Excellent Esquire Article: "Welcome to Idiot America"

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

Are you saying it's just as dumb to believe in public health care as it is to believe that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs?

This wasn't really a Canada vs America or a left vs right thing whatsoever.

Most of this thread has been about people believing in something that has been scientifically proven to be impossible. If health care is your only example then i would suggest that you are either missing the point or you're letting your own political leanings get in the way of a totally unrelated discussion.

Public (socialized) healthcare is based on believing in socialist dogmas and myths, and yes it has been scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently

Greater than Magna Carta? Of course.

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Public (socialized) healthcare is based on believing in socialist dogmas and myths, and yes it has been scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently

Greater than Magna Carta? Of course.

Soooo... remember the rest of the thread, where we were discussing people who act on their beliefs (be they religious, political or otherwise) without bothering to stop, smell the roses, and act on the TRUTH.

yeah......... i guess you missed that part.

I'm new around these parts, and I understand that Albertans lean a little more right than I am used to but "scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently".

WOW.

Well at least you have proven that not all the "American Idiots" are indeed from America.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Dude, you are a ripe example of what is wrong with today public schools - they produce chronic know-nothings like yourself, who have never heard of socialism calculation debate for example, yet they feel educated enough to make silly WOW statements.

[Save Us Sutter]

Are you suggesting I'm still in high school? For the record, (not that it really matters at all) I have a two undergrad degrees and am working on my masters in psychology.

I do not pretend to know all that much about politics, and you're right, i do not know what the socialism calculation debate is. I still feel pretty confident in saying that your remark is totally false and based on your beliefs and not the real world.

It would seem to me that you're a ripe examle of a rich, bitter, old man who can afford to take care of himself (and good for you for that) but doesn't give a flying fata about anyone below him on the pecking order.

Perhaps you should have attended public school... might have taught you some humility.

I feel kinda bad for derailing this thread, cause it was a good discussion and one of the first times I've actively participated on this forum. But at the same time you're a great example of what we've been talking about the whole time.

[Flame Of Liberty]

If you never heard of the calculation debate, how on earth can you say that my claim is false?

I suggest you look in the mirror first, seems to me you have fallen on your own sword. You zealously believe in something completely unsubstantiated, exactly like those "stupid americans" you so eagerly take shots at.

[FireFly]

[Save Us Sutter]

I don't believe in socialism let alone zealously.. Never said I did.

I'm doing some research here. From what I can understand (admitedly I am doing this fast as it is 2am) the basic premise is "that rational economic activity is impossible in a socialist commonwealth" That is a quote from Ludwig von Misses who appears to be the guy who first proposed it. He says this because without the free market to create a price for goods, everything is just transfered and no one really knows what anything is worth... making the whole system inefficient.

Sooo... assuming this is the premise you are arguing... and without taking the time to read any rebuttals (which I am sure there must be some) it sorta makes sense. An entirely socialist state is necessarily inefficient.

But we're not talking about an independent 100% socialist state.

Your original quote was "it is scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently"

a) The calculation debate is a DEBATE. Seems if it was proven there wouldn't be much debate would there? There are tons of people out there arguing against it and while I don't have time to read them tonight I'm sure if it was already proven they were wrong they wouldn't bother.

b)Public Health Care is simply a social program in a counrty with a free-market economy. There is no problem in Canada finding out what things are worth.

edit: The more I read here, the more I'm just not getting how you can point to the calculation debate to prove your original quote. There are several rebuttals (notably Oskar Lange) that put holes in the theory. It is nothing more than a debate, and while it may even be true it is certainly not SCIENTIFIC FACT.

So, if the calculation itself has not been proven to be true for an entirely socialist economy how can you possibly say "scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently" You're wrong twice. It hasn't been proven, and even if it has, it's not relevant to any single social program in a free-market economy.

I apologize if I totally misinterpreted the entire thing, and please correct me if I did.

[Save Us Sutter]

Just to bring this back on topic.

I was just presented with an idea that I was not familiar with (socialist calculation debate). The conclusion I was told to draw from this idea I did not agree with, and originaly made me quite angry.

However, in the spirit of this thread, (and to avoid being a total hypocrite) I chose not to continue fighting and instead I did some research on the idea that was presented to find out the truth of the matter.

Luckily, at first glance, I still appear to be correct in my original belief! However, had I been wrong (and I admit, I still might be) I will have to change my position.

That's really all you can ask from people. Listen, learn and adapt. That's all I was ever saying I'd like the "American Idiots" to do.

