Register to reply

Rick Santorum's candidacy ...

by ThomasT
Tags: candidacy, rick, santorum
Share this thread:
Office_Shredder
#397
Mar5-12, 06:15 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
P: 4,500
http://m.cbsnews.com/blogsfullstory....6&videofeed=36

No country that had ever form socialized medicine has stopped using it, and santorum states that this is a negative feature
mheslep
#398
Mar5-12, 06:46 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,098
Quote Quote by Office_Shredder View Post
http://m.cbsnews.com/blogsfullstory....6&videofeed=36

No country that had ever form socialized medicine has stopped using it, and santorum states that this is a negative feature
I admit that it is difficult to give up, but I'm not sure about the no country claim. I thought the Dutch gave it up? Others have backed away at least a degree or two. The Canadians for instance used to outlaw private clinics in some provinces, but that law was since ruled illegal.

edit: yes

Quote Quote by NEJM
Until 2006, two thirds of the population was insured by public health insurance funds managed by nonprofit associations, with enrollees making an income-dependent contribution. People with incomes above a predefined threshold were privately insured and paid a full premium.
Although the Dutch system provided high-quality care at relatively low cost,1 many believed that the insurance system offered too little choice, spread the financial burden unevenly, and did little to control increasing health care expenditures. To address these problems, a new statutory health insurance system was introduced in January 2006. Under this system, the public health insurers have been privatized or have merged with private health insurers,...
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0707383

Anybody know of other cases?
MarcoD
#399
Mar5-12, 07:00 PM
P: 98
Quote Quote by mheslep View Post
I thought the Dutch gave it up?
No, we definitely didn't. Some things changed/were liberalized, people were hoping that market effects would lower some of the involved costs. I don't think it did, but like I said, we have such an baroque system that only experts understand how it works.
mheslep
#400
Mar5-12, 07:02 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,098
Quote Quote by MarcoD View Post
No, we definitely didn't. Some things changed/were liberalized, people were hoping that market effects would lower some of the involved costs. I don't think it did, but like I said, we have such an baroque system that only experts understand how it works.
Can you square that with the New England Journal of Medicine reference? Sounds like you may be referring to the stipend given to the poor

People with low incomes receive a subsidy for the basic insurance, and there is an option to purchase an additional package to cover nonvital extras.
But that's nothing close to the system in place before 2006 which was .... public healthcare
MarcoD
#401
Mar5-12, 07:33 PM
P: 98
No, I am referring to the whole system where the government is very active in what healthcare should be provided/be mandatory, how the insurers buy medical care, what guidelines there are for all actors, etc. It surely isn't a free market mechanism, and it's only understood by the actors.

Personally, I think it's just all overhead on a process where you don't want any market mechanism; i.e., neoliberal nonsense. I have the feeling that the whole system works at the moment despite the nonsense because most people in the field try their best to make it work no matter what. But that's just my unfounded opinion, and I guess it's a discussion I shouldn't even be involved in.

Anyway, cost are exploding. That's all I know.
ThomasT
#402
Mar5-12, 07:38 PM
P: 1,414
Quote Quote by lisab View Post
Maybe "angry little man" is the Zeitgeist for the great recession.
It would seem to be for, say, the OWS people.
ThomasT
#403
Mar5-12, 07:47 PM
P: 1,414
Quote Quote by Number Nine View Post
This is actually an extremely important point. Religious devotion has led to the idiom of sorts that a person who pursues something zealously is pursuing it "religiously", but this doesn't mean that the term "religion" actually applies to that pursuit.
Ok, so I guess we're all agreed that, wrt this thread, the term religion refers to the big three theistic religions, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity? And of course I realize that that's generally how the term is used in ordinary language. But, like I said, it does have other meanings which have been used in arguments by religious (in the ordinary sense) zealots.

Anyway, in the agreed, and ordinary, sense, Santorum is, to me, an unnacceptably religious person. And for that reason, I will not vote for him.
ThomasT
#404
Mar5-12, 07:53 PM
P: 1,414
Quote Quote by Hobin View Post
He's a little too popular for someone's who's just an angry little man, methinks.
I agree with you in the sense that as far as I'm concerned he's too popular. But I don't see him as an angry little man. After all, he's rich, he's running for president, he's got a nice family. What's he got to be angry about? He'd probably make a great neighbor. I just don't want him to be president -- mostly because of the fact that he seems to be a bit too theistically religious for my ... sensibilities.
mheslep
#405
Mar5-12, 08:03 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,098
Quote Quote by MarcoD View Post
No, I am referring to the whole system where the government is very active in what healthcare should be provided/be mandatory, how the insurers buy medical care, what guidelines there are for all actors, etc. It surely isn't a free market mechanism, and it's only understood by the actors.
Ok, the Dutch have regulated healthcare by private insurers in a market. They use to have public insurance for 2/3 of the country, i.e. socialized healthcare, now they don't. I think that's a counter-example to Santorum's claim.
Gokul43201
#406
Mar5-12, 10:50 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Gokul43201's Avatar
P: 11,155
Quote Quote by mheslep View Post
I think that's a counter-example to Santorum's claim.
And there's plenty of counter examples to his second statement as well, that no country that's lost its freedom has ever regained it. Why would he even want to say something like that? It's all over folks - we've socialized medicine and lost our freedom, and there's no turning back. Might as well retire to your bunkers and wait for the apocalypse.
lisab
#407
Mar5-12, 10:53 PM
Mentor
lisab's Avatar
P: 2,988
Quote Quote by Gokul43201 View Post
And there's plenty of counter examples to his second statement as well, that no country that's lost its freedom has ever regained it. Why would he even want to say something like that? It's all over folks - we've socialized medicine and lost our freedom, and there's no turning back. Might as well retire to your bunkers and wait for the apocalypse.
The ratcheting down of freedom.

