# USA really too different from English-speaking world to have similar policies? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 27, 2009, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193 "2009-01-27T06:04:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Flipshod](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/f19dbf/32.png) [@Flipshod](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flipshod)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2009, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/361 "2009-02-04T22:14:27Z")
> [@welby](#): > > […] > So a lot of small businessmen would go out of business - aren’t these the guys UHC is supposed to help?\* > > […] > \*Yep. Strawman. I know, but still thought it was funny given the vehemence of your response. I’d be willing to bet your pulse jumped a few beats when you read that line. Is that really a straw man argument? All of you guys arguing against UHC, without regard to the pros and cons of moving from our current system to another one, but rather based on the general idea that government is wasteful, seem to throw around the concept of the straw man a lot. It’s as if you are propping up the straw man of government waste and knocking it down as support for your reasons why we should have multiple private insurers acting independently rather than a more coordinated system of insurance. Did Hannity use the term straw man recently? The term’s getting a lot lip talk and not even seeming to be used correctly. Did you guys just misunderstand the term to be some sort of rhetorical trump card? It’s just government-is-wasteful-bad, over and over, with the only details being about things like the relative murder rates amongst countries, or the rate of welfare fraud in California, neither of which is directly relevant–in fact, no one is even attempting to explain the relevance beyond the generalities that keep being harped on. Even when asked to. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 4, 2009, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/362 "2009-02-04T22:40:01Z")
A bunch of stuff that I cannot answer came from **LilShieste**. You need to stay on point - I’m not going to follow you all over trying to figure out where you are jumping to. My only comment is that simply because some department cannot get a conviction on every case they hear about doesn’t mean that abuse is not happening at a high rate. ---
**Author:** ![slaphead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9bcb4/32.png) [@slaphead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/slaphead)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/363 "2009-02-05T13:35:49Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > How many cancer patients at a couple of million each should the taxpayers pony up for before you decide this might be a bad idea? How many people in the US do you think have paid more than a couple of million in premiums, or can afford to pay that kind of money in cash out of their own assets? Almost all patients who cost significant money to treat are being paid for by others, either co-insured (who have to pay increased premiums as a result) or by taxpayers (if the patient is uninsured or they hit their policy’s limit). UHC or current system doesn’t matter, either way healthcare costs are passed to society and the country is still headed for a hard choice between financial implosion or dragging people off the cancer ward to be euthanised. The discussion is around finding the least inefficient way to handle the cost distribution. > [@curlcoat](#): > > I am not interested in living someplace that “manages somehow”. I think you already do, unless you are arguing that the US system is the best arrangement for medical care that could ever be put together, which would be a somewhat unusual viewpoint. > [@curlcoat](#): > > Nor do I want to live in a socialist country. You think the UK is a socialist country? Australia? Canada? Germany? Taiwan? Israel? Saudi Arabia? If the answer to any of these is ‘No’ then what are you babbling about? If your answer to ALL of these is ‘Yes’ then I suggest you leave us all alone and go back to your own private alternate universe. ---
**Author:** ![welby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@welby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/welby)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/364 "2009-02-05T14:31:56Z")
> [@Flipshod](#): > > Is that really a straw man argument? Yes. Yes it is. To address the rest of your post, I haven’t been arguing anything, but posted questions seeking the pro-UHC perspective on why UHC is feasible given the level of useless found in your average government office. I have stated repeatedly that my GUT FEELING is that it won’t work. That doesn’t mean I’m one of the rabid repubs, or Hannity watchers, or anything else. It simply means that I’m curious about UHC and asking questions about it. I could have sworn that was allowed here. However, if you really need data on how wasteful our government is, [this](http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=homepage) is a good place to start. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/365 "2009-02-05T14:40:49Z")
> [@slaphead](#): > > You think the UK is a socialist country? Australia? Canada? Germany? Taiwan? Israel? Saudi Arabia? > If the answer to any of these is ‘No’ then what are you babbling about? If your answer to ALL of these is ‘Yes’ then I suggest you leave us all alone and go back to your own private alternate universe. I suspect the answer is “yes”. IME, conservatives think that any country less fiscally conservative than Monaco is “socialist”. > [@welby](#): > > To address the rest of your post, I haven’t been arguing anything, but posted questions seeking the pro-UHC perspective on why UHC is feasible given the level of useless found in your average government office. I have stated repeatedly that my GUT FEELING is that it won’t work. That doesn’t mean I’m one of the rabid repubs, or Hannity watchers, or anything else. It simply means that I’m curious about UHC and asking questions about it. I could have sworn that was allowed here. I did point out earlier that whatever government waste may be present in the not-yet-proposed UHC system will be hard-pressed to match the waste inherent in the current system. ---
