Why do you feel socialism is bad?

[peary1]

Originally Posted by **timcfc **
Britain is very different to the US,we have a healthcare system,that is not perfect but is far better than 30 million Americans having none.

**We are a country of 300 million +. To destroy the healthcare system of 270 million Americans for 30 million who do not have or who choose not to have medical insurance is preposterous and a downright danger to the economy. It will swallow up one-sixth of our economy. Your system is hardly working and there is massive rationing for the elderly. Next to the Chinese Army and workers on the Indian railway, your country employs the most bureacracy in its healthcare system. **

On a Catholic forum i find it very hard to read that fellow Catholics do not believe in Socialised medicine.

Why? We are not a democratic socialist nation! That is not our historical context. And the vast majority of Americans fear a government takeover of every major part of our lives that will limit our freedom to choose what we think is best for our families and ourselves. There are more creative ways to bring down prices and assure everyone has adequate medical care. The fact is, we DO have adequate medical care. No one goes to a hospital anywhere in this country and is refused treatment. The cost is past on to us, the taxpayer, through Medicaid. I really do not believe that you even know of WHAT our medical care consists. And if Canada’s was so great, why are Canadians saving their money and coming down to the States to receive medical care? The Canadian system is practically broke. It is not sustainable. The same can be said for yours.

By reading the bible you will see that Jesus would want ALL his people to have access to healthcare not just those who could afford it.

**Jesus said in the Bible that everyone should have healthcare? You’ve GOT to be kidding me! **

Jesus spoke remarkably often about wealth and poverty. To the poor he said, “Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God,” (Luke’s version). To the rich he said, “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth,” and “go, sell what you have, and give to the poor.” When the rich turned away from him because they couldn’t follow his command he observed, “it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.”

**It is not a government’s job to take over CHARITY. That is the spiritual obligation of Christians. And to prove the point, the charitable level of giving by countries that have such over-burdening healthcare systems has dropped significantly, including yours. Charity becomes a lame exercise under socialism. When it is divorced from its spiritual roots it is ineffective.

Pope Benedict XVI issued his first encyclical, Deus caritas est (“God is love”), and insisted that there is no substitute for charity—for the direct, personal involvement of individuals and communities in the lives of those who are suffering, those in need of material or educational assistance, or those simply needing the consolation of human contact.

You certainly will not get that under a government-run medical plan unless, of course, you are at the stage of life that you must deal with “death panels”. The only compassion a government-run medical plan can give is to determine who lives and who dies. Everything else is just monetary numbers to be manipulated by government agencies.

For Jesus, helping the poor and the outcast is not optional: it is the essence of what it means to love God. In the parable of the last judgement he welcomes the righteous into heaven saying, “I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.” When the righteous answered that they didn’t recall doing any of these things, he said, “as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.”

**Trite biblical verses do not prove anything. The government is NOT THE CHURCH. When Jesus said “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s but to God the things that are God” (Matt. 22:21) He certainly wasn’t talking about a government-run healthcare system!

Yes, it is good and appropriate to submit to the state when asked, that spiritual demands supersede earthly demands but do not abolish them, or that the demands of the state are non-negotiable. However others have also interpreted this saying as meaning that spiritual authority should maintain its independence from temporal authority, which rules by force rather than moral law.

And for your information, the bills that are passing through our Congress are so bad that if we do not submit to the State, we will be fined and go to jail! And when the money runs out (we will also be taxed six years *before *the system begins), what then? Does anyone actually believe that the government is going to put it away in some safe place until it’s time to implement the plan? Be serious!

Our country is also $12 TRILLION in debt. To add this will cripple our economy for generations to come, and our freedoms will disappear.

