Health Care

[Nixly]

I'm from Belgium, and we're often praised into the sky for our "great" health care system.

 

If you have a good system, people will always abuse it. No getting around that. We know it's being abused by some, but some people in Belgium are having quite a lot health care issues.

Before the money is refunded, you gotta pay it. So if you don't have much, it's pretty difficult to get the care. There are a few ways around it, and more and more it's starting to improve.

 

When I'm honest, I'm very happy I live in Belgium for the health care! It might not be perfect and I've got more then 1 complaint about it, but it's also helped me a lot.

I've got a chronic illness, and that makes my immune system go nuts every now and then. I had a period were I NEEDED a doctor weekly. I don't think I'd be able to afford paying for all of that myself! Let alone all the medication that comes with it!

I go to the hospital once a week, for care, I don't think I need to tell anyone that doing that for a year or 2 is expensive. Not even to mention the physiotherapist I also visit weekly. I get refunds for both, without that, I wouldn't even have half the symptom control I have now.

Health care allows me to recover as much as I possible can, get a good symptom control, and then I can go for a job. It's even better for the economy - rather then staying sick, and unemployed, I can have a more or less normal life (some adjustments, like a part-time job rather then a full time one, and going to a physiotherapist weekly for the rest of my life) and I'll be able to do a good job - rather then working sick and getting fired! I feel better too - my life improved a lot. Even only in terms of pain control - SO much better!

 

I know of people with the same illness in America ... let's just say I think America needs a health care system.

EDIT: on the suing doctor comment, that doesn't happen here - rarely. Only when we have REALLY good reasons. They even make the news here - I'm in the health care circuit quite a lot, and I've never even met someone who knew someone who sued a doctor.

Edited August 6, 2012 by Nixly

[Rosedamai]

on the suing doctor comment, that doesn't happen here - rarely. Only when we have REALLY good reasons. They even make the news here - I'm in the health care circuit quite a lot, and I've never even met someone who knew someone who sued a doctor.

Same here in Korea. I think the only time I've heard of a doctor getting sued was when he was chronically negligent and accidentally sewed up the stitches on a patient with the knife still inside it. I just don't see doctors getting sued a lot.

[~Kat~]

I believe our health care does need reform but the way Obama is proposing it would lead our country to bankruptcy. Also, under the "Obama care" the doctors or government would decide whether or not you're too old to receive treatment. I'm not trying to get all political here it's just a sensitive topic.

 

EX>

 

60 Year old needs said organ to survive but, so does a 27 year old. Ethically speaking it would be morally right to give the organ to the 27 year old; however, how can we outweigh the possibility the 60 year old can live 20-40 more years? Heck, even live to be 100? From a moral stand point you could say the twenty year old could live longer with that organ, though how do we say who has the right to live and who doesn't? Everyone has the right to live and opportunity to get the treatment they're entitiled too. Uh, this is something considered the death panel in that reform.

 

I'm not too educated on the whole health care system and I know I'm ignorant in that respect. I don't really know how other countries operate with theirs I just know ours is MEH.

I have to agree with you.

 

I do not want Obamacare.

 

My Dr's do not want Obamacare because their hands will be tied. My own Dr told me the way they like to give care, will be against the rules.

 

I just hope Obama does not get back in. He has not done much for our country as it is.

[Syaoransbear]

I just hope Obama does not get back in. He has not done much for our country as it is.

Yeah because people won't let him do anything. He's not a king, he can't do whatever he wants. There won't be change if the people won't allow it.

 

I think the health care in the US is disgusting and I would never live there. Worrying about whether or not your health insurance will accept your claim because you will be homeless or bankrupt if they don't sounds horrible, especially since insurance companies profit off of denying claims and will look for loop holes or just plain make it difficult for you to collect. Plus if you lose the genetic lottery, sounds like you will be pretty much screwed for life over there. Too sick to work but too poor to get treatment. That sure sounds lovely.

 

I love our health care in Canada. I think it's weird when people say they don't want to pay for the health of others, but they don't mind paying for the education of others, for the construction of buildings/parks/roads for others, for firefighters to put out the fires of other people's houses, etc. Having so many other things socialized but not health just seems weird. I'd rather my money go towards saving lives than a new park honestly.