[Flame Of Liberty]

Originally Posted by Save Us Sutter

I don't believe in socialism let alone zealously.. Never said I did.

I'm doing some research here. From what I can understand (admitedly I am doing this fast as it is 2am) the basic premise is "that rational economic activity is impossible in a socialist commonwealth" That is a quote from Ludwig von Misses who appears to be the guy who first proposed it. He says this because without the free market to create a price for goods, everything is just transfered and no one really knows what anything is worth... making the whole system inefficient.

Sooo... assuming this is the premise you are arguing... and without taking the time to read any rebuttals (which I am sure there must be some) it sorta makes sense. An entirely socialist state is necessarily inefficient.

But we're not talking about an independent 100% socialist state.

Your original quote was "it is scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently"

a) The calculation debate is a DEBATE. Seems if it was proven there wouldn't be much debate would there? There are tons of people out there arguing against it and while I don't have time to read them tonight I'm sure if it was already proven they were wrong they wouldn't bother.

b)Public Health Care is simply a social program in a counrty with a free-market economy. There is no problem in Canada finding out what things are worth.

edit: The more I read here, the more I'm just not getting how you can point to the calculation debate to prove your original quote. There are several rebuttals (notably Oskar Lange) that put holes in the theory. It is nothing more than a debate, and while it may even be true it is certainly not SCIENTIFIC FACT.

So, if the calculation itself has not been proven to be true for an entirely socialist economy how can you possibly say "scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently" You're wrong twice. It hasn't been proven, and even if it has, it's not relevant to any single social program in a free-market economy.

I apologize if I totally misinterpreted the entire thing, and please correct me if I did.

The debate took place in the 1920s and 1930s. But I suppose there are people out there who act on their beliefs (be they religious, political or otherwise) without bothering to stop, smell the roses, and act on the TRUTH, realize the debate is over and socialism has failed everywhere.

If 100% socialism is impossible to work, because of its inefficiency, trying to build anything upon it means that you are injecting fundamental inefficiency into your system. Which in result means that it cannot function efficiently

[Save Us Sutter]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

The debate took place in the 1920s and 1930s. But I suppose there are people out there who act on their beliefs (be they religious, political or otherwise) without bothering to stop, smell the roses, and act on the TRUTH, realize the debate is over and socialism has failed everywhere.

If 100% socialism is impossible to work, because of its inefficiency, trying to build anything upon it means that you are injecting fundamental inefficiency into your system. Which in result means that it cannot function efficiently

That reasoning is flawed though. The reason (according to the calculation) that it doesn't work is because the 100% socialist state, in 1930, has no way to know what things are worth. That unknown is what makes it inefficient.

A social program, in a free-market economy, in the year 2007 has a million ways to know what things are worth. Therefore it can still function efficiently.

Look, I'm not even saying it does. I don't know enough about the details about our health care system compared to others to make that call. All I was arguing with was your claim that it was "scientifically proven... inefficient". I think you're wrong there, whether or not we have a good health care system in Canada.

[Flame Of Liberty]

I would like to hear how do you know the real price of a good or a service that other than subjecting this good to the supply and demand forces on the market.

Prices determined in other ways are simply numbers pulled out of thin air, and as such cause inefficiency.

[Save Us Sutter]

Well we are talking about Health Care in Canada correct?

In other countries, I hear, they charge for such a thing. Presumably based on supply and demand forces on the market.

Sooo... can we not look to other countries to see what things are worth?

Answer that if you'd like, but we've derailed this thread enough I think. I only picked on your comment because you used the term "scientifcaly proven" and I think that is BS. I am not an economist, nor am I a political scientist so I have willingly admitted all along that this isn't an argument I should be involved in. I am however a (soon to be) psychologist, which is why the original topic interested me.

Why do people hold on to their beliefs, even in the face of undeniable proof they are wrong?
And why will they fight, even kill, when people disagree with them?
Can it all be attributed to religion? Ego?
I am heading to bed, but I'd love to read others thoughts in the morning. And FOL, thanks for making me learn something today... even if it was in the heat of battle!

[Flame Of Liberty]

Yes you can try that, (the Soviets did that with their natural resources), but:

- the markets differ, and I fail to see how can you be efficient if you take the price of say eye surgery in Germany and apply it to Canada...

- this example of yours suggest that you need free market first so the "mixed economy" can plagiarize prices, because it cannot create them itself

[Save Us Sutter]

Well i was thinking the US, but if you want to get prices from Germany... whatever!!