Not only that, Congress keeps tinkering with spending federal money to perform abortions under the federally-mandated healthcare plan, which is an abomination to most Americans.
You can keep your system that you think is so wonderful.**

 

[John21652]

What is your rebuttal to 95% of the comments in this subject matter? Jesus preached how to preform acts of mercy not to cheapen them, make them government owned, and mandated. Works of love and mercy are done by the generosity of a neighbor with their own free will.
I for one am glad that the majority of the participants in this discussion see the other side to the glamorized propaganda of big government.
Health care is already majorly influenced by the government in the US. It is no wonder why costs are so high and so many are uninsured. Yet a sector of health care where government is not involved is lasik eye surgery, the costs have reduced significantly and the treatment is excellent.

TenBobNote touches on omething here that most posters have missed. When you mandate that government should be in the ‘helping hand’ industry, you are instituting a ‘middle man’, in the form of a government bureacracy. That bureacracy then has to be staffed, funded and policed. I use the word ‘policed’ to refer to a system of checks and balances that will have to be put in place to protect against fraud, misuse of funds, corruption, etc. The cost can be astronomical and the sad irony will be that for every dollar collected by the government for ‘help programs’ , anything up to fifty cents will be soaked up by having to pay the middle man.

Now, there’s another danger. We all know that government departments and bureacracies attract power unto themselves. They grow and grow and become a source of political power in themselves. Their particular field of ‘helping’ will always be the most important and so they will become experienced and very good at making sure their share of the monetary cake continues to grow.

Now here’s a scenarion for you - you are dissatisfied with the way a certain government department is handing out their money for ‘helping’ people, so you go to your Federal rep and he listens politely. A few days later, a highly trained and highly paid team from that certain government department visits your local Federal rep. and presents him with figures from right across the state, or nation, and tells him a story different from the one you told him. Who’s your local rep. going to listen to? And, should you, a constituent of that Rep. even be having to compete against a big bureacracy for the ear of government?

 

[peary1]

timcfc, all due respect:
Christ never endorsed “socialism.” Socialism is a recent invention from the stand point of the Catholic Church, and all of Christianity for that matter. You are reading into scripture your own modern sentiments.

I think both socialism and communism were branded as social heresies of contemporary Modernism in Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum, no?

 

[exoflare]

Well it looks like you are going against the the instructions of the US church on this one

I notice you attempted to “answer” me while ignoring the actual question. Again, can you show me the part in the Bible where Jesus commands us to trust our healthcare to a corrupt, bloated government bureaucracy?

 

[timcfc]

margaret Thatcher did indeed clean up the mess created by the duopoly of a Labor government working hqand in hand with trade union monopoly. Yes, unemployment did rise under Thatcher, but that’s because she ruthlessly sold off, or shut down government owned and loss making enterprises like certain scottish coal mines, shipyards and manufacturing industries. did you know that 29 million days were lost to strikes in 1979, so out of control were the trade unions. When Thatcher came to power fewer people in Scotland owned their own homes than in Communist Poland. Today, homeownership is enjoyed by around seventy percent of Scotland’s population.** Thatcher broke the power of the unions through unemployment and only then did Great Britain prosper.** Thatcher then deregulated the financial sector and that is why you think the south east of the country prospered. zIt did, because capital and labour were frred up and flocked to where the profitable markets were.

Thatcher killed off the destructive forces of socialism in Britain and played a large hand in shoreing up Ronald Raegan’s stance against communism,

So the fact that unemployment rose massively in Scotland doesnt matter to you?
The fact is that Margaret Thatcher did not care what happened to Scotland or its people.This is a sad fact but she is still the most hated person in Scotland,the very mention of her name is a source of great anger here.
The effects of Thatchers policies are still felt today,the total deprivation that came from her policies are still very evident today.You sit and look at figures saying more Scots own houses now than ever before,the fact that i lived through her time gives me a greater insight than your figures will ever give.

 

[timcfc]

Respectfully, you are comparing apples and oranges. The health care systems of France and the United States are very different. The U.S. has 330 million people while France has roughly 65 million. What does this list even measure?

The bishops have advocated for universal access not universal health care. The way to get to universal access for everybody is up to the prudential decision of the laity.