**Author:** ![welby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/d78d45/32.png) [@welby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/welby)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/366 "2009-02-05T15:59:51Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > I did point out earlier that whatever government waste may be present in the not-yet-proposed UHC system will be hard-pressed to match the waste inherent in the current system. You did, and I wasted my time responding to the knuckleheads, which was dumb given the amount of time I generally have to spend on here. Let me address your post now. [QUOTE=Really Not All That Bright] I also have lots of personal experience with USCIS/INS - I’m British, and a green card holder - and yes, it sucks. However, there are a few factors you’re missing here. 1. USCIS doesn’t have to be efficient. People want to get in? They can wait. I can tell you from my mother’s personal experience that the UK Home Office’s Border Agency (which was called something else back in the day, I’m pretty sure) is equally inefficient, though generally staffed by people with more common sense. Anyway, the point is that USCIS is the one government agency which can most afford to be a mess because voters don’t have to deal with it. Also, most of that money wasn’t spent on making it more efficient in terms of processing paperwork and getting your passport renewed faster and so on. It was spent on making USCIS better at catching crooks. Everything spent since 2001 has been spent on antiterrorism stuff, it seems- or at least on stuff which is claimed to be for combating terrorism. 1. The paperwork may be standardized, but it has to be published in 200 different languages, and every office needs people who speak lots of languages, from data entry personnel to officials. Of course, finding a US citizen who speaks Gaelic or Swahili or Haitian Creole and who wants to work in a government office in New Mexico is not easy. 2. Most healthcare claims approvals procedures can be computerized. You only need people to review the ones which are appealed, or the ones which are unusual - “medically necessary” breast implants, and so on. Immigration/asylum/visa applications usually can’t be computerized; the computer isn’t going to know whether your marriage is legit or a green card scam, etc. [/quote] As for point one, I’d argue that the same would apply to a central healthcare office. No government agency _has_ to fuction effectively, since the government has a monopoly on the service. Indeed there have been many arguments that by thier very nature a government office _cannot_ function efficiently. And, in fact, the $1 billion was distributed specifically to address the backlog issues at USCIS - they received other funds to “combat terrorism”. If UHC devolves into another typical government program, where does the consumer go for health care? Point 2, granted. USCIS has a lot more problems in that regard than other agencies. Point 3 also granted. I do wonder whether it would make sense to force some sort of standardization on insurance companies prior to implementing any kind of UHC plan though. It would make any such change easier and less expensive, and would have the added bonus of reducing waste in the current system. Another question I have: What’s the fallback plan? If (and I’m saying IF) the naysayers are right, and our health care system becomes a shambles as a result of UHC, what’s the fix? I don’t think getting rid of it is an option. Has the government ever taken away a similar entitlement? I don’t think it has, but if so, I’m sure someone will point it out. If getting out isn’t an option, what happens? ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/367 "2009-02-05T21:58:41Z")
> [@slaphead](#): > > How many people in the US do you think have paid more than a couple of million in premiums, or can afford to pay that kind of money in cash out of their own assets? > Almost all patients who cost significant money to treat are being paid for by others, either co-insured (who have to pay increased premiums as a result) or by taxpayers (if the patient is uninsured or they hit their policy’s limit). Until they hit their limit. After that, unless they qualify for Medicaid, noone pays for them. Would this also be true of the UHC, or are we all going to be responsible for paying out this kind of money over and over? How long before we would be totally in the tank if that is true? > [@](#): > > I think you already do, unless you are arguing that the US system is the best arrangement for medical care that could ever be put together, which would be a somewhat unusual viewpoint. No, where I live I can go to the doctor when I need to and get treatment. Yes, that isn’t true for “the working poor” but I cannot see how expecting one health care system to cover everyone no matter what their habits, station in life and ability to pay are will make for anything better than what I already have. > [@](#): > > You think the UK is a socialist country? Australia? Canada? Germany? Taiwan? Israel? Saudi Arabia? I think I’ve said this before - I have no idea, I don’t live in any of those places. > [@](#): > > If the answer to any of these is ‘No’ then what are you babbling about? From [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) –\> "socialism [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] –noun 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole." It seems that the major reason folks want to have a UHC is because there are some people who can afford health care and some that can’t. This is also why we have welfare, because people think that folks who have (what they view as) “extra money” should be giving it to those who are less “fortunate”. The more we create “safety nets” like a UHC, the closer we are to becoming socialist, which is only one more step to —\> "communism [kom-yuh-niz-uhm] –noun 1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state." I would much rather live in a place where my efforts, skills and work ethic are rewarded and I am not required to pay out to support people who cannot get off their butts and earn a living. I am already paying to give them food, shelter and diapers, now you want me to pay to give them health care - under the laughable idea that it would cost me less and/or provide better care. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2009, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/368 "2009-02-05T23:10:49Z")
