Socialized healthcare

[BamaRider]

1st Goofyjim said this-

We shouldn’t need to work more than 40 hours a week to not be considered lazy. There are other things necessary to be done outside of official work time.

So I said this jokingly-

yeah like hangin out on CAF.

So now Goofy is thinkin this-

I take that as an invite to stop hanging out in a place that makes me sick

So I’m sayin- You libs have gotta lighten up, it was NOT a invite to stop hangin out here, it was a joke!

 

[cynic]

Yeah they did a lot of stuff, now they have cradle to grave govt.

Govt mandated 6 weeks vacation. Can you imagine the chaos? Large and small companies would hafta scramble just to get everybody off work in a year. Entire crews would have to be added to the payroll just to work for the guys that are out on vacation.

I’m not into 6 weeks mandatory leave, but you could make a similiar argument against 2 or 3 weeks. Now to the other extreme ; in the U.S there isn’t *any *guaranteed leave.

And all that makes France the economic power it is! The average French worker forks over more than 50% of his salary to the govt. No wonder he doesn’t wanna get out of the house and go to work! How depressing that must be.

so you’ve talked to a few french workers to ascertain their feelings about this? While money is valid motivation for work, it isn’t the only thing, otherwise noone would indeed bother getting out of bed (and workers do because they still aren’t starving over there). The money-is-all idea is pretty depressing aswell.

 

[vern_humphrey]

so you’ve talked to a few french workers to ascertain their feelings about this? While money is valid motivation for work, it isn’t the only thing, otherwise noone would indeed bother getting out of bed (and workers do because they still aren’t starving over there). The money-is-all idea is pretty depressing aswell.

Next time a hungry person asks you for money to buy food, give him some quality leisure time and see if that satisfies him.

 

[DL82]

Isn’t the average working week in the U.S 46 hours? More than 40, but not *that *much more.

It’s 35 hours a week in most of Europe. And the legal minimum annual holiday entitlement here in the UK is 20 days, which is less than most of our European neighbours.

Not only that, but with modern technology, we could very easily work 3 days a week and still enjoy a higher quality of life than our grandparents ever had.

The idea that it’s normal for an American, even a graduate with good qualifications, to have 2 jobs, a full-time 8-5 job and an evening or weekend job, seems crazy to me, and to most people in Europe.

The highest productivity in Europe seems to belong to the Scandinavian countries, especially Finland, which have a very high tax rate and high quality of public services, 70% of their young people are University educated, and for free, and working hours and conditions are extremely flexible, taking account of the effects of the climate (it can be light for 2 hours in winter and 22 hours in summer, and people can be snowed in and have to work from home for weeks).

Socialised healthcare, higher education, housing, transport and pensions don’t seem to be doing them (or us) any harm. I’d say Britain has become less happy, less socially cohesive, and less attractive as a society since we began dismantling our welfare state in the 1980s.

Long working hours don’t increase productivity. If you know you have to do 3 main tasks before you can go home, you will probably do them really thoroughly in the space of 3 hours, then go, and be refreshed for the next day. If you know you’ve just got to clock in and clock out 8 hours later, you’ll take your time over it, probably only get 2 1/2 of the 3 tasks done, and make a half-baked job of it.

What are you working all those hours for? What good does it do? Gives you more money, but everyone else also has more money, which drives up the cost of housing and consumer goods, which means you have to work harder, producing more ‘stuff’ for people to buy, which drives down the cost of consumer goods, which in turn drives down your wages, which means you have to work even harder, and consume more, and save to cope with uncertainty, but market uncertainty can wipe out your savings, so you invest in property and spend more, which drives up the cost of housing and consumer goods (return to line 1 and start again).

 

[vern_humphrey]

It’s 35 hours a week in most of Europe.

Not only that, but with modern technology, we could very easily work 3 days a week and still enjoy a higher quality of life than our grandparents ever had.

The idea that it’s normal for an American, even a graduate with good qualifications, to have 2 jobs, a full-time 8-5 job and an evening or weekend job, seems crazy to me, and to most people in Europe.

The highest productivity in Europe seems to belong to the Scandinavian countries, especially Finland, which have a very high tax rate and high quality of public services, 70% of their young people are University educated, and for free, and working hours and conditions are extremely flexible, taking account of the effects of the climate (it can be light for 2 hours in winter and 22 hours in summer, and people can be snowed in and have to work from home for weeks).

