- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Sorry Bernie Bros But Nordic Countries Are Not Socialist
Posted on 7/30/18 at 7:00 pm to Antonio Moss
Posted on 7/30/18 at 7:00 pm to Antonio Moss
I don’t think he thought this through fully before posting. It’s ok, I’ve certainly been guilty of that before.
This post was edited on 7/30/18 at 7:01 pm
0
Posted on 7/30/18 at 8:48 pm to Revelator
quote:
in reality the Nordic countries practice mostly free market economics paired with high taxes exchanged for generous government entitlement programs
In other words exactly what you guys claim the socialist left wants. That article is dumb as frick.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 9:37 pm to Robin Masters
quote:
Most Scandinavian countries pay about 1.0% of gdp towards military knowing full well America will defend them in case of invasion.
To be fair, the only two Scandinavian countries in NATO are Norway (1.6%) and Denmark (1.2%). Norway is in the top half of NATO as far as percentage of GDP. Denmark is not.
Sweden, Finland, and Iceland are not NATO members.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 9:46 pm to lostinbr
That's okay we'll settle for the social democracy that they have.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 9:48 pm to YipSkiddlyDooo
quote:
Norway got rich off of "nationalized" oil production (yes, I know their offshore production isn't owned entirely by the state but they funnel everything through the state via offshore licenses and their state-owned company).
Yeah, any discussion on this subject that neglects to mention the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund or the fact that Norway’s government owns almost 70% of Statoil is a little disingenuous.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 10:06 pm to WaWaWeeWa
Nm
This post was edited on 7/30/18 at 10:10 pm
Posted on 7/30/18 at 10:12 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:
That is just the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The whole point is to go Single Payer which basically just illiminates Insurance Company profits. That inherently would make more economic sense for everyone involved who isn't a CEO of an insurance company
You are an idiot if you think the problem with Healthcare costs are insurance company profits.
Is that really your solution to what ails American healthcare?
Posted on 7/30/18 at 11:05 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
Give me one example of govnerment running an industry more efficiently than the private sector
quote:
Healthcare
So the VA is run more efficiently than Kaiser?
Are you retarded?
Posted on 7/30/18 at 11:49 pm to TheHarahanian
quote:
I believe leftists here want a "generous welfare state" aka rampant Marxism, but are calling that socialism. It's thievery under any name.
Ironic because conservatives like you want a welfare state, the only difference being a corporate welfare state where the rich and corporations play by different rules and don’t pay their taxes, not to mention buying our democracy. That welfare costs this country many times more than social welfare.
For what it’s worth, Scandinavian countries are far for socialist than we are and they are far ahead of us in almost every meaningful metric. Nobody has called for complete socialism in the US or for government ownership of business. I hope you remember your hatred of socialism when it comes time for your Social Security and Medicare, picking up your garbage, delivering your mail, or funding the military, to name just a few.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 11:55 pm to HTDawg
quote:
the only difference being a corporate welfare state where the rich and corporations play by different rules and don’t pay their taxe
who is advocating for giving rich people and corporations tax money?
In reality, "the rich" pay the vast majority of taxes in America, far above the share of income they earn. On the other hand, all poor households and a sizeable portion of middle class households ACTUALLY GET MONEY BACK from the IRS.
Posted on 7/30/18 at 11:57 pm to HTDawg
quote:
Ironic because conservatives like you want a welfare state, the only difference being a corporate welfare state where the rich and corporations play by different rules and don’t pay their taxes,
That's pure leftist fantasy
quote:
hope you remember your hatred of socialism when it comes time for your Social Security and Medicare, picking up your garbage, delivering your mail, or funding the military, to name just a few.
Oh dear god
This post was edited on 7/31/18 at 12:00 am
Posted on 7/31/18 at 12:00 am to HTDawg
Where do they teach you that corporation and "the rich" pay no taxes?
Bernies school of fairy tales?
Bernies school of fairy tales?
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:07 am to SDVTiger
quote:
There it is.
400bil cost in cali at 39mil ppl same as Canada
I don't understand what you're not getting about this. I'm talking about eliminating insurance companies. We're just removing profit from the equation.
I don't think People's Health is something other people should be able to monetize in such a way. Some things are better left to the community.