This is from another thread, but fits here. > [@Please define Socialized Medicine for me](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-define-socialized-medicine-for-me/483169/25): > > I have talked to serveral people who have lived in the UK, Aussie and NZ and they all agree, in terms of most things the socialized medicine is better there for all routine things. Office visits, routine surgery, drugs. But when it comes to complex things like transplants, advanced cancer or surgeries, the United States totally comes out ahead. > > So I think it’d be a matter of pluses and minuses depending on where you stand on your overall health If, as some here claim, the benefits of UHC might not translate to the USA, isn’t it just as reasonable to argue that the advantages in top-end care are not due to the lack of socialized medicine? If we’re being sloppy to claim that UHC works in other countries & would therefore work here, then isn’t it even more sloppy to claim that private medicine causes better transplant care? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/369 "2009-02-06T00:12:24Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > I think I’ve said this before - I have no idea, I don’t live in any of those places. And yet you had no problem implying Canadians don’t have the “underclass” with the same culture of complaint as the USA does. Do you know anything about Canada or not? Is it really that hard to pick up an encyclopedia to learn what countries are socialist and which ones aren’t? Or look it up online? ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/370 "2009-02-06T00:34:13Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > From [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com) –\> "socialism [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] –noun > > 1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole." > > It seems that the major reason folks want to have a UHC is because there are some people who can afford health care and some that can’t. This is also why we have welfare, because people think that folks who have (what they view as) “extra money” should be giving it to those who are less “fortunate”. The more we create “safety nets” like a UHC, the closer we are to becoming socialist, which is only one more step to —\> > > "communism [kom-yuh-niz-uhm] –noun > > 1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of all property in common, actual ownership being ascribed to the community as a whole or to the state." Like that well known communist, Adam Smith, who proposed: > [@](#): > > ‘in the same manner as it would deserve its most serious attention to prevent a leprosy or any other loathsome and offence disease, though neither mortal nor dangerous, from spreading itself among them, though, perhaps, no other publick good might result from such attention beside the prevention of so great a publick evil’ (WN V.i.f.60: p 788). (i.e. healthcare is a valid role for government, and having social safety nets needn’t imply socialism). ---
**Author:** ![Gam\_Zeh\_Yaavor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/3e96dc/32.png) [@Gam\_Zeh\_Yaavor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gam_Zeh_Yaavor)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/371 "2009-02-06T02:31:43Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > I would much rather live in a place where my efforts, skills and work ethic are rewarded and I am not required to pay out to support people who cannot get off their butts and earn a living. I am already paying to give them food, shelter and diapers, now you want me to pay to give them health care - under the laughable idea that it would cost me less and/or provide better care. \*You are **already** paying for it!! \* :smack: I am stunned, **curlcoat**. You stun me. Should payment be required before admission to the ER? Whether or not you think it’s good that you already pay for emergency and life-saving medical care for the poor, you do it. This is a fact. If you’d rather that the poor die in the gutters outside the ER rather than be treated, well then kudos, I respect your evil. But it’s unlikely that you do want this. Well, hypothetically speaking, say you paid for some regular inexpensive preventative care for these people so that you don’t have to pay a lot more later to keep them alive. Does this not seem like a good idea? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/372 "2009-02-06T02:43:11Z")
Jesus merciful fuck, this thread is still going on? Curlcoat has no intention of actually thinking. She’s a fucking automation, with as much going on under her top hat as the animatronic Lincoln at Disney Land.\* Has she conceded a single argument yet? Has she actually looked at anyone’s data or links and actually learned a single thing? She lives in an ignorance bubble capable of deflecting any logic or factual attack. \*I’ve never been, so I don’t know if he’s actually wearing the hat. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/373 "2009-02-06T05:34:31Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > And yet you had no problem implying Canadians don’t have the “underclass” with the same culture of complaint as the USA does. Do you know anything about Canada or not? > > Is it really that hard to pick up an encyclopedia to learn what countries are socialist and which ones aren’t? Or look it up online? Don’t be an idiot. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/374 "2009-02-06T05:36:46Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > Like that well known communist, Adam Smith, who proposed: > > (i.e. healthcare is a valid role for government, and having social safety nets needn’t imply socialism). Apparently to you, the connection between the quote and your conclusion is really clear. To me, not so much. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/375 "2009-02-06T05:44:02Z")