Long working hours don’t increase productivity. If you know you have to do 3 main tasks before you can go home, you will probably do them really thoroughly in the space of 3 hours, then go, and be refreshed for the next day. If you know you’ve just got to clock in and clock out 8 hours later, you’ll take your time over it, probably only get 2 1/2 of the 3 tasks done, and make a half-baked job of it.

What are you working all those hours for? What good does it do? Gives you more money, but everyone else also has more money, which drives up the cost of housing and consumer goods, which means you have to work harder, producing more ‘stuff’ for people to buy, which drives down the cost of consumer goods, which in turn drives down your wages, which means you have to work even harder, and consume more, and save to cope with uncertainty, but market uncertainty can wipe out your savings, so you invest in property and spend more, which drives up the cost of housing and consumer goods (return to line 1 and start again).

The whole point of this discussion is to point out the hypocrisy of those who want to do wonderful, caring things – and force someone else to pay for it.

I have yet to find someone who says, “The poor need our help. *** I*** must work harder.”

 

[Godi]

It would all be settled if only the Government would get away from the minimum wage and guarantee every adult an income of $60,000 a year. Health care? As soon as these Liberal Fascist get their euthanasia laws passed, they’ll solve both our health care & Social Security woes.

 

[DL82]

The whole point of this discussion is to point out the hypocracy of those who want to do wonderful, caring things – and force someone else to pay for it.

I have yet to find someone who says, “The poor need our help. *** I*** must work harder.”

The point is, you don’t have to work harder to feed the poor.

Let me put it this way, let’s say you work in a job where you get paid to demolish houses. One day, you notice that the people in the houses you demolish are left homeless, so you go out and work twice as hard, demolish twice as many houses, to help the people you saw that day to pay the rent for a new place to live. But now you’ve made twice as many people homeless. So you go out and work twice as hard again, and what happens?..

That’s the problem with privatised healthcare. Every time you go to see a doctor, you’re paying to see two doctors, one whose job it is to examine you and decide what treatment you need, another whose job it is to examine the first doctor’s files and decide what treatment you won’t get. Is that a worthwhile use of either doctor’s time or your money? Even if you earned enough to sponsor someone else’s healthcare as well as your own, you’d only be propping up this unjust system.

I bet you think carefully when giving to a charity, to make sure the money is spent wisely. If you see somebody rattling a tin on the street saying “money for Africa”, that money could be going to an African government to buy weapons to continue a war against their neighbour that makes both countries poorer. Money we work for needs to be spent wisely, whether we spend it on ourselves or on others.

Who is more likely to spend your money in your interests and the interests of the poor, people accountable to you and to the poor, who you and the poor vote for, or people accountable only to their rich shareholders for making a profit?

 

[vern_humphrey]

The point is, you don’t have to work harder to feed the poor.

Let me put it this way, let’s say you work in a job where you get paid to demolish houses. One day, you notice that the people in the houses you demolish are left homeless, so you go out and work twice as hard, demolish twice as many houses, to help the people you saw that day to pay the rent for a new place to live. But now you’ve made twice as many people homeless. So you go out and work twice as hard again, and what happens?..

Now, there is sophistry in action!

That’s the problem with privatised healthcare. Every time you go to see a doctor, you’re paying to see two doctors, one whose job it is to examine you and decide what treatment you need, another whose job it is to examine the first doctor’s files and decide what treatment you won’t get. Is that a worthwhile use of either doctor’s time or your money? Even if you earned enough to sponsor someone else’s healthcare as well as your own, you’d only be propping up this unjust system.

That’s how government sponsored healthcare works.

For example, as a Purple Heart veteran I am entitled to health care from the Veteran’s Administration. So I though I’d see how it works – I need hearing aids.

Nearly a year after applying, I still don’t know my status – but when accepted, I have to drive a 100 mile round trip to see a VA doctor who will tell me what my local doctor already told me.

Then I have to drive a 250 mile round trip to an audio center – when I could just walk down the street from my local doctor.

Government healthcare is really efficient. Riiiiiiight.

I bet you think carefully when giving to a charity, to make sure the money is spent wisely. If you see somebody rattling a tin on the street saying “money for Africa”, that money could be going to an African government to buy weapons to continue a war against their neighbour that makes both countries poorer. Money we work for needs to be spent wisely, whether we spend it on ourselves or on others.

Who is more likely to spend your money in your interests and the interests of the poor, people accountable to you and to the poor, who you and the poor vote for, or people accountable only to their rich shareholders for making a profit?

Who is likely to spend my money in my interests? The Church.

Now, if the Church needs more money for charity, then the members of the Church must work harder, no?