The Bush administration has issued Pro-life laws. “Restrictions” on embryonic stem cell research were acceptable while the ban on late term abortion was very commendable. You have to understand that the opposition to abortion is only starting to take hold on Americans today after the election of Obama.

Also, the Republicans seem to be the only party that is Pro-Life.

I would argue that the Republican party is not Pro-Life as abortions happened under its administration,yes they made it harder but they didnt make it illegal.
I would ask you to go and check the facts for yourself,people in the US have shorter lives than most Europeans,have higher infant mortality rates,have less physicians per 1000 people.
The biggest problem that i have with US healthcare,is that it puts profit before people. The bottom line is that these companies are profit driven,your interests do not come first,its their profit margin.The more sick you become,the less profit they make from you.

 

[tjm190]

The effects of Thatchers policies are still felt today,the total deprivation that came from her policies are still very evident today.You sit and look at figures saying more Scots own houses now than ever before,the fact that i lived through her time gives me a greater insight than your figures will ever give.

Actually no- I’ve got no idea what the discussion is, but figures give the big picture while personal experience is highly limited. I’d say 85% of my friends and associates are fans of the current administration. Am I justified in saying polls are misleading when they claim only 50% are fans of Obama?

 

[tjm190]

I would argue that the Republican party is not Pro-Life as abortions happened under its administration,yes they made it harder but they didnt make it illegal.
I would ask you to go and check the facts for yourself,people in the US have shorter lives than most Europeans,have higher infant mortality rates,have less physicians per 1000 people.
The biggest problem that i have with US healthcare,is that it puts profit before people. The bottom line is that these companies are profit driven,your interests do not come first,its their profit margin.The more sick you become,the less profit they make from you.

Does shorter life expectancy mean inferior care? I’d bet hospitals on army bases offer very excellent care, yet the U.S. army sees a much higher fatality rate than the rest of the population.
Could it be that what people are doing with their lives effects life expectancy?

 

[timcfc]

Also you didn’t answer my question. Do you believe the Church’s stand on collectivisms and subsidiarity? Even in health care?

This basic principle is articulated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which reads: “Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good. Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance”

I believe that the Church’s stance on subsidiarity needs to be looked at,with regards to the US.

 

[fish90]

I would argue that the Republican party is not Pro-Life as abortions happened under its administration,yes they made it harder but they didnt make it illegal.
I would ask you to go and check the facts for yourself,people in the US have shorter lives than most Europeans,have higher infant mortality rates,have less physicians per 1000 people.
The biggest problem that i have with US healthcare,is that it puts profit before people. The bottom line is that these companies are profit driven,your interests do not come first,its their profit margin.The more sick you become,the less profit they make from you.

You can be as Pro-Life as you want in this democracy, yet abortions can still happen and I never said they are the most Pro-Life party. Republicans consistently value being Pro-Life unlike the Democrats for the most part.

Respectfully, your country has a different definition of when a miscarriage happens and your philosophy on profiting in health care is a little off. The more sick a person is the more profit is extracted. Think about why hypertension has not been cured.

When did profit become evil?

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

 

[timcfc]

timcfc stated:

We should be taking care of people in our communities within a subsidiarity system and not in an collectivism. Those who can take care of themselves should do so and help others; otherwise it is a form of sloth.

How are those who are recieving Healthcare in the US looking after those who dont?
The numbers that dont have health insurance run into the tens of millions,how can you,as a good Catholic with no medical experience,i presume,help them?

This is misinformation. Those 30 million Americans (and there is great debate about the number…did you know that may include many illegal immigrants?) do indeed have HEALTH CARE. They can go to doctors and pay full price, they can go to local or charity clinics, or they can go to emergency rooms and receive FREE treatment.

What they don’t have is private health INSURANCE. And until the very recently in US history, many people did just fine without health insurance.