> [@Gam\_Zeh\_Yaavor](#): > > \*You are **already** paying for it!! \* :smack: Continuing to repeat the same thing will not suddenly make this a fact. > [@](#): > > I am stunned, **curlcoat**. You stun me. Should payment be required before admission to the ER? Whether or not you think it’s good that you already pay for emergency and life-saving medical care for the poor, you do it. This is a fact. Which I have already said, yes, I do. That is what Medicaid is for. > [@](#): > > If you’d rather that the poor die in the gutters outside the ER rather than be treated, well then kudos, I respect your evil. But it’s unlikely that you do want this. Well, hypothetically speaking, say you paid for some regular inexpensive preventative care for these people so that you don’t have to pay a lot more later to keep them alive. Does this not seem like a good idea? Only if it were true that “regular inexpensive preventative care” would actually mean there wouldn’t be a lot to pay later on. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/376 "2009-02-06T05:47:37Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Jesus merciful fuck, this thread is still going on? > > Curlcoat has no intention of actually thinking. She’s a fucking automation, with as much going on under her top hat as the animatronic Lincoln at Disney Land.\* > > Has she conceded a single argument yet? Has she actually looked at anyone’s data or links and actually learned a single thing? She lives in an ignorance bubble capable of deflecting any logic or factual attack. Pfui. Simply because you don’t agree with my conclusions doesn’t mean that I am not thinking. It actually makes _you_ look like an automation, absorbing and believing every fantasy that sounds good to you, when you post something like this. ---
**Author:** ![Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Capt.Ridley_s_Shooting_Party)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/377 "2009-02-06T10:29:33Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > Apparently to you, the connection between the quote and your conclusion is really clear. To me, not so much. Having government sponsored social safety nets does not equate to socialism. This is (American) right wing propaganda that somehow’s made it into the mainstream of political discourse. Let’s be clear: you made the claim that moving toward public health care was a step towards socialism. It’s your job to back that up. The point of the quote was obvious. Adam Smith was a well known capitalist theorist and espoused the primacy of free markets, yet even he recognised that the government has multiple roles, in promoting social justice (through his proposed progressive taxation) and also to prevent the “publick evil” of widespread disease in the population. Tell me, **curlcoat** , in your view, was Adam Smith a socialist? (As an aside, it always amuses me that Smith has somehow become a folk hero to extreme libertarians, seeing as he generally recognized that governments routinely have to intervene in the “free market”.) ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 11:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/378 "2009-02-06T11:09:40Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > Pfui. Simply because you don’t agree with my conclusions doesn’t mean that I am not thinking. It actually makes _you_ look like an automation, absorbing and believing every fantasy that sounds good to you, when you post something like this. Of course I don’t agree with you. I didn’t have the advantage of your preternatural ability to suss out the right side of an issue without evidence and thinking. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2009, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/379 "2009-02-06T23:13:45Z")
> [@curlcoat](#): > > I meant the GD thread - the two have become almost the same thing, minus the Pit type insults over there. Yeah, I meant the GD thread as well. Seriously, I don’t think I’ve proposed a specific plan to debate in either one. As I think I mentioned in that thread. ---
**Author:** ![curlcoat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ea5d25/32.png) [@curlcoat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curlcoat)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2009, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193/380 "2009-02-07T03:23:43Z")
> [@Capt.Ridley\_s\_Shooting\_Party](#): > > Having government sponsored social safety nets does not equate to socialism. This is (American) right wing propaganda that somehow’s made it into the mainstream of political discourse. Let’s be clear: you made the claim that moving toward public health care was a step towards socialism. It’s your job to back that up. I did. Since you apparently didn’t understand my post regarding moving towards socialism, I’m not surprised that you didn’t understand the “back up”. OK, hint - it has nothing to do with whether or not the government is sponsoring anything. Think overall attitude of the people. (BTW, I don’t waste my time listening to the right wing, or the left wing for that matter, and don’t listen to propaganda from anyone. This may be what the problem here is - I think for myself so my conclusions may be uncomfortable for those that let Faux News think for them.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-really-too-different-from-english-speaking-world-to-have-similar-policies/483193.md?page=20)