Instead, we have couch potatos – they sit on the couch, sip beer, eat chips and cheer for their favorite team or government program – but don’t do anything to move the ball themselves.

 

[DL82]

Now, there is sophistry in action!

That’s how government sponsored healthcare works.

For example, as a Purple Heart veteran I am entitled to health care from the Veteran’s Administration. So I though I’d see how it works – I need hearing aids.

Nearly a year after applying, I still don’t know my status – but when accepted, I have to drive a 100 mile round trip to see a VA doctor who will tell me what my local doctor already told me.

Then I have to drive a 250 mile round trip to an audio center – when I could just walk down the street from my local doctor.

Government healthcare is really efficient. Riiiiiiight.

Who is likely to spend my money in my interests? The Church.

Now, if the Church needs more money for charity, then the members of the Church must work harder, no?

Instead, we have couch potatos – they sit on the couch, sip beer, eat chips and cheer for their favorite team or government program – but don’t do anything to move the ball themselves.

American government healthcare doesn’t work because it’s run in the same way as American private healthcare, but with less money.

Universal entitlement healthcare is a totally different story. I have a 5 minute walk to my doctor, who doesn’t have to check with anybody, no government bureaucrats, no insurance assessors, before referring me to a hospital (any hospital) or writing a prescription.

I agree with your point about people giving more money to the Church and to charities. Here in the UK, despite having a universal entitlement, people still give money to healthcare charities, who help provide an additional service. For example, palliative care for cancer patients can be provided in faceless hospital wards, but the Macmillan nurses charity provides in-home care for those people, free of charge, but is dependent on charitable contributions. Many of the UK’s cities have the St John’s Ambulance charity backing up the national ambulance service, which means that waiting times for emergency ambulances can be cut further, by having more ambulances out on the streets.

The difference between the socialised model and the privatised model is that people in the UK are more likely to use a pay-rise to make a donation to a health service that will help everyone in need, whereas people in the USA, if they have a conscience, will be compelled to donate that money to a charity hospital that can barely afford to provide third-world healthcare to the very poor and needy (because charitable donations are tiny in comparison to what the big insurance companies can afford to spend, and the cost of healthcare is skewed upwards by these businesses), the kind of place that can only patch up gunshot wounds and send people back out onto the streets. Or if they have less social awareness, they are more likely to use that money to pay for an improvement in their own healthcare provision, i.e. to move to a ‘premium’ plan that gives them priority over someone who pays less, irrespective of their levels of need.

 

[vern_humphrey]

The difference between the socialised model and the privatised model is that people in the UK are more likely to use a pay-rise to make a donation to a health service that will help everyone in need, whereas people in the USA, if they have a conscience, will be compelled to donate that money to a charity hospital .

Americans give more, per capita, to charity, than any other nation on earth. Americans give more to poor nations than anyone else on earth.

And despite your lectures on how it works in America, it’s obvious you haven’t lived here and don’t know.

 

[BamaRider]

The highest productivity in Europe seems to belong to the Scandinavian countries, especially Finland, which have a very high tax rate and high quality of public services, 70% of their young people are University educated, and for free, and working hours and conditions are extremely flexible, taking account of the effects of the climate (it can be light for 2 hours in winter and 22 hours in summer, and people can be snowed in and have to work from home for weeks).

Finland?? Brrrrrrrrrrr Cold place. Now there’s a true economic power. LOL. Never been there but have spent time in Europe. What ya reckon the #2 combo at McDonald’s costs in Finland? 15 dollars??

I’ve spent time riding in Europe and the UK, now I’m not bragging, but all I’m gonna tell ya, my birck home, on a one acre lot, 2 cars, 2 motorcycles, big screen tv, served by a 200 channel digital cable, and a dozen all ya can eat buffets for 6 dollars within 5 miles of me, would put me in the upper 10% of Europe, but here in the wealth of American I’m just your average retired firefighter, now if ya wanna get into the top 10% and how they live here, you’d better get ready. I could not live and do what I do, anywhere in Europe, on a firefighters pension, it would just flat cost too much.

Plus the Finns, like most of Europe, has no army to speak off. If someone decided to drop a few bombs on them, not one thing they could do about it. If a invading army hit the shores there, nothing they could do, but ask what the terms are. Now why they sit around and sip lattes working 3 days a week, they take comfort under the U.S. military umbrella. We gurantee their freedom, surely they don’t think France is gonna come save them? LOL

Outside of the Brits, who can still defend themselves, most of Europe’s social spending have caused them to abandon military spending, and now depend on the US to protect them. If they had to protect themselves they have no idea how they would pay for it.