Republicans swear that everything should be privatized but it doesn't always work. Look at privatized jails.
quote:
What would the cost be for 325mil ppl in this country what is the tax amount needed to pay for this
I'm going to go with slightly less than we pay now.
quote:
You already pay for Obamacare.
Not anymore
"On Dec. 22, President Donald Trump did indeed sign a sweeping tax bill that repeals the Affordable Care Act's tax penalty by zeroing out the fines.
Opponents of the tax penalty rejoiced, and many, like Rick, Patrick and Michael, assumed it took effect immediately.
Not so. The penalty won't go away until 2019, and that means you still will owe Uncle Sam if you didn't have health insurance — or an exemption from the mandate — in 2017. The same holds true for this year."
Are you ever right?
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:13 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Because savings from removing insurance company profits will be offset probably 5 fold by the increase in costs due to inefficiency, waste, and corruption in a government run healthcare system.
Yeah but no. You say it would be more corrupt but I don't think that it's possible to me more corrupt than insurance companies. Also don't like leaving my life and treatment in the hands of someone who would like to not pay out on my behalf because it hurts their bottom line.
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:29 am to Ebbandflow
quote:I am not trying to be rude dude, but do you realize health insurance profit margins are on average below 3%, which is not at all high compared to other industries across the economy?
Ebbandflow
Approximately 97% of the money you pay an insurance company is not going to it's coffers, it is going to pay for its costs.
If you want to attack profit in healthcare, attack pharma and medical device companies, not insurance companies.
Unless you think a 3% return is too high.
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:33 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
I am not trying to be rude dude, but do you realize health insurance profit margins are on average below 3%, which is not at all high compared to other industries across the economy?
Approximately 97% of the money you pay an insurance company is not going to it's coffers, it is going to pay for its costs.
If you want to attack profit in healthcare, attack pharma and medical device companies, not insurance companies.
Unless you think a 3% return is too high.
Well 3% is higher than zero. Probably a lot of wages at the top that would be shaved substantially as well.
quote:
attack pharma and medical device companies
Them also.
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:37 am to Ebbandflow
quote:It is higher than zero obviously, but it simply is not at all a large player in total health care costs. Health insurance profits make up a grand total of about 0.5% of total health spending in America. I don't think a policy that only reduces our spending by 0.5% is a very good policy.
Well 3% is higher than zero. Probably a lot of wages at the top that would be shaved substantially as well.
Posted on 7/31/18 at 2:54 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
As Obamacare twists in political winds, top insurers made $6 billion (not that there is anything wrong with that).
I would prefer not to have privatization in things involving my life and insurance.
I would prefer not to have privatization in things involving my life and insurance.
Posted on 7/31/18 at 4:41 am to Revelator
The point that should jump out and slap leftists in the face when they read that article is this one:
quote:
It was not the government benefits that created wealth, but wealth that allowed the luxury of such generous government programs [in the first place].
Posted on 7/31/18 at 5:01 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
You are such a dumbass. How does the number of people make any difference? That is just the dumbest thing I've ever heard. The whole point is to go Single Payer which basically just illiminates Insurance Company profits. That inherently would make more economic sense for everyone involved who isn't a CEO of an insurance company
This is the classic debate and there are three things to think about:
(1) Can the private sector run something efficiently enough such that they can still offer a lower price than the public option even after paying taxes and making a profit?
If the answer to (1) is no, you then have to ask:
(2) Even if the public sector can do it cheaper, would the lack of market forces cause them to provide a product that is as good (in terms of quality, not price) as the private sector option would have been?
I know of quite a few examples of the government offering a service more cheaply than the private sector. I also know that many of those examples involve sub-par services that are below the standard most citizens would happily pay more for.
Finally, there’s (3), which is closely related to (1):
(3) Can you trust the government won’t waste the funds they need to operate the program effectively? Will this much extra cash flowing through FedGov inevitably lead to an increase in corruption?
Last I checked, Scandinavia isn’t known for government corruption and domineering special interests. To give the bureaucratic class in Washington access to the power and resources that would come with a publicly-operated healthcare system is simply horrifying to me.
This post was edited on 7/31/18 at 5:03 am
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News