Why our country is screwed

[demonsvx]

Uunions get paid before the workers and all they do is hurt the employees and employers. Look at GM need I say more? Their a joke like our government with lip service to get in and find a way to screw everyone else.

[BoxerFanatic]

Subie59...

That depends on skills.

unskilled labor is usually the most physically intensive, but also the least specialized. And yes, it tends to get paid less, unless union contracts over-inflate the cost of labor, rather than the market determining the price of labor.

Unions are the biggest force for marginalizing skill, promoting a dis-interested, uncaring work force, and bleeding industries dry, by raising costs.

I would NEVER work for a union, as I want to work on my own merit, and my own skill, and not be just a union card number, by definition the same as, and limited to every other union card number. I am not a number.

Highly skilled labor tends to be less physical, more specialized, and more dependent on qualification and education. It also tends to be less common, and more tied to people's ambition and capabilities. And it tends to be more rewarded, because of it's scarcity.

If you are talking about honesty vs. corruption, that is a completely different argument, and a matter that deals with justice under the law, not so much the qualifications of a diverse economic labor pool.

[Subie59]

unions are not perfect, neither are governments and certainly not big business. If you do not have a union representing you and giving you some job security, you run the very real risk that you will eventually get past your prime and the company you have worked at for 20 years will simply replace you with someone younger who will work harder.
i happen to be a journalist, so my union is not a typical labour union. Many unions have grown too big and too strong but so too have companies.
Your new president recognizes the value of unions, another reason why I like the guy so much.

[RSVX]

Originally Posted by Green1995SVX

I can't believe that anybody could disapprove of universal health care. I'd really love to be able to go to a doctor when I'm sick.

Just keep the government's hands out of it.

Originally Posted by Subie59

unions are not perfect, neither are governments and certainly not big business. If you do not have a union representing you and giving you some job security, you run the very real risk that you will eventually get past your prime and the company you have worked at for 20 years will simply replace you with someone younger who will work harder.

Um, SO WHAT?

If you, the worker, do not work hard to make yourself valuable to your employer, you DESERVE to be replaced by someone who will.

Thank you for outlining EXACTLY what is wrong with unions.

[dcarrb]

I've always been a "right to work" sort of guy; never been in a union and probably never will. Dad was a UAW member for awhile, and I don't think he liked it too much. He went to a company that was non-union because, well, it treated it's people right and paid more than anybody around.

That said, if not for the efforts of organized labor, those of us who rate our pay by the hour would probably be working 12-hour days for peasant wages, with no benefits. It blows my mind how working people can deny this. Wealth confers power in this country, folks. Better be thankful for policies that endeavor to empower ordinary folks just a bit.

dcb

[BoxerFanatic]

Originally Posted by dcarrb

I've always been a "right to work" sort of guy; never been in a union and probably never will. Dad was a UAW member for awhile, and I don't think he liked it too much. He went to a company that was non-union because, well, it treated it's people right and paid more than anybody around.

That said, if not for the efforts of organized labor, those of us who rate our pay by the hour would probably be working 12-hour days for peasant wages, with no benefits. It blows my mind how working people can deny this. Wealth confers power in this country, folks. Better be thankful for policies that endeavor to empower ordinary folks just a bit.

dcb

That may be historically true, and I can understand guild organizations, and professional associations that foster suggested base-lines, and give employers and employees tools to use the open market to meet those guidelines.

But union thug tactics, striking, extorting money, from both the company, AND the workers, biting the hand that feeds you, and generally lining the pockets of union leadership, at the expense of union workers and industry...

I think they have long since overstepped their bounds, and worn out their welcome.

[Green1995SVX]

Originally Posted by BoxerFanatic

Where are cancer treatments, and medical advancements made, moreso than any other place?

New cancer treatments and medical advancements are meaningless if you can't afford to take advantage of them.

Mike.

[TomsSVX]

Universal healthcare is a double edged sword. While everyone has coverage, it significantly reduces the need to be better than the other guy. Competition is the drive of capitolism and without competition there will always be people doing the bare minimum. So in the US we have doctors and physicians who need to do the best they can to get ahead, and with that we have the best health care in world, just not the cheapest. That is why people travel from all over the globe to the US to get many procedures done because our doctors and facilities are better if you have the ching to shell out for it.

Tom

[Subie59]

The best health care in the world. Hmmmm
The world health organization has you ranked number 37, Canada 30
France being No. 1 followed by Italy.

