socialized firefighting in ca
Posted By: Liberal democrat on 2007-10-24
In Reply to: I am concerned for my fellow democrats on this post - piglet
I think Libby meant her/his post as tongue in cheek. Obviously Bush had nothing to do with the fires. My post about socialized firefighting is the truth. The govt pays for firefighting in CA. It is a govt job. CA could never exist with volunteer firefighters like in some parts of the USA.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
And as to socialized medicine leading to a socialized country....
it has to start somewhere, piglet. It has already started in this country with all the entitlements. Adding health care is one more nail in the proverbial coffin. And as you seek to move entitlements further and further up the income ladder, you create a wider disparity and destroy the middle class. That is how it starts. That is how it started everywhere. A good idea gone bad, just like so many others. The more power you place in one area, and the more choice you take away from the "people" the closer you get. It looks good to start. Then pretty soon the government starts to control businesses, so that eventually everyone "works for the government." When people begin to wake up and realize what is going on...and start to protest it or try to bring it into the light...then the government starts to control media (aka Chavez shutting down a TV station). It is not a leap. It is a slow, malicious process. Socialist Germany started out that way. Germans thought it was great, and it was, until Hitler rose to power. Then it was too late. When you concentrate too much power over the everyday lives of the people and make them dependent upon the state for the necessities...we are already headed that way with people dependent for income, and now you want them to be depenent for health care as well. What's next, Piglet? You tell me.
I have lived to see enough "that would never happens" that DID happen to know. And if you will read history, you will see that what I have said is borne out. In a person's desire to have everything provided for them, every time that happens, control is relinquished to the government. That is where it starts.
Nobody is saying socialized medicine
they are saying set up an insurance program that we would still have to pay for!
Obama is not going for socialized medicine -
Obama's plan just involves making sure affordable insurance is available for everyone. He is not mandating that you all use government hospitals or government sponsored clinics. He is saying that he wants insurance for every person in America.
Under the socialized medicine system........sm
which is basically what Obama is pushing for, you might get some health care, but I sure hope you don't need a hip replacement or other specialized care. Just ask our neighbors to the north how long they have to wait for a hip replacement.
Brian Day, former president of the Canadian Medical Association, remarked that Canada "is a country in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years."
Medicines will be rationed and forget about getting treatment for pesky things like cancer if you are over a certain age or have other comorbid conditions.
Socialized health care = semantics...
what it boils down to is, when you have the federal government start administering all health care, quality of care will go down, not up, and access to care will be even more difficult. You cited Medicare and Medicaid...both rife with waste and fraud. We read about it every other day. The VA system for soldiers is federally run...tell me how well THAT is working, and that is not for every person in the US. I would like a poll of rank and file Canadians...I would like to know what individuals think of their health system. The only one I saw quoted said 55% of his paycheck is taken off the top for taxes, and a large part of that is what funds the health care system. There ARE waiting lists for operations. And even if you have the money privately to pay for your own operation if time constraint is involved, you are NOT allowed to jump the "list." That is why many Canadians cross the border for emergent care and surgery. Just a couple of weeks ago there was the story of the two women with high-risk pregnancies who could not be hospitalized because there was nowhere to put them. They ended up in Seattle.
So no thanks. I would much rather have a full cost of premiums tax refund, which is what some have proposed. Yeah, you will still have to cough up the premiums for a year, but then if you take your refund at the end of the year and put it in the bank...voila. There are your premiums for the next year. And we can keep the quality of care we have and the access we have.
That would be my choice, far, far ahead of any kind of federal government subsidized and administered health care...which is what Hillary is proposing, only calling it "universal" instead of socialized. Same difference.
Anyone who thinks that socialized medicine is a good idea
should try out military medicine for awhile and see how it goes!
|
