[mike777]

 Winstonm, on 2012-July-13, 12:23, said:

Mike,

This sounds like Mancur Olson - could it be?

Olson contended that size of group mattered, that in large groups there was no choice for group betterment unless it was accompanied by a personal benefit.

In the U.S., I think the reason is more simple: a tiny, tiny minority has the ability to block and halt any change to the status quo they deem harmful to their cause. Note, this is not a single group acting in concert, but splinter groups within a bigger group of super-wealthy who act in their own interests to keep the status quo. It may be A,B,C who oppose universal healthcare and act to keep it off the table, while it may be X,Y,Z who oppose changes to energy profits by opposing global warming.

Regardless, the U.S. is no longer a representative-Republic, and because of that I fully expect the U.S. to continue to follow the path of other lumbering giants who could not or would not evolve.

First off was your daughter on Jay Leno last night?


have no idea who that is, I am more a Milton Friedman. type guy

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand”



agree tiny tiny minorities can block oil drilling and etc. As far as healthcare it seems more than half the people have real concerns over such a massive change as advocated here. I think it is up to the advocates to do a better job at explaining their side.


to get back to one of the two main concerns, innovation, the concern is a massive takeover of healthcare by the central govt. that will dampen innovation and thus quality of healthcare.


The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government”

---


Perhaps all of this just boils down to what the posters are saying, America should be more like Europe.

[kenberg]

Briefs:
Centralized government projects:
Manhattan Project
Space Flight
Recently I read that the Bush multi-billion dollar program to combat AIDS in Africa had a very substantial effect.

More like Europe:
I am not even sure what this means. Some good skiing there.

Study Finland:
I got nothin against them Finns, but I pass.

Motorcycle helmets.
Back when I rode one, I took a substantial spill and decided all on my own a helmet might be a good idea. Probably it's a good law. But I had ice cream for lunch and I don't want no pointy headed do gooder saying I can't.

Options on the table for Nov.
Keep and maybe expand ACA
Repeal ACA.

Options not on the table.:
Repealing helmet laws
Finland
Curing me of my intrinsic masochism
Making Mancur Olson part of every undergraduate's education. Not even at Maryland.

[ArtK78]

 mike777, on 2012-July-13, 13:28, said:

to get back to one of the two main concerns, innovation, the concern is a massive takeover of healthcare by the central govt. that will dampen innovation and thus quality of healthcare.

Indeed. Lets get rid of Medicare.

[luke warm]

 ArtK78, on 2012-July-13, 15:15, said:

Indeed. Lets get rid of Medicare.

too late, but not too late to change it...

[Winstonm]

 mike777, on 2012-July-13, 13:28, said:

First off was your daughter on Jay Leno last night?


have no idea who that is, I am more a Milton Friedman. type guy

“If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand”



agree tiny tiny minorities can block oil drilling and etc. As far as healthcare it seems more than half the people have real concerns over such a massive change as advocated here. I think it is up to the advocates to do a better job at explaining their side.


to get back to one of the two main concerns, innovation, the concern is a massive takeover of healthcare by the central govt. that will dampen innovation and thus quality of healthcare.


The greatest advances of civilization, whether in architecture or painting, in science and literature, in industry or agriculture, have never come from centralized government”

---


Perhaps all of this just boils down to what the posters are saying, America should be more like Europe.

I didn't see Leno, but it probably was her. She is in the movie "Magic Mike" and also has a role in the HBO series "Newsroom", so it would be about the right time to be doing the talk-show rounds.

I agree that placing productivity into the hands of a central government is a bad idea - one has to look no further than old East Germany or the Soviet satellites to see that.

On the other hand, centralized payments systems have a lot of benefits, the main one being to eliminate almost all of the overhead associated with billing.

As for cost, I cannot see how anyone can with a straight face and clear conscience say anything about cost when the U.S. spends $1 trillion annually on war, warring, and defense.

I agree the President did a poor job explaining the necessity of his healthcare plan. As for the polls showing anti-healthcare, I am uncertain if those numbers reflect genuine concerns about healthcare or whether it simply shows hows prejudiced this country still is and the votes simply express displeasure that an African-American is telling them what to do.

I have never understood racism - and I am always shocked by how pervasive it really is.