The upper middle class do work hard in America, and they live in a style and manner most Europeans only see on TV. The thing is, very hard for them to move up the ladder, because lack of economic freedom.

There is no economic freedom in Finland, with govt prolly taking 60% of your paycheck. They have traded their freedom to come and go and spend their money on what they want, to a govt that will dole out on what they think they need.

Now if the good folks there like it that way, then God Bless them, but I’m gonna fight tooth and nail to keep that line of thinking off our shores.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’ m waiting to hear the story about the woman who was turned away from the hospital because she didn’t have $100, and later she and her baby died.

 

[DL82]

Finland?? Brrrrrrrrrrr Cold place. Now there’s a true economic power. LOL. Never been there but have spent time in Europe. What ya reckon the #2 combo at McDonald’s costs in Finland? 15 dollars??

I’ve spent time riding in Europe and the UK, now I’m not bragging, but all I’m gonna tell ya, my birck home, on a one acre lot, 2 cars, 2 motorcycles, big screen tv, served by a 200 channel digital cable, and a dozen all ya can eat buffets for 6 dollars within 5 miles of me, would put me in the upper 10% of Europe, but here in the wealth of American I’m just your average retired firefighter, now if ya wanna get into the top 10% and how they live here, you’d better get ready. I could not live and do what I do, anywhere in Europe, on a firefighters pension, it would just flat cost too much.

Plus the Finns, like most of Europe, has no army to speak off. If someone decided to drop a few bombs on them, not one thing they could do about it. If a invading army hit the shores there, nothing they could do, but ask what the terms are. Now why they sit around and sip lattes working 3 days a week, they take comfort under the U.S. military umbrella. We gurantee their freedom, surely they don’t think France is gonna come save them? LOL

Outside of the Brits, who can still defend themselves, most of Europe’s social spending have caused them to abandon military spending, and now depend on the US to protect them. If they had to protect themselves they have no idea how they would pay for it.

The upper middle class do work hard in America, and they live in a style and manner most Europeans only see on TV. The thing is, very hard for them to move up the ladder, because lack of economic freedom.

There is no economic freedom in Finland, with govt prolly taking 60% of your paycheck. They have traded their freedom to come and go and spend their money on what they want, to a govt that will dole out on what they think they need.

Now if the good folks there like it that way, then God Bless them, but I’m gonna fight tooth and nail to keep that line of thinking off our shores.

I was engaged to an American girl, whose family were upper-middle class, and I didn’t see that much difference between them and the upper-middle classes here in Britain. Of course land is cheaper in America, if you’re willing to live in the middle of nowhere, because there’s so much land to go round, and so much of the country is relatively new. And America has kept its heavy industry going through economic protectionism, which makes owning and running a car cheaper, that’s also true.

One thing I did see was that these quite wealthy people, who owned their own business and 2 homes, were able to provide a decent quality of life for a disabled member of their family, and for their own ailing health in older age, a quality of life that would be a given for anyone in their situation, regardless of wealth, in the UK (although I’ll admit America’s disability laws give greater independence for those who can afford the assistive technology and lawyers bills to make use of it). Someone in a lesser position financially would be in real trouble in America if they had to deal with a disability or long-term ill-health.

What I also saw was people with full-time jobs living in their cars in Seattle because it was so expensive to rent an apartment in or near the city. Now I lived in London, where it’s expensive to rent even a tiny place, but I never saw that level of deprivation from people who were working full-time jobs.

Another thing I saw, when I was looking at getting married and emigrating, was that the pay scales in American jobs are incredibly steep. Between my entry-level job as a secretary here in the UK and my next promotion, which jumped a step, my salary increased about 25-30%, the next promotion would probably be another 20% or less. The same promotions between junior, junior professional, and middle management in America were a 100% pay jump each time, from entry level about $18-$20k, to next level $36-40, to middle management double that again. Dunno what happens after that, because I never looked at the top end of the scale.

