Socialized Medicine - Who has it - What do you think?

I haven't kept abreast of truly recent developments among the Nordic countries, but at least through the post-WWII period, all in all, I'd say the Nordic socialist democracies managed the transition to labor-producer cooperation fairly well, historically speaking, which resulted in many of the benefits you describe above.

From what I can tell, such a relationship was borne out of the pre-WWI nature of social coalitions that are not replicated everywhere, in terms of national, political economic development. But among the nordic countries, this historical background set the stage for what would happen after the cataclysm of WWI, itself setting the stage for the modern era among these countries.

A good read in this respect is Liberalism, Fascism, or Social Democracy: Social Classes and the Political Origins of Regimes in Interwar Europe, by Greg Luebbert.

(Note: shameless plug for the scholarship of my late honors advisor at Berkeley. Prof. Luebbert was a specialist in political economy, coalition building and regime development and change. Regardless of one's particular assessment of the book's argument, a fascinating read on the origins and development of labor-producer cooperation among these countries, and the structure in this area among many other countries).

 

Thanks for the link, expensive though.

 

I was just wondering, because we police the world, and can't afford social programs like small European countries with low infrastructure and military demands.

Socialism at the surface level sounds great.

I mean, if you can't afford something you get it for free. Better than praying for divine influence.

The problem comes in that someone has to pay for it, and only the state can hand it out. Instead of people helping people, you have the state helping some people by punishing others.

I could go on and on about it, but basically, the foundation for me is that once you legalize theft from the working class to provide for the lower class, eventually you destroy the middle class. You get a rich caste, and an underclass.

 

Hahahah - you know, I didn't notice...I have the book.

Prof. Luebbert was a young, rising star when I was at Berkeley (he was my undergrad honors advisor, and, on my entry into the PhD program, his area was a core of my interest and research), who was untimely killed during a whitewater accident. His work was valued even then, quite highly, and with his death, it looks like this book has something of that value embedded within.

Library?

 

Yeah I'll see if they have it at the libary but if not i'll buy it from the 'used' section of Amazon, they have it for $8.

Guerilla, the Middle class has not been wiped out here so mabye you could be wrong about in the usa? We have a working class, middle class and upper class, and you are right about policing the world though - imagine how much money you, and every country could save if they spent 1/100th of what they spent on military now. We, the UK, are the 2nd biggest spenders on military, now isn't that rediculous, for a small island, one of the smallest in the world.

In my opinion, socialism is the way to go for a better society and country for anyone, if you don't trust the state with nationalising things, simple, vote in a goverment that you do trust!

 

One thing that I think is important to keep in mind is that no model exists that has been transplanted from the theorist's page to the real world, across countries, in toto - there is no one "capitalism," nor no one "socialism," nor no political economic model that exists as a common model across nations.

Every nation has developed with a particular history, which is informed by the divisions of power extant at the time of any particular development, with historically embedded institutions and "coalitions" of people; all of these things inform what happens in the country after, as well. In short, the historical arrangements between the two main players in modern political economies, at the inception of industrialization - producers and labor - are sui generis, unique to each particular history and process.

For instance, the social democracies of Sweden, Finland, Norway grew from a very propitious history, an early (19th into early 20th century) coalition of mobilized labor and smallholder, family peasantry that gave enough strength to the two to be able to "compete" with producer interests in a way that can never be done in the United States; the history of industrialization, and the division of power then between mobilized labor, state power, and concentrated capital was quite different in the United States from that of the nordic countries, or even your own.

Different mobilizations, different coalitions in response, different development. In the nordic countries, you had labor and producers sitting down to hammer out what I think are fairly workable solutions, to the benefit of the nation. In the U.S., the two were, and are, at best, in a kind of perpetual catfight.

 

Lmao, you call the pre-rich the middle, and the poor people "working class". Very funny.

No disrespect, I have friends from the UK, but you couldn't pay me to live in your socialist police state. I don't need the government filming me when I walk out in public.

I definitely don't trust the state. Didn't Tony Blair lie to get you guys into the war? Isn't that what the Downing Street memo is about?

How many good young men have died in Iraq for his lies?