 

And there may be those who abuse the system(although I definitely don't know any), but there are far more who under use the system. My fiance hasn't seen a doctor in 15 years, which is quite funny considering his father is a doctor(surgeon). Most people will put off seeing the doctor for as long as possible because even though there's no bill at the end, seeing the doctor is still unpleasant. I think people get the impression that if they aren't charged based on frequency of visits they'll just see the doctor every other week just because they can, but that's definitely not the case at all.

 

Our doctors do make a good living as well. My future father in law is loaded, even with a gazillion children and his wife not being employed.

[Princess Artemis]

People aren't so lawyer happy, for a start. I think it is SICK the way people keep suing doctors who did their level best - they almost TRY to find a reason to sue (I have no particular issue with suing ones who genuinely screwed up, though I'm not sure how it helps except with care costs.) But Canadian doctors all have malpractice insurance, and on the whole I haven't seen any problems. I used to work for a doctor in Canada, and I never heard of one being sued.

 

And they seemed - still seem - to make a perfectly good living. My boss certainly did - and he was an ordinary family doctor. What can I say ? Media misrepresentation in the US paid for by insurance companies (and Fox News...) I suspect....

I wondered about the malpractice laws because in the US, doctors need a lot of malpractice insurance. More than they used to. My father's heart specialist is one of the doctors I mentioned up thread that very likely will retire shortly due to Obamacare running him out of business. One of the reasons it will do so is because his malpractice insurance is really ungodly expensive, and right now he has trouble paying for his house. Obamacare will reduce his income below his ability to afford to keep working. So...he won't.

 

That will be a shame, because he's a very good doctor. I am pretty sure that I didn't hear about that on any news station, but rather from my father, who sees the doctor in question regularly.

 

So, I guess, like magic, capping the amount he can charge would solve all his problems? Because, it's not rocket science?

 

As to the comparative cost of glasses - I've no idea what sort you buy (and equally I wasn't aware of those rather good looking Tesco ones) - but I am not about to pay for Armani frames, and I don't think a health service should either. It would take one HELL of a lot of pairs of glasses to come close to the cost of Lasik.

 

I certainly never bought Armani. I've had insurance that paid for frames, but, on average, glasses for me cost ~$120, frames, lenses, etc, for something fairly basic. Not used frames, and of course the frames don't need to be bought over and over. Naturally, frames break, lenses get scratched, etc., etc., etc.. When I was younger I was wearing contacts also, which are their own expense. Given that I had LASIK done when I was 28 or so, and it will last the rest of my life, that is, for me, an entire lifetime of not paying for glasses, or contacts, or worrying about my lenses getting scratched, or glass cleaner, or contact lens cleaner, which is all expensive, or the fact that glasses made me dizzy and hurt my ears, or that contacts are always somewhat of a risk because hey, sticking foreign objects in your eyes daily, yeah, LASIK was worth it to me and I consider it to cost less than sixty or seventy years worth of glasses or contacts. That is one hell of a lot of glasses, and putting forward that cost once for all has, in the long run, made life a lot easier on me, since I'm not exactly well to do.

 

ETA in relation to greed. I am sorry to say there are some greedy doctors out there, too. And sure - there are times when your money would be paying for the health care of others (JUST AS HAPPENS WITH INSURANCE ! when did you last claim on that expensive auto policy ?) - but one day someone you know or love would be able to be treated for that heart attack/broken leg/brain tumour without the fear of a massive bill.

 

I myself am aware that all insurance pools the money collected, since it really is quite a lot like gambling when insurance is working as insurance, but that does not make it a tax on the fact that someone is alive. And I, myself, have no issue with my money paying for someone else's health care when it is voluntary. Sorry, I don't feel quite so cheerful about forcing others to labor for the benefit of my family.

Edited August 7, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[lightbird]

I just hope Obama does not get back in. He has not done much for our country as it is.

Oh really.

Maybe because I'm from the secular Europe, but IDK why you (Americans) think that Romney will be better.

 

I can't say that much about healthcare in Latvia, tbh, since, despite having chronic dermatitis, I don't really have that much experience with hospitals and doctors. I know that doctors often tend to be pretty condescending to patients and, at least in the government-funded hospitals and policlinics, there's a lot of money trafficicking and patient blackmailing behind closed doors, since the government-funded medical staff salaries are quite low.