Anyway, I give up ok. Economy discussions are out of my league. I'll admit it's inefficient if you admit it's not "scientifically proven"

Deal?

Now... once again... to get back on topic:

Why do people hold on to their beliefs, even in the face of undeniable proof they are wrong?
And why will they fight, even kill, when people disagree with them?
Can it all be attributed to religion? Ego?

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

know-nothings like yourself

I didn't realize that personal degradation of other posters was tolerated at CP. Really, insults and name calling really bring down the quality of the debate and reflect poorly on the poster doing the name calling.

[Alter Haudegen]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Public (socialized) healthcare is based on believing in socialist dogmas and myths, and yes it has been scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently.

No offense but I've seldom read such nonsense.

Given the fact that the US (with it's "entrepreneurial model") ranks near the bottom among modern nations in both newborns' survival and life expectancy rates and the countries at the top of the rankings all operate either a "national health service model" or a "mandated insurance model" - both are public (socialized) healthcare systems - I'd say it's been proved to work pretty well.

[MarchHare]

Public (socialized) healthcare is based on believing in socialist dogmas and myths, and yes it has been scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently

Well, this thread is already WAY off-topic, and I hesitate to make it worse, but this quote is just too juicy to pass up.

Socialized Canadian healthcare has been scientifically proven to be more cost efficient while at the same time offering equal or better quality of service for the majority of patients than privatized American health insurance in a study conducted jointly by US and Canadian researchers.

I know that totally goes against everything you've been taught about the the sacred alter of free market capitalism, but you can't argue with cold, hard facts.

http://wkrn.com/nashville/news/us-he...nada/89794.htm

A team of Canadian and U.S. researchers conducted a review of studies comparing American to Canadian health care.

The studies examined the end results in patients treated for different types of diseases, from kidney failure to cancer to various surgical procedures.

They found that the Canadian system provided just as good care at a fraction of the cost.

Canada may even have the edge in quality as 14 studies favored the Canadian system, and just five favored the United States.

The remaining 19 studies found no overall difference.

The United States far outstrips Canada on health care spending. U.S. per capita health care costs totaled over $7,000 in 2006, more than double Canadian costs.

Canada also has universal healthcare, while the U.S. still has more than 45 million people without health insurance.

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/...canada-us.html

"In looking at patients in Canada with a specific diagnosis compared to Americans with the same diagnosis, in Canada patients had at least as good an outcome as their American counterparts — and in many situations, a better health outcome," said one of the 17 authors, Dr. P.J. Devereaux, a cardiologist and clinical epidemiologist at McMaster University in Hamilton.

"And that is important because in the United States, they're currently spending a little over $7,100 per individual on health care annually, whereas in Canada we're spending a little over $2,900 per individual annually," he said in a telephone interview from Brantford, Ont.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

OK lets criticize Americans, why not, but lets not forget that black tribal chiefs were often selling their "own people" to foreigners, what does that say about them? There was also "Intra-African" slave trade too. What does this say about their history? Also, I find it funny no one ever mentions that Arab slave trade in Africa. How about that mark on their history?

This racism and discrimination of blacks is blown way out of proportion. People hate each other for all kind of reasons, or without any reason at all. Trying to pin all the blame on "rich white america" is ridiculous. There is a lot of racism between Arabs, blacks, asians too.

That is also a pet peeve of mine when it comes to people's historical knowledge of the slave trade. Revisionists often make it sound like white people went to Africa and enslaved people, when in fact, the slave trade in Africa existed for centuries before Europeans became part of it. Slaves were traded within Africa and to the Middle East. It still exists in some remote regions of Africa.

But it took the Americans long enough to abolish it. They were way behind most nations in that regard. This fear of change and ffear of "liberalism" is still prevalent in many ways in American society.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty

Public (socialized) healthcare is based on believing in socialist dogmas and myths, and yes it has been scientifically proven that anything based on socialism cannot function efficiently

Greater than Magna Carta? Of course.

Wel that statement that I bolded certainly is a Bold statement .

I'd like to see this proof that you have, because I'm fairly certain that you can't produce this.

Withouth even thinking too hard about it, I can think of the example of Hutterite Colonies, who are entirely socialist (and in some respects, almost perfect examples of communism). Ask any farmer who lives near a good sized Hutterite colonly if he believes that anything based on socialism is guaranteed to be inefficient.

[badnarik]

You can't blame the free market for america's healthcare. There is too much government bureacracy and third-party hmo interference to consider it a free market.