One thing I could never understand about America, whenever I spoke to my ex or her friends or family, was the universal fear of your own government. Democracy is supposed to make the government closer to the people, and Americans are rightly proud of their democracy. Americans are terrified of the government taking control of anything. Washington seems so far removed from the lives of ordinary Americans, and it’s clear that there’s a game being played between rich vested interests, a game that’s been played for at least 50 years, under the name ‘democracy’ that’s really not worthy of the name. If all the Americans who were fed up of their politicians decided to vote them out, decided to vote for constitutional reform to update American democracy to reflect best practice in the 21st century, instead of a system that was miles ahead of its’ time in the 18th century, but which is now so well-known to the political elites that they play it like a hand of poker, if the American people made their voices heard, they could have a government they could trust. That’s what democracy’s for after all. Instead, Americans are comfortable to emasculate their government and keep those incompetent elites in the White House as long as they don’t try to tell them what to do. America is more like a limited anarchism (i.e. as little government as possible) than a democracy.

I’m glad that we feel closer to our government here, that we feel we can control them, and that they can run the country.

The price of freedom is constant vigilance. I think Ben Franklin said that.

Nobody should starve or live in a box or go without basic healthcare in the world’s wealthiest country. I said that.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I’ve seen people “sleeping rough” as they call it, in Britain, Germany and France.

 

[DL82]

I’ve seen people “sleeping rough” as they call it, in Britain, Germany and France.

That happens, it’s true.

It didn’t used to happen at all. Before 1979, Britain had enough social housing for nearly everybody. France and Germany were slower off the mark, owing to having been devastated in WWII, but still have a better record than America. Britain began to go down a more American free-market route under Mrs Thatcher in the 1980s, and unemployment and homelessness reached levels we hadn’t seen since 1918.

I used to work at a homeless shelter in London. Most of our residents had mental health, drug and/or drink problems, or had just come out of jail. Between government housing schemes, charity shelters such as the St Vincent De Paul shelter I used to work at, and soup kitches such as those run by the Salvation Army and the Hare Krishnas, I can honestly say that nobody in London has to beg for food. If they’re begging for money, it’s probably for drugs. There are a few, such as those with severe mental health problems (I remember one man who refused to eat food prepared by any religious groups because he thought we’d drugged it to brainwash him), or those who are new to the streets, who might genuinely go hungry, but very very few.

My ex did a study as part of her bachelor’s degree and was surprised to find that the number of homeless people in the small idyllic town in the Pacific Northwest where she studied had numbers of homeless in the high hundreds! My parents come from a similar sized town in Scotland, and you can count the numbers of homeless on the fingers of one hand.

Also, we may have people who slip through the cracks in our system, but at least we have a system. People who get into a cycle of drugs, paranoia, crime and unemployability are very difficult to deal with, but we don’t have anybody in Britain who sleeps on the streets AND has a full-time job. We have Salvation Army kitchens to help these few totally helpless souls, but we have nothing like America’s Second Harvest, providing food to many thousands of people who live in their own homes, have a job or are willing to work, and still can’t afford to eat! The welfare state makes sure that doesn’t happen, and I’m very glad of it.

What are the real social consequences of this? People in Britain feel confident to be creative, to try something new, to strike out on their own and pursue careers in emerging industries. That’s why we now have the most flourishing financial capital in the world, and huge numbers of people who are successful in the knowledge economy, not to mention a vibrant and world-leading arts and music scene for the last 40 years. People know that they can take a chance. If it goes well and they get rich, they’ll pay some of that money back in tax, and probably much more in charity donations, if it goes badly, they know we will help them to get back on their feet, and they won’t be left to starve on the streets. I feel more free because I have that support behind me.

How different is that to America, Nation of Fear. Maybe that’s one of the reasons the US economy is so conservative, still so reliant on heavy industry that is no longer profitable, people are scared to take a chance. Scared to study for a degree because of the debt they’ll build up. Scared to start their own business because they’d literally be putting their life, and the lives of their children, on the line, by leaving their healthcare plan behind.

That would be a good title for a Fox News special. “Tonight on Fox, America, Nation of Fear!” cue scenes of endless crime dramas, crime reports on the news, women carrying firearms in their handbags for self defence, anti-terror measures in public buildings, militias holed up in the mountains, etc.

 

[vern_humphrey]

How different is that to America, Nation of Fear.

That would be a good title for a Fox News special. “Tonight on Fox, America, Nation of Fear!” cue scenes of endless crime dramas, crime reports on the news, women carrying firearms in their handbags for self defence, anti-terror measures in public buildings, militias holed up in the mountains, etc.

Now this is what happens when people form their opinions through the media, not through in-depth study.

England has the highest rate of victimization in the civilized world – according to the European Union.

England has the highest network of “security” TV cameras – talk about fear and paranoia!

England has more anti-terror measures in public buildings than the US – by far.

The United States allows self-defense, and that includes guarenteeing the right to carry arms. And there are plenty of peer-reviewed studies that show liberalized conceal carry is highly correlated with reduced violent crime.