Edited August 7, 2012 by lightbird

[Fuzzbucket]

I wondered about the malpractice laws because in the US, doctors need a lot of malpractice insurance. More than they used to. My father's heart specialist is one of the doctors I mentioned up thread that very likely will retire shortly due to Obamacare running him out of business. One of the reasons it will do so is because his malpractice insurance is really ungodly expensive, and right now he has trouble paying for his house. Obamacare will reduce his income below his ability to afford to keep working. So...he won't.

 

That will be a shame, because he's a very good doctor. I am pretty sure that I didn't hear about that on any news station, but rather from my father, who sees the doctor in question regularly.

 

So, I guess, like magic, capping the amount he can charge would solve all his problems? Because, it's not rocket science?

 

 

 

I certainly never bought Armani. I've had insurance that paid for frames, but, on average, glasses for me cost ~$120, frames, lenses, etc, for something fairly basic. Not used frames, and of course the frames don't need to be bought over and over. Naturally, frames break, lenses get scratched, etc., etc., etc.. When I was younger I was wearing contacts also, which are their own expense. Given that I had LASIK done when I was 28 or so, and it will last the rest of my life, that is, for me, an entire lifetime of not paying for glasses, or contacts, or worrying about my lenses getting scratched, or glass cleaner, or contact lens cleaner, which is all expensive, or the fact that glasses made me dizzy and hurt my ears, or that contacts are always somewhat of a risk because hey, sticking foreign objects in your eyes daily, yeah, LASIK was worth it to me and I consider it to cost less than sixty or seventy years worth of glasses or contacts. That is one hell of a lot of glasses, and putting forward that cost once for all has, in the long run, made life a lot easier on me, since I'm not exactly well to do.

 

 

 

I myself am aware that all insurance pools the money collected, since it really is quite a lot like gambling when insurance is working as insurance, but that does not make it a tax on the fact that someone is alive. And I, myself, have no issue with my money paying for someone else's health care when it is voluntary. Sorry, I don't feel quite so cheerful about forcing others to labor for the benefit of my family.

I don't quite get the difference between insurance for a car and insurance for health. It isn't a tax on being alive. It is a whole community chipping in to take care of every member of that community.

 

And I would FAR rather see my taxes go on health than weaponry - but that is a whole different issue.

 

I have a Swedish friend who used to say (she is so old and ill that she doesn't say much any more - but hey she is in an excellent care home with no worries about money...) that she could sometimes get cross about their high taxes - but on the other hand she knew when she saw someone sleeping on the street, that she knew that the taxes she had paid meant she need not feel guilty that he was there, as there WERE facilities for him to get a bed., meals, clothes - and it was actually his choice not to use them. I wish that were true in the UK (homelessness and poverty are huge problems...) - but at least I know if I see someone having a heart attack, I can call an ambulance and not have them refuse to get in because they can't afford to.

 

I see it as caring about the other guy as much as anything. I like to know that no-one - NO-ONE - will lose their home as a result of coming down with cancer.

 

As to doctors and making a living - well, they seem to manage perfectly well in countries that do have universal health care. I am betting they would/will in the US in the end. I don't know why malpractice insurance is so high there - maybe that is something the feds could investigate. Because unless there are one HELL of a lot of incompetent doctors and one HELL of a lot of court cases, there's no need for that. I know people there seem more litigious in general - but even so....

[WereJace]

The reason malpractice insurance is so high in America compared to Canada is that we have completely different systems to handle malpractice. The majority of doctors in Canada belong to the Canadian Medical Protection Association, which collects dues annually for the purpose of acting as a middleman in all malpractice cases-they defend doctors in malpractice cases and distribute settlements to victims of malpractice.

 

There are fewer claims generally, because in malpractice suits the loser pays the winner's legal fees, there are lower compensation levels (due to the lack of direct personal cost associated with obtaining medical care) and lack of lawyers/insurance agencies who deal with malpractice due to the presence of the CMPA.