Sorry, but I'm not going to rely on the state to protect me.

Re: socialism, I'll never buy government sponsored theft. I have no right to come into your home to take from you for my needs. Based on your comments, it sounds like you probably haven't hit that point in your life yet, where you are paying. It sounds more like you are on the receiving end.

 

We have a hard time voting in a trustworthy goverment because when an election comes all 3 parties are untrustworthy, so you have to pick the best of the worst.

 

Your quote was show an example of feudalism - so I did, P.S. it is an example of privatization - the forest was the Lord's PRIVATE hunting ground - he OWNED it - PRIVATE HIS ALONE - all the trees and animals in it were considered his - imagine being told you couldn't go to Yellowstone national park because it belonged to one person - would you be outraged - the U.S. national park system is a perfect example of a successful socialized practice in the U.S. - large areas of land held for the general good of everyone -

shame the U.S. doesn't do the same for health and give its citizens the benefit of a healthy life.

 

The Amish has a society similar to socialized principles and they seem to lead a great lifestyle -

Socialism - my definition - a philosophy where instead of striving solely for one's self we striving for the benefit of the greater good (i.e. you can get rich, but you should do so helping others along the way - Henry FORD - pay your workers the most you can - and it will in turn generate further demand - unfortunately capitalism is starting to fail today because instead of such sensible principles of sharing the wealth - the new mantra is get as much as you can by any means you can - Capitalism of the 80's, capitalism of the "wall street" the movie, capitalism of greed. Capitalism that builds (and almost is socialistic) is capitalism that shares the wealth, pays its workers the best, keeps jobs with a skilled workforce - instead of looking for the cheapest labor, capitalism that builds for the long term -


(pps. on the other topic - both Britain and Russia were out producing the Germans by themselves in term of industrial output by 1943, (without U.S. industry even factored into the equation - the U.S. military muscle ensured the war ended earlier - the outcome was already decided when Hitler invaded Russia and failed to knock it out in one campaign - i.e. when the winter struck.)

 

That's not privatization. You don't even understand privatization, how can you possibly criticize it?

The Lord is the government, privatization = not government owned.

Look, before we debate any further, I want to warn you, I have a brain, and I'm not afraid to use it. Which will probably put you at a big disadvantage.

 

Yeah, they have a fantastic lifestyle, absent of any productive gains. You want milk cows, make butter by hand and parade around in a horse and buggy, knock yourself out.

This is such a load of tripe.

Capitalism is not synonymous with greed. Socialism is far more greedy and envious, it involves taking from someone else for your own use, rather than creating your own prosperity and sharing it.

Socialism is only accomplished by coercive force of government. The threat of imprisonment of violence if you do not share. Socialism is NOT charity.

Capitalists on the other hand have helped build hospitals, set up foundations, and the most successful capitalists pay the bulk of the tax revenue of the government.

 

Obviously you turn to insults to show me how wonderful your brain is? I tremble in fear of your mighty brain.

Privatization - owned privately - for one's own use or sole enjoyment, The feudal system wasn't just a system of government - it was a system of controlling wealth - he who controlled the wealth control the power - in that regard it is not much different to what we see today. Despite claims we have 'democracy' - we don't - the average person has little to no influence over their government. Being able to vote once every 3 to 4 years for one of two realistic candidates is not real democracy.

 

- crap - the most successful capitalists pay lawyers to minimize their payment of tax - the middle class provides the bulk of tax revenue - always has - always will - the middle classes burden is the heaviest of any when it comes to tax.

Wow do they - our socialized medicine here in Australia builds hospitals all the time - for everyone's use - I'm glad I don't have to wait in line for my Lord and master the mighty capitalist to dane to build me a hospital - well thank ye lordie and master you've built a hospital - thank you lordie shame I don't have the money to go to this fine institution - guess I'll just work till I die - but it be a fine hospital - yes siree, mighty fine, best treatment in the world

 

You should. Not much of what you post makes sense.

Feudalism and privatization are two different things. All forms of government control wealth.

In feudalism, all wealth belonging to the crown. Privatization means that wealth, resources and infrastructure are separate from the crown.