I don’t lock my doors. I’m not cowering in fear behind a triple-locked door, as people in England do.

And when I go to England, I see signs informing burglars that the house subscribes to a burglar alarm system – in front of house after house. As I walk down the street, I notice every car has a “club” – an enanced version of the “club” that locks the gearshift.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Arguably the biggest problem in the United States is that it is soooo bad here … conditions are so terrible … that literally millions of people sneak across the borders to get here.

Even with millions getting LEGAL admission, millions more take death-defying chances to come here. Some just walk off a plane and disappear; but many take chances getting smuggled across the desert area in the southwest or come in on small boats from Caribbean islands.

At a meeting, there was a fellow from Russia who had come here; he looked at me and he said … “your supermarkets are fantastic”.

What can I tell you?

[Things can’t be all that bad here.]

[By the way, one of the reasons for so many homeless people living in the open on the streets is that our “civil rights” folks filed court case after court case … that putting mentally ill people in hospitals was incarcerating them against their will. So … they were turned loose. There are many programs for them, but as long as they are not a danger to themselves or to others, they cannot be legally forced to live in a house.]

 

[DL82]

Now this is what happens when people form their opinions through the media, not through in-depth study.

England has the highest rate of victimization in the civilized world – according to the European Union.

England has the highest network of “security” TV cameras – talk about fear and paranoia!

England has more anti-terror measures in public buildings than the US – by far.

The United States allows self-defense, and that includes guarenteeing the right to carry arms. And there are plenty of peer-reviewed studies that show liberalized conceal carry is highly correlated with reduced violent crime.

I don’t lock my doors. I’m not cowering in fear behind a triple-locked door, as people in England do.

And when I go to England, I see signs informing burglars that the house subscribes to a burglar alarm system – in front of house after house. As I walk down the street, I notice every car has a “club” – an enanced version of the “club” that locks the gearshift.

I’m not saying Britain’s perfect, and I certainly don’t like the levels of CCTV in this country. I’d much rather adopt the model they have in Denmark where nobody can take your photo without your permission.

But anyway, this is getting off-topic. Back to socialised healthcare, and its’ wider context, the welfare state, a guaranteed minimum standard of living from ‘cradle to grave’, I’d much rather have that than America’s version of freedom.

What use is the right to life, if you’re starving to death or can’t afford the meds you need to stay alive? What use is the right to liberty if you are stuck in two dead-end jobs that take up all your waking time so you can pay off your healthcare and student loan? What does the pursuit of happiness mean to somebody who’s living on the street or to parents who can’t afford to give their kids a decent education?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Arguably the biggest problem in the United States is that it is soooo bad here … conditions are so terrible … that literally millions of people sneak across the borders to get here.

Not so long ago, there were stories of avant guard American celebrities who lived in London coming back to the US – because of the high crime rate in England.

 

[vern_humphrey]

But anyway, this is getting off-topic. Back to socialised healthcare, and its’ wider context, the welfare state, a guaranteed minimum standard of living from ‘cradle to grave’, I’d much rather have that than America’s version of freedom.

People who have fears about their ability to make it on their own are often willing to sell themselves into a system of subservience.

What use is the right to life, if you’re starving to death or can’t afford the meds you need to stay alive?

Name someone in the US who is starving to death or can’t afford meds?

In the US it’s so bad that welfare bureaucrats have had to redefine “hunger” to mean “Malnutrition” so they can call fat people “hungry.”

What use is the right to liberty if you are stuck in two dead-end jobs that take up all your waking time so you can pay off your healthcare and student loan?

Again, a symptom of an inferiority comples – people in the US who are willing to work get ahead much faster than in the UK.

What does the pursuit of happiness mean to somebody who’s living on the street

People living on the streets in Europe tend to be more or less normal. When you find people living on the streets in the US, they tend to be mentally ill – and choose to live on the streets.

The “poster child” for homelessness was the woman who died sitting on a bench at a bus stop in front of the Department of Health and Human Services in Washington. The press made a big deal – until it was found she had a wallet around her neck with several hundred dollars, a ticket for a bed in a woman’s shelter that night, and a family that was out looking for her.

With three choices, she picked choice D – to spend the night on the bench.

or to parents who can’t afford to give their kids a decent education?

Glad you brought that up – the closest thing to Communism in the US is the Public School system. And that system has failed totally – despite the huge amounts of money we pay into it.

Before we go to socialized healthcare, we better take a look at how badly socialized education has failed.