have their voting priviliges revoked. But we live in a make-believe free country dominated by money and secret agendas, so the media is bound to push certain parties and candidates, while totatally ignoring others. This causes the illusion of extremely limited choice.
I don't like a lame duck Government per say...but then. MOST of my life has been spent living in an America where split Government did NOT mean lame duck and gridlock to the total loss of anything at all getting done. Clinton, Daddy Bush and Reagan all served in varying states of mixed Government and that was a good thing. Very good thing.
You see, as much as some would say split Governemnt is a bad thing...and Republicans have full control of the house while Dems have the Senate is counter-productive, I look at it a different way. Would you prefer a SUPER-majority voting block of Republicans in both houses of Congress while running the White House? That solves gridlock and lame duck questions. It would solve them entirely. Republicans would get everything they want and anyone who didn't like it could just move, cork it, or hide somewhere.
Sounds like Utopia doesn't it? Ahhh..... I can almost smell the mountains of despair among the poor folks now in such a world. .....and that's the DOWNSIDE of what full Right control would bring.
Full LEFT control brings the opposite. The poor will be happier than they'd ever beb under a full Right Government but those who generate what makes any nation wealthy or 'great' will be stomped flat in the process. Such that, the poor better be happy by the end. Poor is the majority of what will be left.
^^^^ Now MIX those two extremes and and force some cooperation? We get an imperfect system that carries some of both extremes without the full downsides to suffer from either. We're a 50/50 nation ...almost dead even on right vs. left ideology.
There isn't another way this happens. Period. Cooperation happens? Or we all fall together.
There's a bunch of tea party hacks that want to blow up government, and some political tricksters whose main priority is to stop the President, but no serious Republicans, or at least very few.
The right's supporters are not, by and large, supporting these amazing Republican suggestions and policies, they are by and large ideologues and anti-Obamaites... And sure, if you disagree, tell me of these amazing Republican policies and initiatives the Republicans are pushing... love to hear about them...
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by longlostbrother
There's a bunch of tea party hacks that want to blow up government, and some political tricksters whose main priority is to stop the President, but no serious Republicans, or at least very few.
The right's supporters are not, by and large, supporting these amazing Republican suggestions and policies, they are by and large ideologues and anti-Obamaites... And sure, if you disagree, tell me of these amazing Republican policies and initiatives the Republicans are pushing... love to hear about them...
I honestly don't know how to debate you on this anymore. Your stereotyping, as evidenced here, is so vicious and hateful to me personally and anyone who shares my side of the political spectrum, it leaves no possibility to even seek common ground. When the discussion opens with fighting words, no one can be surprised that a fight is all anyone gets out of it. Sadly, these fighting word approaches are as common in Washington from both sides as they are between normal people right now.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by longlostbrother
I agree 100% that one simply can't debate with extremists. It's likely the only thing and certainly last thing we'll discuss to agree on at all. I can't find common ground with someone who hates me intensely, personally, on nothing but my political beliefs. It can't be done...and I just hope the majority are not as polarized. If they are, we won't have a United anything much longer. It just won't be there. It has taken generally like minded people to make this thing work for over 200 years. It cannot stand long when 50% of the people want it one way, 50% want it another way and both sides are willing to see the object being fought over, crash and burn with no survivors if they can't get it their own personal way.
It's bad bad times we're in...and this hate for the sheer sake of being partisan about hating people is too much and killing everything good about America. Take care there....Longlost. Try as I might...I just can't find debate ground with your level of open hate so I'll definitely bow out further talking with ya. No one needs to see the other approach I know how to take. Not here....ATS doesn't go that way and I'm glad for it.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by longlostbrother
I agree 100% that one simply can't debate with extremists. It's likely the only thing and certainly last thing we'll discuss to agree on at all. I can't find common ground with someone who hates me intensely, personally, on nothing but my political beliefs. It can't be done...and I just hope the majority are not as polarized. If they are, we won't have a United anything much longer. It just won't be there. It has taken generally like minded people to make this thing work for over 200 years. It cannot stand long when 50% of the people want it one way, 50% want it another way and both sides are willing to see the object being fought over, crash and burn with no survivors if they can't get it their own personal way.
It's bad bad times we're in...and this hate for the sheer sake of being partisan about hating people is too much and killing everything good about America. Take care there....Longlost. Try as I might...I just can't find debate ground with your level of open hate so I'll definitely bow out further talking with ya. No one needs to see the other approach I know how to take. Not here....ATS doesn't go that way and I'm glad for it.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
I'm not really getting your point.
I'm not a fan of unnecessary regulation, who is, but at the same time... I think that much of the US society and business is much less regulated than say Germany, which does pretty well... so... maybe I'm missing your point...?
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Please watch roger calero from the socialist workers party during his interview at occupy wall street.
Unfortunately both the socialist workers party and socialist party usa only have ballots in several states, whereas the libertarians and greens have ballots in nearly every state.
It would be good for people to know there are insanely better alternatives to this unbelievably corrupt duopoly.
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
The billionares and trillionares should pay 80% of the taxes
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
Please watch roger calero from the socialist workers party during his interview at occupy wall street.
Unfortunately both the socialist workers party and socialist party usa only have ballots in several states, whereas the libertarians and greens have ballots in nearly every state.
It would be good for people to know there are insanely better alternatives to this unbelievably corrupt duopoly.
I will fight to maintain a free America to my last breath.