We live in a society

submitted by Orangutan from i.redd.it

all 42 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

If there's one thing I think the US was missing, it's economic advice from someone making £250 a month.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Another thing that the US is lacking is decent healthcare. US Infant Mortality Rate Higher Than Other Wealthy Countries.

The US pays the most money, for the poorest quality care among wealthy nations.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

tho the infant mortality is high due to vaccines. SIDS is caused by this

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

SIDS is a recent phenomena. This is my conclusion, as well.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They make more than that. It's 4% of income tax. Tax laws are really complicated, but I make it around £2237.50 a month, give or take £80, in order for 4% of their income tax (about 20% for everything over a certain amount) to be £10 if they live in Scotland. Source

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

5% of your cheque‽ Imagine how good the health care that could buy would be!

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Wow. More cheerleader support for the corporate health care vendors. Imagine that...
I'm seeing a trend.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

More cheerleader support for the corporate health care vendors.

Sorry it came across that way. Given that the cited NHS (Scotland) was 4% * income tax (significantly less than 100% unless you're rich), I was saying that a flat rate of 5% of your pay would fund a much better national health service. The NHS, if you weren't aware, is currently having a bit of a funding crisis because the government-in-power cut all of its funding and then got distracted by Brexit.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

So it's a self-induced crisis.
Get a yellow vest and head to the streets.

It's still better then a greed induced corporate crisis that forces the middle-class into bankruptcy, and punishes the poor for being poor.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Get a yellow vest and head to the streets.

It's not quite that bad yet. We're mostly focused on not wrecking the economy at the moment – those who are politically active, that is. (There's a surprising amount of disagreement about how to do that.)

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's far worse than should be tollerated. The economy is rigged, and the only way to fix it is to head to the streets.

I'm close to certain that a depression was planned for this very moment, but they didn't anticipate Trump. Hillary was part of the scam.

If they crash it now, then Trump will call out the FED (he already has) for the fraud that it is, and the people force congress to change the game.

They're barely keeping a lid on the system. Power does reside with the people.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Erm. Not quite sure how to respond to this. Try reading some anti-Trump news; your faith in a particular leader doesn't really fall well with your general criticism of The System, so I don't see how you're not experiencing cognitive dissonance.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Trigger warning:

Try reading some anti-Trump news; your faith in a particular leader doesn't really fall well with your general criticism of The System.

I do not have a "leader", as you put it. Nor do I have "faith" in any "leader". I simply support/condemn policies on a case by case basis. If a given politician has a historical record of better policies, then I may support that candidate.

The Fed is an illegitimate institution of banksters.
Trump has criticized the Fed on numerous occasions. I am unaware of any president since Kennedy criticising the Fed. This presents an rare opportunity for economic progress.

Most Americans are unaware of what the Fed actually is, or how it operates. I strongly suspect that you are also unaware.

The Fed magically conjures money into existence, and then charges the US interest for every dollar created with this magic trick.

If the public actual understood that they are being robbed by the Fed with every dollar created, then they would force Congress to dismantle the Fed.

Americans harbor deep resentment for the Obama administrations financial betrayal. Trump has a platform to remind the public who it was that betrayed them, and why they were betrayed (the banksterers own the Democrats).

Inducing a recession could/would be catastrophic for the banksters.

No cognitive dissonance required. Rather, an informed world view.

You need to get with the program.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Trump has criticized the Fed on numerous occasions.

He's criticised everyone. I'm tempted to claim it "mere prattle without practice", because he hasn't made policies against it. Saying "Oh, this is so, so bad." is all well and good, but doing something about it is another matter.

Trump has a platform to remind the public who it was that betrayed them.

I'd be inclined to say that he reminds the public of whatever keeps him in power.

views expressed by me do not necessarily represent my views.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

K

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

turns out buying in bulk and cutting out the middleman has cost savings

[–]SundogsPlace 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (21 children)

I'll call it, Leftist Self Defeating Propaganda. Forget costs, a scorpion vaccine in Mexico, $100, same exact vaccine in the good ole USA, something like $26,000.

See the scam? Someone's going into anaphylactic shock, they either die, or get something, anything, in this case just several thousand percent more than the original profit margin. Keep your crap authoritarianism, I mean socialism, I apologize :)

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Why not revert to the social-capitalism of the early 20th century US that was so successful?

Instead we've gone back to the robber baron capitalism of the guilded age.

[–]SundogsPlace 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm strictly free market. There are some things I think should be socialized, like natural resources in many instances. Oil, and natural gas are great examples, they drill a well in one area, then pollute the entire area underground, as well above ground with pollutants; where's the compensation for those suffering from the effects? To further that thought, oil, usually when disaster strikes, the 'fix', is always socialized, but the profit is kept private.

For things like oil, I could see companies renting a patch of land, or paying back like what's done in Alaska.

Another reason I'm not for organized big medicine, or socialized, is I feel treatments are too restrictive. Allopathic medicine treats the part; basically changing the proverbial oil, or replace the part; where by (W)holistic treats the entire body as a complete unit; which I lean towards for myself. I think if it were socialized, allopathic would 'rule the day, by enforcement via color of law'; in turn potentially destroying other less toxic holistic treatments.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Agreed. It's easy to forget that we have been brainwashed into a different notion of what free economics actually means..

