American exceptionalism and socialism.

[Sava]

Originally posted by mrmitchell

We do. We just don't want to pay for it.

actually, universal health care costs would run less than our current health care system... study after study shows non-profit systems are more efficient than for-profit systems. For profit systems waste much more money on administrative costs, not to mention the money that is pumped into marketing and advertising.

The reason health care is so expensive is because we allow corporations to make such obscene profits from it.

It's not an industry that is fueled by consumer demand. People aren't buying products as if they are TV's. You go to the doctor because you are sick and don't want to die... not because you want an iPod or a new car.

So called "supply and demand" don't apply to an industry like health care/pharmaceuticals. Profit is extortion in this industry. Because the alternative to not getting service is death.

[Dracon II]

And even if demand for healthcare services is elastic... this is still perverse because it may mean people are forgoing needed healthcare for financial reasons.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Dracon II
The NLR article is about Frank's work. It's quite interesting.

The culturalization of class is quite an interesting phenomenon. I would like to understand how the Republicans can convince the working classes that their hardship is due to cultural factors promulgated by liberal elites...

It's really not that hard; just a few simple steps:

1) Step 1 - convince people that capitalism is good, generally by assuring them its' the only possible alternative to something really bad, like Soviet-style state socialism.

2) Step 2 - convince them that the central myth of American capitalism -- that is you work hard, you get ahead -- is also true.

3) Step 3 - when #2 doesn't conform to their own lived experience, assure them that #1 is still true, so the problem must be something other than capitalism.

4) Step 4 - provide an alternative explanation for #3, ideally blaming groups (liberals, blacks, gays, immigrants, intellectuals, feminists, the French) traditionally allied with the country's more liberal political party.

Et voila! The "spontaneous consent of the masses" is yours; now have fun looting the government and laughing all the way to the bank!

[MrFun]

Originally posted by DanS
The US government broadly acts no differently than about half of the European governments. It's very redistributive. Before the Great Depression, that was decidedly not the case.

But isn't the poverty rate in United States higher than compared to socialist European countries? If I'm correct on this, then couldn't we infer that our higher poverty rate is because we are NOT anything like those European countries with economic and social policies?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Bill3000
Americans in general do not support a universal healthcare system;

Actually, Americans in general do support universal health care. It has overwhelming support in polls. That support, however, doesn't translate into voting patterns, however, because other concerns are usually paramount. However, it was a key reason Clinton was elected in '92.

The problem is that our elected officials refuse to take on the medical/insurance industries because of lobbyist dollars.

[chequita guevara]

One of the other points that should be considered is that for a long time, the U.S. had an outlet for discontent among newly proletarianized peasants: the fronteer. If you'd had it up to here with your boss, go West young man and become a farmer, miner, seek your fortune, etc.

Another factor was the fact that the working classes in the U.S. were sharply divided by race. Racism was a major wedge issue, and was used against socialists and progressives for over a hundred years.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Another factor was the fact that the working classes in the U.S. were sharply divided by race. Racism was a major wedge issue, and was used against socialists and progressives for over a hundred years.

beat me to it

[chequita guevara]

Nyah nyah!

I'll let you discuss Chinese exclusionism and the shameful record of the Workingmen's Party, if you like.

[Zevico]

2) Step 2 - convince them that the central myth of American capitalism -- that is you work hard, you get ahead -- is also true.

Last I checked that was still true. The amount of work I put it in to my studies will determine what career I get into, which in turn determines my future health and prosperity. Has this somehow changed in America? Yes, richer people receive an advantage in that they attend better schools, but the possibility for advancement remains. In fact, those who try and are at a relative disadvantage--for example if they are immigrants---are quite likely to achieve a greater level of prosperity.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Zevico

Last I checked that was still true. The amount of work I put it in to my studies will determine what career I get into, which in turn determines my future health and prosperity. Has this somehow changed in America? Yes, richer people receive an advantage in that they attend better schools, but the possibility for advancement remains. In fact, those who try and are at a relative disadvantage--for example if they are immigrants---are quite likely to achieve a greater level of prosperity.

Yes: more and more Americans are working hard and not getting ahead; the poor are getting poorer, and the middle class is shrinking rather than growing. There could be lots of reasons for that, from the decline of the "good union job" to the rise of easy credit. I'm not interested in who's to blame for that. My point was that, when people notice their own economic quagmire, they want answers; and the party of Big Business has been very good about saying, "it's not us, and it's not you -- it's them!" This has been very, very effective.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DanS
Unfortunately, we're about as socialist as the next country.

This claim is not substantiated by the Gini Index

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Zevico
Yes, richer people receive an advantage in that they attend better schools, but the possibility for advancement remains.

The possibility of winning the lottery also exists. Not that it matter much.

[DaShi]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


The possibility of winning the lottery also exists. Not that it matter much.

Trolling, are we? Or would you like to compare the chances of advancement in China over winning the lottery?

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


This claim is not substantiated by the Gini Index

It's hard to know what to make of that. On the on hand, it suggests that the US is on par with China, Turkey, and Thailand when it comes to income distribution ("a-ha!" cry the liberals). On the other hand, it suggests that liberal paradises Canada and the Netherlands are on par with India, Indonesia, and Ethiopia ("a-ha!" cry the conservatives).

"WTF?" cries Rufus...

[Frankychan]

I don't think America's workers were duped or anything. Furthermore, I think we have to consider another variable. Bush had the backing of the Chrisitan fundy groups and if you look at his strongest supporting states, they were from the MidWest. While many of them could be seen as having a lot of blue-collar workers, they were also strong Christian groups.

This could possibly mean that those same blue-collar workers that might not necessarily agree with Bush's policies for the economy and worker-rights, they do support him based on his religion.

As for the universal healthcare, yes, as mentioned above. The vast majority of Americans support it...it's the HMO lobbyists that are screwing with us.