See below
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

[Green1995SVX]

I love how we're only 2 better than Cuba.

[TomsSVX]

Thats an overall average and not actual premium healthcare.

Tom

[SoCal LS-L]

Being a Blackfeet indian, I get somewhat free healthcare thats funded by the federal govt. per treatys that were signed long ago. I can safely say.... govt funded health care SUCKS, when I had my surgery I rode around the hospital in a wheelchair that was missing the footrests and had to hold my feet off the floor (after a hernia surgery!!). The surgeon apparently made an incorrect incision and there were complications shortly after (like bleeding under my skin) and I have been in pain ever since from a nerve entrapment (also from incorrect mesh suture). What was my recourse??? Nada.... you have to have permission FROM the federal govt. to sue the federal govt., and we all know how that works out 99% of the time.......

[Wikedjuggalo]

Originally Posted by Subie59

The best health care in the world. Hmmmm
The world health organization has you ranked number 37, Canada 30
France being No. 1 followed by Italy.

See below
http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html

FWIW it was published in 2000. I do believe things have changed. I too am against Universal health care. There are too many points to argue all which will fall on deaf ears. Read up on Frances health system and your own. YT and others have already stated the issues with universal health care system.

Here are a few points pulled up from another argument.

1. There isn't a single government agency or division that runs efficiently; do we really want an organization that developed the U.S. Tax Code handling something as complex as health care?

2. "Free" health care isn't really free since we must pay for it with taxes; expenses for health care would have to be paid for with higher taxes or spending cuts in other areas such as defense, education, etc.

3. Profit motives, competition, and individual ingenuity have always led to greater cost control and effectiveness.
Government-controlled health care would lead to a decrease in patient flexibility.

4. Patients aren't likely to curb their drug costs and doctor visits if health care is free; thus, total costs will be several times what they are now.

5. Just because Americans are uninsured doesn't mean they can't receive health care; nonprofits and government-run hospitals provide services to those who don't have insurance, and it is illegal to refuse emergency medical service because of a lack of insurance.

6. Government-mandated procedures will likely reduce doctor flexibility and lead to poor patient care.
Healthy people who take care of themselves will have to pay for the burden of those who smoke, are obese, etc.
7. A long, painful transition will have to take place involving lost insurance industry jobs, business closures, and new patient record creation.

8. Loss of private practice options and possible reduced pay may dissuade many would-be doctors from pursuing the profession.

9. Malpractice lawsuit costs, which are already sky-high, could further explode since universal care may expose the government to legal liability, and the possibility to sue someone with deep pockets usually invites more lawsuits.

10. Like social security, any government benefit eventually is taken as a "right" by the public, meaning that it's politically near impossible to remove or curtail it later on when costs get out of control.

[demonsvx]

You really want government healthcare when they cannot take care of some of the simplest things?
Lets get down to the basics of the matter, we are going to pay for it in some way, usually taxes then utilities, services, etc.
WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE BREAKING POINT FOR AMERICANS TO REALIZE WE ARE GETTING SCREWED BIG TIME?
Now I know why our Founding Fathers were sick of being taxed to death
Maybe thats why ammo has been so hard to find...coming revolution

[BoxerFanatic]

I agree with you, but those who know, have known for some time now. Those who don't know, don't seem to want to know.

And not only is revolution the worst possible rectification of this problem, but I only have 63 rounds of .40sw... I can't find much more around.

But seriously, a bloodless re-application of founding principles at the ballot box is the way to do this, not another civil war.

Because bloody uprising will not be like the revolution against the british king. It will be like the war between the states.

IF that happens, and I hope it doesn't, it won't be like the civil war of the early 1860s. There won't be a clear moral issue with economic repercussions (slavery) tangled into a complex state's rights issue (weak or strong federal control of what states are allowed to decide).

It will be a matter of government tyranny, with lines drawn for or against government control and redistribution of the wealth of the population. That is a clear moral issue to people who wish to be free, but as we have even seen in this thread, not everyone shares that dedication, and does welcome government involvement in their lives, and sees it as a benefit, despite the monetary, and non-monetary costs. There are people who want someone else to tell them what to do, and there are people who really love the power to tell them, and everyone else. It is not a given that everyone loves freedom, even if they pay lip-service to it. Some don't know what freedom means, nor want that responsibility.