 

It isn't a perfect system, not at all. Some people don't take malpractice claims to court because they can't afford to lose, or it might not be worth the time. The CMPA is a little too all-encompassing for my taste-it'd be nice if it was split into two divisions, one defending patients and one defending doctors-but I'm not really a legal scholar, so I don't know how that would work or if thats already how it works.

[Nixly]

My Dr's do not want Obamacare because their hands will be tied. My own Dr told me the way they like to give care, will be against the rules.

 

I just hope Obama does not get back in. He has not done much for our country as it is.

 

I don't know the details of Oboma's healthcare plan, but I do it really improve things for several people in America. And quite frankly, people always abuse systems like this, but that's doesn't mean you should punish all the really sick people!

I know of the concern that the country might go bankrupt if a healthcare system is introduced, but it's working in several other countries. It's always fighting against the cheaters and such, but it's worth it.

 

And that's hardly Obama's fault. Each time he tries something, he's blocked by the rich guys. You can't blame him for that.

[Fuzzbucket]

The reason malpractice insurance is so high in America compared to Canada is that we have completely different systems to handle malpractice. The majority of doctors in Canada belong to the Canadian Medical Protection Association, which collects dues annually for the purpose of acting as a middleman in all malpractice cases-they defend doctors in malpractice cases and distribute settlements to victims of malpractice.

 

There are fewer claims generally, because in malpractice suits the loser pays the winner's legal fees, there are lower compensation levels (due to the lack of direct personal cost associated with obtaining medical care) and lack of lawyers/insurance agencies who deal with malpractice due to the presence of the CMPA.

 

It isn't a perfect system, not at all. Some people don't take malpractice claims to court because they can't afford to lose, or it might not be worth the time. The CMPA is a little too all-encompassing for my taste-it'd be nice if it was split into two divisions, one defending patients and one defending doctors-but I'm not really a legal scholar, so I don't know how that would work or if thats already how it works.

Ah thanks ! It was in Ontario that I worked for a doctor, and I knew he never had these fears and issues. So - there's your answer; set up an MPA.

 

Did you know that in Saskatchewan, motor insurance is bought every year with your licence sticker; no gouging; everyone pays the same, and it works out WAY cheaper all round. Same thing in France with home insurance, I gather from my sister-in-law, who was amazed to find how little it was going to cost to insure her rather large house. Insurance companies who are only out to make a profit have a LOT to answer for (mine - in Canada and the UK - is with mutuals which cuts the cost enormously - because they are non-profit. Says it all, really !)

[Syaoransbear]

Did you know that in Saskatchewan, motor insurance is bought every year with your licence sticker; no gouging; everyone pays the same, and it works out WAY cheaper all round.

Agreeeeeeed. I live in Saskatchewan and our vehicle insurance is absolutely amazing here and super cheap. If you get in an accident they are incredibly easy to deal with.

[Fuzzbucket]

Agreeeeeeed. I live in Saskatchewan and our vehicle insurance is absolutely amazing here and super cheap. If you get in an accident they are incredibly easy to deal with.

Can you get ON to copy ????

[Princess Artemis]

I don't quite get the difference between insurance for a car and insurance for health. It isn't a tax on being alive. It is a whole community chipping in to take care of every member of that community.

In the US, Obamacare is founded on a tax on being alive. In the US, it is very easy to avoid car insurance if one does not wish to have that expense for whatever reason. Breathing will not cause the Internal Revenue Service to force an American to acquire car insurance against their will.

 

A whole community chipping in to take care of every member of that community is...rather voluntary sounding, wouldn't you say? So, my challenge to you, since you are making it sound voluntary: Withhold your taxes. I am very certain that your government will clarify for you very quickly whether or not you are chipping in to take care of every member, or if they are, gently as may be, forcing you to do so.

 

Again, based on how other nations are handling issues such as the need for austerity measures, I don't see that as a future to be desired.

 

I have a Swedish friend who used to say (she is so old and ill that she doesn't say much any more - but hey she is in an excellent care home with no worries about money...) that she could sometimes get cross about their high taxes - but on the other hand she knew when she saw someone sleeping on the street, that she knew that the taxes she had paid meant she need not feel guilty that he was there, as there WERE facilities for him to get a bed., meals, clothes - and it was actually his choice not to use them. I wish that were true in the UK (homelessness and poverty are huge problems...) - but at least I know if I see someone having a heart attack, I can call an ambulance and not have them refuse to get in because they can't afford to.