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

All of our economic problems can be traced back to Nixon taking us off the gold backed dollar in the 70s. Before that everything was peachy and it just got worse and worse.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problems started with the creation of the Fed. Private banks rule the nation, and the citizens pay them interest for every dollar created. The biggest scam ever.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

need price controls as well. also need more doctors so their average salary goes down. AMA is a guild.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Doctors are not overpaid. The healthcare vendor system is overpaid.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

both overpaid. the reason doctors are overpaid tho is supply and demand, not that many of them, high need for their services. AMA only allows so many students into med schools each year, they need to expand it. also hospitals are in collusion, need to nationalize them along with universal single payer

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They are also paid because they sacrifice their entire youth by dedicating it to medicine.

  • You need straight A's in college (sacrifice 18-23)
  • Dedication to med school (sacrifice 23-27)
  • Tortured abuse of residency for $40K/year and +80 hours of work/week (sacrifice 27- 29/31)
  • Fellowship (optional) not so bad, but $45K/yr when you could make more

When all is said and done they've committed an addtional 8-12 continuous years to medicine before they start making money.
On top of that they have about $250,000 in debt (unless their parents have that kind of money collecting dust).

This is not a trivial sacrifice.

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You think nationalizing them will make them less in collusion? Why would you think that?

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The healthcare vendor system is monopolistic because of regulatory capture. They have more of a free market in Mexico, which is why Americans keep going over there for cheaper care.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Rockefeller medicine ruined healthcare.

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Price controls don't work. Look at rent costs before and after price controls for easy examples of what happens.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

work great. just need to expand em. Guessing you mean rent in NYC? Just some of them are rent controlled and grandfathered in. That rent is too damn high guy was right.

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I mean everywhere price controls are implemented. Watch what happens in Oregon. It's going to be a disaster.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

they'll be fine the only problem is the rich who own corporations make less money when they have to sell stuff for less but who cares

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

a scorpion vaccine

Despite scorpion toxin being useful in vaccines, I think you meant "antivenom".

To address your actual point, wouldn't the government paying for the medicines mean that the profit margins go down? Because they'd be bulk-buying and able to order from the people charging less evil prices for life-saving medicines, in bulk?

I totally agree that they're charging too much, just because they can – which is another reason I support the abolition of medicine patents. Money from taxing medicines – which would be cheaper with actual competition, could go towards funding public-domain development. Or another, better plan.

[–]SundogsPlace 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't support the abolition of any patents; I'm not a Communist, and doing so will eliminate motivation to invent, or research cures, and treatments. The scorpion vaccine is just one I know of where by once it hits the USA's oligarchy of control, the price sky rockets.

I'm actually anti Big Pharma, Big AMA, and Allopathic medicine. It's a total crock of horse crap. There's many accounts of when doctors strike, the death rates go down; now the debate there, is whether it's due to people not dying from elective surgeries, or seriously from the doctors not working.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Eliminating patents will eliminate motivation to invent, or research the kinds of thing that pharmaceutical companies can profit from. There are classes of medicines that they don't research at all, because they can't profit from them before the patent expires. Replacing the patents with another motivation, e.g. funding independent research groups, is conceivably a viable strategy.

You've got what seem to me to be contradictory beliefs.

[–]SundogsPlace 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's not the patent per se, it's the regulations that keep many people out of the game in the first place. It's the governmental authorities also blocking alternative competition to the medical industrial complex.

Delete the patents, whoopie! They still have their own internal departments steering how the drugs are used, or approved. Take Ru-486, originally designed, and created for cancer; the drug had amazing abilities to stop cell replication-cancer growth....

What do they do with the drug??? it's the morning after pill.

All you do by removing patents, is remove any motivation.

And on this note, just because someone has a 'degree', a 'doctorate', or more, does that really mean their qualified? Absolutely not; we can hash through countless examples of malpractice, and even bad drugs that were pushed for no reason; Seroquel is a great example. The man behind this drug, and the dangers associated had manipulated it into for a short time, a drug handed out like SSRI's, or Statins.

bah.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks for explaining. (I hate being naïve.)

[–]HurkaDurka 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

As our obesity rates increase, the percentage we would need to pay would keep increasing. It would probably be at least 15% of our checks right now. And it will grow (like our citizens) every year. I would fully support a national medical system that excluded treatment for obesity/smoking/alcoholism induced disease. But that would be impossible to implement (and a bit immoral) so I'll stick to being on the fence with socializing our medial care.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

As our obesity rates increase, the percentage we would need to pay would keep increasing.

Part of the role of the NHS in the UK is health campaigns, e.g. Stoptober, Change4Life. So the percentage wouldn't increase, because the increase in your obesity rates would slow down. And honestly, your NMS would probably just go underfunded before taxes went up.

[–]HurkaDurka 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Obesity rates are steadily rising in the UK and they are the most obese country in Europe. And we can have campaigns without a NMS anyway. And we used to in the U.S. before we had all these pro-obesity campaigns... I'm not making an argument against NMS, just pointing out the severity of the obesity problems we are facing. I can't imagine where this is going to end. Well, extinction or mass death is what I imagine, but I hope we can stop it before that happens.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Obesity rates are steadily rising in the UK and they are the most obese country in Europe.

Oh, there are countries with much better healthcare. All of which, take note, are national. Compare any of these to the US and you find it lacking. So yeah, pretty shit, but better than the US.