[mike777]

speaking of Finland and Europe here is a concern:

These days everybody talks about Europe's debt problem and how southern Europe is destroying the economy and the prospects of rest of Europe. In the short term, it is true that countries in the South will have to face painful realities surrounding their economies, however in the long term, all of Europe will suffer from a chronic disease that's been in the continent for a few decades now. This disease is called "demographic time bomb" and when it strikes, it will leave no prisoners behind. Not even countries with relatively healthier economies such as Finland, Germany and Netherlands are immune to it.

http://seekingalpha....aphic-time-bomb


As you can see in the table below, most European countries, if not all, are in deep trouble in the decades to come. In Italy, an average citizen lives 18.77 years beyond retirement and in France this number is 19.19 years. Even in countries like Germany, Finland and Netherlands, retirees live for nearly 15 years. This trend is unsustainable as these countries spend between 3.5% and 11.7% of their GDP on healthcare costs alone. In the near future, as medicine and technology improves, people will live longer and longer, which will force these countries to increase their retirement ages. For reference, only about 20 years ago, an average retiree lived about 5-7 years. This is less than half of today's number

--


I certainly agree the that the central govt has an important role to perform in funding basic research which capitalists will try and exploit for profit.

[barmar]

 mike777, on 2012-July-13, 13:28, said:

agree tiny tiny minorities can block oil drilling and etc. As far as healthcare it seems more than half the people have real concerns over such a massive change as advocated here. I think it is up to the advocates to do a better job at explaining their side.

Unfortunately, I think a huge number of them don't care what the advocates say. They're Republicans and simply parrot what they hear from the party leadership. And the leaders get their marching orders from rich people who don't have any problem getting quality medical care, and don't want to pay for everyone else.

Republicans are so dead set against anything that smacks of socialism that they'd rather die than allow it.

[blackshoe]

 Zelandakh, on 2012-July-13, 04:15, said:

Sounds just like the NHS. So the American system is free treatment for all - who'd have thunk it.

TANSTAAFL

[blackshoe]

As always, ken berg speaks with the voice of reason.

[luke warm]

 Winstonm, on 2012-July-13, 15:58, said:

As for the polls showing anti-healthcare, I am uncertain if those numbers reflect genuine concerns about healthcare or whether it simply shows hows prejudiced this country still is and the votes simply express displeasure that an African-American is telling them what to do.

I have never understood racism - and I am always shocked by how pervasive it really is.

why is it that people can't voice sincere disagreement without being called names? aside from being logically indefensible, it seems like an attempt to end debate before it can start

 barmar, on 2012-July-14, 00:14, said:

Republicans are so dead set against anything that smacks of socialism that they'd rather die than allow it.

assuming that is true, 1) why do you think it is, and 2) why is it a bad thing?

[Winstonm]

 luke warm, on 2012-July-14, 06:39, said:

why is it that people can't voice sincere disagreement without being called names? aside from being logically indefensible, it seems like an attempt to end debate before it can start

If you will read closely, you will note the racism comment was not directed toward you. Perhaps I should have separated it more as it was a different line of thought - and I still cannot fathom how much genuine racism there is in the world, in places you would not imagine.

I lived for a number of years in Las Vegas - once you get outside the city proper, as far as racist views, you would think you had stepped into Mississippi in the 1950s.

Anyway, if you thought the racism comment was directed toward you I apologize as it was not - I always assume non-racism is the standard, you included, and perhaps that is why I am always so shocked when I see it and hear it.

[Cthulhu D]

 mike777, on 2012-July-13, 16:00, said:

As you can see in the table below, most European countries, if not all, are in deep trouble in the decades to come. In Italy, an average citizen lives 18.77 years beyond retirement and in France this number is 19.19 years. Even in countries like Germany, Finland and Netherlands, retirees live for nearly 15 years. This trend is unsustainable as these countries spend between 3.5% and 11.7% of their GDP on healthcare costs alone. In the near future, as medicine and technology improves, people will live longer and longer, which will force these countries to increase their retirement ages. For reference, only about 20 years ago, an average retiree lived about 5-7 years. This is less than half of today's numbers

But American spends ~17.5% now! If this demolishes your economy, America is in more dire need of reform and cost controls than anyone else?

If you don't like Finnland, try Germany. Booming economy, strong healthcare, and inherited the ex-soviet block east Germany and had to manage that.

[kenberg]

 Cthulhu D, on 2012-July-14, 09:27, said:

But American spends ~17.5% now! If this demolishes your economy, America is in more dire need of reform and cost controls than anyone else?

If you don't like Finnland, try Germany. Booming economy, strong healthcare, and inherited the ex-soviet block east Germany and had to manage that.

I regard the successful re-integration of E Germany as one of the most impressive accomplishments in Post WWII history. Surely there is much to be learned for economists, political scientists, sociologists, and many other ists. I am not at all against applauding and learning from our friends.