Well from figures released from your own government,they were not doing just fine from having no health insurance,they were dying.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Nearly 45,000 people die in the United States each year – one every 12 minutes – in large part because they lack health insurance and can not get good care, Harvard Medical School researchers found in an analysis released on Thursday.

 

[timcfc]

By reading the bible you will see that Jesus would want ALL his people to have access to healthcare not just those who could afford it.

**Jesus said in the Bible that everyone should have healthcare? You’ve GOT to be kidding me! **

Excuse me,but i said that if you read the bible you will see how Jesus spent much of his life on earth seeking out the poor, the needy and the outcasts of society. He so closely associated with the destitute that he told his disciples that the way they relate to the hungry, the poor and even prisoners is the way he considers them to be relating to him.

You certainly will not get that under a government-run medical plan unless, of course, you are at the stage of life that you must deal with “death panels”. ****The only compassion a government-run medical plan can give is to determine who lives and who dies. Everything else is just monetary numbers to be manipulated by government agencies.

Oh the “death panels” made up by Sarah Palin. The biggest lie of the Year is the award that she won for that. Surely you do not believe that to be true?

 

[timcfc]

Actually no- I’ve got no idea what the discussion is, but figures give the big picture while personal experience is highly limited. I’d say 85% of my friends and associates are fans of the current administration. Am I justified in saying polls are misleading when they claim only 50% are fans of Obama?

Margaret Thatcher is the most hated figure in Scotland,nearly 20 years after she left office and her party is still struggling. They know the damage she done to our country,thats why they barely mention her in Scotland.

Does shorter life expectancy mean inferior care? I’d bet hospitals on army bases offer very excellent care, yet the U.S. army sees a much higher fatality rate than the rest of the population.
Could it be that what people are doing with their lives effects life expectancy?

Why are you comparing the US army to civilian figures,thats not a good comparison.
For the best comparisons,why dont you look at the staistics comparing the US and French healthcare systems. Maybe the US should look at how the French do it,they have a great system.

Merry Christmas!!

 

[timcfc]

You can be as Pro-Life as you want in this democracy, yet abortions can still happen and I never said they are the most Pro-Life party. Republicans consistently value being Pro-Life unlike the Democrats for the most part.

Respectfully, your country has a different definition of when a miscarriage happens and your philosophy on profiting in health care is a little off. The more sick a person is the more profit is extracted. Think about why hypertension has not been cured.

When did profit become evil?
MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

Profit is not evil,but when it comes before peoples health then that should be questioned.
By the way,i have visited the US twice and it is a great country.

 

[fish90]

Profit is not evil,but when it comes before peoples health then that should be questioned.
By the way,i have visited the US twice and it is a great country.

Thank you!

 

[Filioque]

I don’t think Socialism is bad, just misplaced. As Catholics we are (or should be) concerned with the health of the bodies and souls of all our neighbors. People should have the resources they need to accomplish this. Some will for various reasons reject help. If due to mental illness, they should be provided for. In my opinion.

Athiestic Socialsim and a Totalitarian State is another issue. I don’t support that. What I do support is Socialism as exibited by Catholic Religious Orders, all is held in common, all work according to their capabilities, the superiors are elected to oversee the day to day needs of the community, and the community in trade offers obedience to those who they elected. However in this case the community has all chosen this life.

Imposing any system or opposing it by spreading fear, Socialism, Capitalism of Monarchy is in my opinion unjust. I do hope for the day when the Monarcy of the Kingship of Christ is what we all know.

 

[tjm190]

Margaret Thatcher is the most hated figure in Scotland,nearly 20 years after she left office and her party is still struggling. They know the damage she done to our country,thats why they barely mention her in Scotland.

I didn’t even look at the discussion, I was just pointing out that statistics trump personal experience.

Why are you comparing the US army to civilian figures,thats not a good comparison. For the best comparisons,why dont you look at the staistics comparing the US and French healthcare systems. Maybe the US should look at how the French do it,they ahve a great system.

Merry Christmas!!