I shouldn't even have to explain this to someone with a basic education.

Let's try this,

Maybe if you got off the dole, found a job and produced something, you could be the one building a hospital for those in need, instead of living off of the hard work of others.

You cry about your lord and master, but it's you who plays the role of serf as you expect the government to confiscate someone else's production for you. That same lord and master is your government, and their dukes are the wealthy who pay your way through life.

Sound better?

Ned Kelly is spinning in his grave at today's Australian idea (if you are any representation) of independence and frontier spirit.

I'm done discussing with you. You love your socialized medicine, you like being a ward of the state. I'd rather be a free man with little material wealth, than a coward or a thief.

 

I'm not on the dole. I've worked for the government for 10 years. Have a Degree. Produce my own income - etc.
I resent 50% of my income going to the government for rubbish - like dole, single mother baby factories, do gooders and the rest - I DO NOT RESENT MY TAX GOING TO THE HEALTH SYSTEM. I do not even resent it going to public schools - although I choose to send my children to private schools.

As for frontier spirit my ancestors came to New Zealand in 1842 - if you want to really know the high regard I have for them - read my blog -http://early-history-auckland.blogspot.com/ you might find out I respect hugely hard work and pioneers - however they built a new society based on equality - not the mess they left in England.

Ned Kelley was a scumbag criminal murdering piece of crap - you do yourself no favors pointing him out - once again the idealized Hollywood view coming out again - you might try reading books for history, rather than watching Heath Ledger giving some bullshit view of history. Kelley was a thief plain and simple - if independence and frontier spirit is about shitting on others you can keep it. If you READ my blog you will find frontier spirit was about helping your neighbor when they were sick - i.e. you would help reap their field for them if they were laid up in bed - rather than let it go to waste - you would do this freely as a Christian, you did it because they would do the same for you - you would do it because you believed in teamwork - (oops is this too "SOCIALISTIC", not individual enough, sounds a bit like socialized medicine as well doesn't it). You would do it because you didn't want to see their children starve this winter, you did it because you care about your fellow man.

At 18 months old I suffered 21% third degree burns - I carry the scars today - I would not be alive were it not for the socialized medicine - p.s. my wife is a registered nurse and my father and two brothers are/were Ambulance officers in this socialized medicine - they work for more than just a pay check - they work to help others.

 

Hey that's pretty crazy. I lived in Takapuna.

Anyway, I really think we should ditch this. Clearly you're pretty personally invested in the idea of socialized medicine, and even though you're just as belligerent as me, I don't feel like battling it out.

America is not going to adopt socialized medicine. We're broke.

And if we did adopt it, say Hillary Care style, it would be corporate medicine, and possibly unconstitutional.

What we can do, is put the money back in the hands of the people. Stop wasting it on weapons, war and foreign aid. Take care of our own, and pay off the debt. Get America into a position where it can help others because it is strong enough to help itself.

 

The U.S. still has natural resources that can be used to pull it out of its Trade deficit - particularly if it takes the lead in alternative energy.

I grew up in South Auckland - it was Middlemore hospital that saved my life in 1972, - so know a bit more about people doing it tough (I myself moved to Australia and tripled my income). I'm not a labor voter - I hate Helen Clark and her lies (she has her real partner living in the house behind hers) - if your going to be a dyke at least stand up for what you believe. I'm actually conservative - but I believe in helping others and believe in a universal health safety net - I believe it creates a healthy society and thus a wealthy society in the long term.

What did you think of the blog?

 

The only alternative that makes sense is nuclear. Wind and solar are overblown, ethanol has become a joke, consuming more oil during production, than using oil in the first place.

When I saw 70 in your name, I didn't realize you were 70. I figured you were born in 1970.

I spent almost 3 years on the North Shore nearly 20 years ago, lived in Mairangi Bay and Murray's Bay, went to school in Takapuna.

I believe in charity, but not state minimum care. Never overlook the good works some of the wealthy have done for this world. While some may be evil, not all of them are.

Didn't check the blog out yet, will do in the next few days. Cheers.

 

I was born in 1970, not 70 yet!