 

Did she ever stop to help any of those people sleeping in the streets? Just curious.

 

I knew someone in Denmark who was rendered homeless (or nearly so) by her never-ending battle with their nationalized health care system. I don't recall the details, just that she apparently fell through the cracks at the tender age of 18.

 

As to doctors and making a living - well, they seem to manage perfectly well in countries that do have universal health care. I am betting they would/will in the US in the end.

 

Very possible, but it won't be an easy thing. Walking down primrose paths isn't always easy.

 

The reason malpractice insurance is so high in America compared to Canada is that we have completely different systems to handle malpractice. The majority of doctors in Canada belong to the Canadian Medical Protection Association, which collects dues annually for the purpose of acting as a middleman in all malpractice cases-they defend doctors in malpractice cases and distribute settlements to victims of malpractice.

 

There are fewer claims generally, because in malpractice suits the loser pays the winner's legal fees, there are lower compensation levels (due to the lack of direct personal cost associated with obtaining medical care) and lack of lawyers/insurance agencies who deal with malpractice due to the presence of the CMPA.

 

It isn't a perfect system, not at all. Some people don't take malpractice claims to court because they can't afford to lose, or it might not be worth the time. The CMPA is a little too all-encompassing for my taste-it'd be nice if it was split into two divisions, one defending patients and one defending doctors-but I'm not really a legal scholar, so I don't know how that would work or if thats already how it works.

 

Thank you! I knew Canada must have a different set up, something other than 'superior moral fibre' ; ) that contributed to the difference in malpractice.

[Fuzzbucket]

Sure they are forcing a degree of communality. I can live with that.

 

Sweden is not Denmark, so I have no idea how that would happen - and no, the most she ever did was tell them where the nearest shelter was. But there was always one she could direct them to.

 

I'm sorry, but given the comparison between Canada/most of the EU and the US, I think the US system is pretty much as bad as it gets. No-one should have to lose their home or get hopelessly in debt just because they get catastrophically sick. NO-ONE. Any system that allows that is wrong - even immoral - especially in a country like the US (or indeed the UK) where society as a whole has so much and also so many individuals have so little.

 

Incidentally, isn't income tax also a tax on being alive ? As to avoiding auto insurance - that is - and should be - a criminal offence. It has to be in place for accidents, and for when some idiot ruins over someone else....

Edited August 7, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[Syaoransbear]

I'm not sure it's really forcing. Americans use this line all the time "If you don't like it you can get out". It's not very hard for a Canadian to move to the US if they really opposed the health care system. Everything is so cheap in the states as well that most people would not be limited by funds. Just the money you'd save buying cheaper booze could probably get you a house in the states in about a year .

[Princess Artemis]

Sure they are forcing a degree of communality. I can live with that.

A good few people can as well, but do not wish to. Herein lies the problem of enforced socialism : )

 

Sweden is not Denmark, so I have no idea how that would happen - and no, the most she ever did was tell them where the nearest shelter was. But there was always one she could direct them to.

 

Indeed it is not. I brought it up because the situation reminded me of the other.

 

I'm sorry, but given the comparison between Canada/most of the EU and the US, I think the US system is pretty much as bad as it gets. No-one should have to lose their home or get hopelessly in debt just because they get catastrophically sick. NO-ONE. Any system that allows that is wrong - even immoral - especially in a country like the US (or indeed the UK) where society as a whole has so much and also so many individuals have so little.

 

You seem to feel I am defending the system as it is in the US. What gave you that impression?

 

Incidentally, isn't income tax also a tax on being alive ? As to avoiding auto insurance - that is - and should be - a criminal offence. It has to be in place for accidents, and for when some idiot ruins over someone else....

 

No, it is a tax on income. Says so on the label. Someone could be (though it would be quite difficult to achieve) phenomenally rich and pay no income tax because they have no income.

 

I find it very easy to avoid auto insurance. You'd have me criminalized for the fact that I haven't got a car to insure?! What about people who drive bikes and ride buses and trains and also haven't got cars? Surely they are not criminals for not having auto insurance?