Still, the issue facing the nation (the USA) is the viability of the ACA. Is it or isn't it? I am predisposed to think well of it. I think cold blooded honest examination of the details is in order, however.

[Winstonm]

 kenberg, on 2012-July-14, 17:25, said:

I regard the successful re-integration of E Germany as one of the most impressive accomplishments in Post WWII history. Surely there is much to be learned for economists, political scientists, sociologists, and many other ists. I am not at all against applauding and learning from our friends.

The following was reported recently in an article from The Guardian. I wonder if it still holds true?

Quote

In 2008, Reuters reports, a survey of east Germans found 52% believed the free-market economy was "unsuitable" and 43% said they wanted socialism back.

[mike777]

 Winstonm, on 2012-July-14, 18:41, said:

The following was reported recently in an article from The Guardian. I wonder if it still holds true?

We see alot of definitions of socialism.

Just to be clear at the heart of it, it means having economic and political power in the same hand.

------------


I think alot of these polls reflect the same thing, just said slightly differently,,,,people love getting stuff for free.


with that said do 42% of East germans really want east germany back and all of what that means, I dont believe the poll? Or 42% mean they really like free stuff?

[hrothgar]

 mike777, on 2012-July-14, 19:29, said:

We see alot of definitions of socialism.
Just to be clear at the heart of it, it means having economic and political power in the same hand.

And how is this any different from say, fascism. (I feel obliged to quote Mussolini who stated "Fascism is the perfect marriage between Big Business and Big Government")

For the record, communication works a lot better when you don't invent your own definitions for common expressions...

Hey! We might finally have an explanation why so made Tea Pary members think that Obama is a "Kenyan".
They've probably redefined the word "Kenyan" to be synonymous as "Black"

[mike777]

yes socialism is facist.geez or at least has many fascist elements....


this is the common definition...economic and political power in the same hand.

http://www.glouceste...socialism-.html



What is socialism? In its purest form, socialism is government ownership and control of the means of production. Ownership of anything implies the right to the income produced by that thing.

http://www.cleverdud...lism-in-the-us/

-----------------
With that said perhaps we should define a reasonable measurement of socialism>


Perhaps the percentage of govt spending to national income?

If 100% of govt spending equals national income we can call it socialism? Perhaps another method?

If 90% then close?

If 10% not close?



--------------------------------------------------------

[barmar]

 mike777, on 2012-July-14, 19:29, said:

I think alot of these polls reflect the same thing, just said slightly differently,,,,people love getting stuff for free.

People who don't have stuff want to get stuff for free. People who have stuff mostly don't want to share their stuff; more accurately, they don't want to be FORCED to share their stuff (many of them are major benefactors, but they get to choose how much and to whom).

But if we as a society feel that the have-nots should be given a helping hand, the money has to come from somewhere.

[mike777]

 barmar, on 2012-July-14, 22:26, said:

People who don't have stuff want to get stuff for free. People who have stuff mostly don't want to share their stuff; more accurately, they don't want to be FORCED to share their stuff (many of them are major benefactors, but they get to choose how much and to whom).

But if we as a society feel that the have-nots should be given a helping hand, the money has to come from somewhere.

good point but as an aside


I think older people love getting free stuff or at least stuff at great bargain....this feels like a function of age.....not wealth.

I cant prove it but it feels like it is true....the older i get.....

I know this may sound wierd but the older one gets the more one gives away and the more one enjoys free

stuff/bargains....that they get...


----


example:

we just got a fed ex package from a major huge usa bank offering to maybe modify our mortgage
1) my younger wife, who pays the bills, called them..yelling at them our mortgage was on time and this was a mistake
2) I called them and asked.....what is your offer?

[barmar]

Who DOESN'T like getting stuff for free? The problem is when one feels they are ENTITLED to free stuff.

The only connection to aging I can think of is all the "senior discounts". I think these exist for a couple of reasons:

1) Seniors = retired people (traditionally). These people are often on fixed incomes, they can't afford high prices as well as people who are employed.

2) "respect for elders". If someone has lived a long, productive life and benefited society, they deserve some recognition and return.

In combination, we don't consider someone "deficient" for being unemployed because they're retired. They put in their time, and they're allowed to rest in their later years. Contrast this with young people who are unemployed and/or homeless -- I think most people assume that there's something wrong with them that they aren't able to get work: they're lazy, too picky, not searching aggressively enough, uneducated, etc. If you've been working for 50 years and decide it's time to stop, few would hold it against you.