That made me laugh .
SHISHKABOB
#408
Mar6-12, 07:46 AM
P: 614
Quote Quote by ThomasT View Post
I agree with you in the sense that as far as I'm concerned he's too popular. But I don't see him as an angry little man. After all, he's rich, he's running for president, he's got a nice family. What's he got to be angry about? He'd probably make a great neighbor. I just don't want him to be president -- mostly because of the fact that he seems to be a bit too theistically religious for my ... sensibilities.
he'd make a great neighbor

as long as you don't forget your front yard nativity scene dun dun dun
ThomasT
#409
Mar6-12, 08:51 AM
P: 1,414
Quote Quote by SHISHKABOB View Post
he'd make a great neighbor

as long as you don't forget your front yard nativity scene dun dun dun
I knew that was going to get some sort of sarcastic reply. Ok, it's funny. But seriously, I've known lots, and I mean lots, of pretty devout Catholic Christians. And, afaik, they're good people. Ok, not counting the priests. But really, the devout Catholics who haven't been proven weird seem ok.
SHISHKABOB
#410
Mar6-12, 11:56 AM
P: 614
Quote Quote by ThomasT View Post
I knew that was going to get some sort of sarcastic reply. Ok, it's funny. But seriously, I've known lots, and I mean lots, of pretty devout Catholic Christians. And, afaik, they're good people. Ok, not counting the priests. But really, the devout Catholics who haven't been proven weird seem ok.
yeah I agree, I've also known lots of great Christians. But I've also known lots of great people who were not Christian.

personally I think a good person will be a good person regardless of their faith, and vice versa. Therefore I think that Santorum is really just using his faith to win votes, which is gross IMO.
mheslep
#411
Mar6-12, 02:14 PM
PF Gold
P: 3,098
Quote Quote by Gokul43201 View Post
...Why would he even want to say something like that?
It's clear that socialized medicine is not an easy thing to reverse, even if it has happened in small countries.


It's all over folks - we've socialized medicine and lost our freedom, and there's no turning back. Might as well retire to your bunkers and wait for the apocalypse.
Yes, he's c..r..a..z..y. C'mon.

Does this Jefferson sound apocalytic?

The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield


Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny
Gokul43201
#412
Mar6-12, 07:24 PM
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
PF Gold
Gokul43201's Avatar
P: 11,155
Quote Quote by mheslep View Post
It's clear that socialized medicine is not an easy thing to reverse, even if it has happened in small countries.
I think you misunderstood what I was referring to. I'm more amazed about the statement that no country that has lost its freedom has ever regained it. If you look at my post again, you'll see that it was this particular statement that I was questioning the judgment behind making.

Yes, he's c..r..a..z..y. C'mon.
From a political point of view, yes, I think so. How is a message that it's too late to return to the glory days supposed to get the electorate to the polling station?

I suppose the argument might be that we're not quite past the point of no return just yet, but with 4 more years of Obama (or Romney?), we definitely will be? That logic is a little difficult to square with the view that things went to hell in a handbasket the moment O was sworn in.

Does this Jefferson sound apocalytic?

The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield


Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny
Does either of that sound remotely close to: No country that has lost its freedom has ever regained it?

Jefferson is making careful observations on the nature of government, not throwing out off-hand statements that are blatantly erroneous.
Astronuc
#413
Mar10-12, 02:50 PM
Admin
Astronuc's Avatar
P: 21,875
Looks like Santorum won the caucuses in Kansas.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...efuls-15893854
Evo
#414
Mar10-12, 03:01 PM
Mentor
Evo's Avatar
P: 26,546
Quote Quote by Astronuc View Post
Looks like Santorum won the caucuses in Kansas.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...efuls-15893854
Kansas is known for it's religious leanings in education and politics, IMO, causing some rather embarrassing decisions.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
Ron Paul's candidacy Current Events 578
Mitt Romney's candidacy Current Events 735
Rick Steves' Europe: Iran Current Events 4
Consider yourself Rick Roll'd General Discussion 20
Vote Rick James! General Discussion 6