 

Obamacare only exists now because the lynchpin of the entire system was deemed a tax. So, yes, in the US, it is a tax on being alive: anyone with a body to insure must insure it, For The Good Of Us All.

[Fuzzbucket]

A good few people can as well, but do not wish to.  Herein lies the problem of enforced socialism : )

 

No, it is a tax on income.  Says so on the label.  Someone could be (though it would be quite difficult to achieve) phenomenally rich and pay no income tax because they have no income.

 

I find it very easy to avoid auto insurance.  You'd have me criminalized for the fact that I haven't got a car to insure?!  What about people who drive bikes and ride buses and trains and also haven't got cars?  Surely they are not criminals for not having auto insurance?

 

Obamacare only exists now because the lynchpin of the entire system was deemed a tax.  So, yes, in the US, it is a tax on being alive: anyone with a body to insure must insure it, For The Good Of Us All.

Oh no - no car no car insurance. No body, no health insurance - fair enough ! (But I think bikes should have to carry insurance - there have been some horrible cases of injuries to pedestrians who had no recourse to claiming anything to cover the loss of pay while they were in hospital etc.)

 

Enforced socialism - that's no worse than enforced capitalism, which is what we effectively have now.

 

And yes, I am still quite OK with Obamacare, and if I lived in the US I would be fighting FOR it - though I feel it needs to go further. So hit me.

 

Some day, try living somewhere where all medical care is paid for by (effectively) compulsory insurance. It does work. And it isn't even socialism - even a really right wing government such as the UK sadly has right now wouldn't think of getting rid of it, even if they do want to bring in a profit motive for providers.

Edited August 7, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[Princess Artemis]

Enforced socialism - that's no worse than enforced capitalism, which is what we effectively have now.

For one, socialism isn't just economic. But, try this: Show me how, in a system of limited government intrusions and a relatively free market, a group of people cannot voluntarily set up a commune.

 

Then show me how, in a system of large, intrusive government with a centrally regulated economy, a group of people can voluntarily not live communally.

 

People can always impose more restrictions on themselves than their environment does. They cannot so easily remove the restrictions of an already restricted environment.

 

And yes, I am still quite OK with Obamacare, and if I lived in the US I would be fighting FOR it - though I feel it needs to go further. So hit me. 

 

I gathered you would be. Some people like that sort of system. Some people don't, and forcing your way on the rest of the country...well, Americans usually don't take kind to that sort of thing. We are contentious and full of people who shout HELL NO and then carve out places for us to live our lives free of whatever we were HELL NOing about. That's one reason we have so many immigrants here! So many of them said HELL NO to something and made their way here where they could carve out a place for themselves. So...if you were a US citizen and fighting for Obamacare, and encountered a bunch of fellow Americans shouting HELL NO...that's just what we do, and we are a fine people for it : )

 

Some day, try living somewhere where all medical care is paid for by (effectively) compulsory insurance. It does work. And it isn't even socialism - even a really right wing government such as the UK sadly has right now wouldn't think of getting rid of it, even if they do want to bring in a profit motive for providers.

 

I never said it didn't work. I said it was compulsory, and I object to government compulsion. I fully believe that this is something that can be handled without running headlong into more and more government compulsion.

 

How is it not socialistic? Explain please?

[philpot123]

I never said it didn't work. I said it was compulsory, and I object to government compulsion. I fully believe that this is something that can be handled without running headlong into more and more government compulsion.

Pretty much this. Good in theory, not so much good for me in practicality. Handing our already wayward government more power doesn't seem like a good thing to me. I would care less if it was instituted on a state by state basis based on state government approval, but being coerced into it by the national government is a bit scary.

 

 

"People can't afford health insurance. I know! Let's force them to buy health insurance!"

[Syaoransbear]

So...if you were a US citizen and fighting for Obamacare, and encountered a bunch of fellow Americans shouting HELL NO...that's just what we do, and we are a fine people for it : )

I think if Americans keep shouting HELL NO to everything obama suggests then they should really stop complaining about how he didn't change anything >_>.

[lightbird]

I think if Americans keep shouting HELL NO to everything obama suggests then they should really stop complaining about how he didn't change anything >_>.