But why isn’t it a good comparison? Because being in the army is a risk factor civilians don’t have? How silly of me, how could I forget to take that into account. With that knowledge, wouldn’t it be wise to consider the fact that U.S. has a world renowned obesity rate before comparing life expectancies?

Merry Christmas to you as well!

 

[tjm190]

Profit is not evil,but when it comes before peoples health then that should be questioned.
By the way,i have visited the US twice and it is a great country.

Well insurance companies in the U.S. have a profit margin of roughly 3.4 percent. They don’t have much wiggle room.

 

[Scout1441]

In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson began pushing his “Great Society” programs which were designed to eliminate poverty and raise the standard of living of the poor. Parts of this legislation were noteworthy, such as eliminating unfair practices like poll taxes. These programs, however, put over 50% of Americans on some sort of financial entitlement. I credit it with undermining the family, especially in certain minority sectors, by creating a seemingly never-ending cycle as generation after generation remain trapped in poverty and on the public dole. As much as America has done for the poor, we are beginning to realize that there will always be poor people. In Matthew 26 and John 12, Jesus tells us that “you will always have the poor with you.”

In 1961 Pope John XXIII issued Mater et Magister. Pertaining to the principle of subsidiarity, Pope John XXIII stated: “Included among basic rights of individuals is the right and duty of each individual normally to provide the necessities of life for himself and his dependents…” “Experience in fact shows that where private initiative of individuals is lacking, political tyranny prevails.” Only after covering this does the Pope discuss the need for “appropriate activity of the state to prevent exploitation of the weak.”

One of the catch phrases tossed around these days is “redistribution of wealth.” This pertains to the state taking from the “haves,” usually through targeted taxation, and giving it to the “have-nots.” It removes philanthropy from the equation and basically sets up a system of forced charity. However, the Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes 24 teaches that the fulfillment of our lives is found in self-giving and not self-assertion.

 

[fish90]

I don’t think Socialism is bad, just misplaced. As Catholics we are (or should be) concerned with the health of the bodies and souls of all our neighbors. People should have the resources they need to accomplish this. Some will for various reasons reject help. If due to mental illness, they should be provided for. In my opinion.

Athiestic Socialsim and a Totalitarian State is another issue. I don’t support that. What I do support is Socialism as exibited by Catholic Religious Orders, all is held in common, all work according to their capabilities, the superiors are elected to oversee the day to day needs of the community, and the community in trade offers obedience to those who they elected. However in this case the community has all chosen this life.

Imposing any system or opposing it by spreading fear, Socialism, Capitalism of Monarchy is in my opinion unjust. I do hope for the day when the Monarcy of the Kingship of Christ is what we all know.

I think you advocate CHARITY not socialism. Religious orders have their member volunteer to contribute to their community not take away what they earn for abortion, waste and “goodies” of all kinds.

People who oppose this current government’s approval of socialism want to see the America that made itself the best country in the world. We want to see the poor do well due to hard work not wealth redistribution and “entitlements.” America was not born through give aways, but hard work.

Pertinent Catechism quotes:

2427 Human work proceeds directly from persons created in the image of God and called to prolong the work of creation by subduing the earth, both with and for one another.210 Hence work is a duty: "If any one will not work, let him not eat."211 Work honors the Creator’s gifts and the talents received from him. It can also be redemptive. By enduring the hardship of work212 in union with Jesus, the carpenter of Nazareth and the one crucified on Calvary, man collaborates in a certain fashion with the Son of God in his redemptive work. He shows himself to be a disciple of Christ by carrying the cross, daily, in the work he is called to accomplish.213 Work can be a means of sanctification and a way of animating earthly realities with the Spirit of Christ.

2428 In work, the person exercises and fulfills in part the potential inscribed in his nature. The primordial value of labor stems from man himself, its author and its beneficiary. Work is for man, not man for work.214

Everyone should be able to draw from work the means of providing for his life and that of his family, and of serving the human community.

From scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a7.htm