Yep.

 

Also. IDK. Maybe I'm just that sort of person, but I went to Sweden earlier this year and from what my immigrant friends tell, I don't see how socialism is that bad. Maybe I'm just the kind of person who, provided that I could afford it, would rather pay higher taxes and then let the government handle things for me that would in the longer run end up saving my money AND time. /shrugs

[Princess Artemis]

I think if Americans keep shouting HELL NO to everything obama suggests then they should really stop complaining about how he didn't change anything >_>.

I think you are taking an opinion of America as a whole, bunching it all up and expecting an entire nation to act like a singular entity. There are, in fact, multiple Americans. Which would explain why there are so very few who dislike Obama's policies and simultaneously want more Obama policies. Who is are these mythical Americans you are referring to? I'd like to see a quote from them. They sound interesting.

 

lightbird, I'm not :/ I already know I'm not. If I desired to, I could shift my personal stuff around to take advantage of what socialized programs there are in the US more than I already do, but to do so makes me feel like a horrible person who is taking advantage of everyone else. I just can't do it, despite being one of the very people this sort of system is designed to help the most.

Edited August 7, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[Syaoransbear]

I think you are taking an opinion of America as a whole, bunching it all up and expecting an entire nation to act like a singular entity.  There are, in fact, multiple Americans.  Which would explain why there are so very few who dislike Obama's policies and simultaneously want more Obama policies.  Who is are these mythical Americans you are referring to?  I'd like to see a quote from them.  They sound interesting.

I was really hoping that I wouldn't have to clarify that I don't mean ALL Americans since it seems so obvious to me that you can't assume anything about large groups of people, but I guess I have to. So here it is: I don't mean all americans, as it is ridiculous to even assume two people of the same political party have all the same views, let alone an entire nation.

 

But the majority of americans I have talked to are the ones that hate obama's ideas and then complain about him not doing anything for the country. That would be the majority on this dog forum I go to, as it is mostly older female americans who are either in the military or are military wives. They've even had to ban the discussion of politics on that forum, but the political threads that arise while the mods are sleeping are filled with the exact attitude I was talking about.

[Princess Artemis]

I was really hoping that I wouldn't have to clarify that I don't mean ALL Americans since it seems so obvious to me that you can't assume anything about large groups of people, but I guess I have to. So here it is: I don't mean all americans, as it is ridiculous to even assume two people of the same political party have all the same views, let alone an entire nation.

 

But the majority of americans I have talked to are the ones that hate obama's ideas and then complain about him not doing anything for the country. That would be the majority on this dog forum I go to, as it is mostly older female americans who are either in the military or are military wives. They've even had to ban the discussion of politics on that forum, but the political threads that arise while the mods are sleeping are filled with the exact attitude I was talking about.

Hey, that's what happens when you make over-generalized hit-and-run comments that paint an entire nation of people one way when you're really just irritated with the people on a dog forum: you get asked to clarify.

[Drachenlied]

I think if Americans keep shouting HELL NO to everything obama suggests then they should really stop complaining about how he didn't change anything >_>.

Couldn't agree more.

 

@Princess - Since things are a democracy here, if majority of Americans are shouting HELL NO (something that the people in the South seem to do quite often, and without knowing the full implications of what they're being asked to consider), then it more than likely will not be enforced.

 

Call me odd, but I honestly hate how things work here in America, what with all the voting and nonsense. It leaves too much room for corruption. I highly doubt that, if we the people had been treated better in the past (e.g. not getting screwed over by our gov't), that so many people would oppose Obamacare and actually TRUST a bit in our president. I think he's doing a good thing, and I personally support Obamacare. While it's not a PERFECT system (EVERY system has it's flaws), I believe that it can be altered to something that will cater more to the American society.

 

 

ETA - About voting - What I mean when I say nonsense is everything we must go through in order to vote, count votes, etc. when, really, voting might as well be rigged. The electoral college's votes are all that really matter, it seems like. Plus, what can ONE singular vote of someone (such as myself) do against A whole plethora of people who don't agree? Against people who are ignorant to what someone really stands for? Nothing, to be honest. Which is why I hate our system...

Edited August 7, 2012 by god.ofthedead