[hootyhoo]

Basically Socialism offers a sort of safety net, but also allows you to find your own path to success.

That's the problem with socialism. While it may allow for a path to success, many people would rather lie comfotably in the safety net.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[lssanjose]

The problem with many welfare programs is the disincentive to go above that line. Once that line's crossed, there goes the freebie. Things do need to have strings attached, but some are willing to stay attached; and may do anything to keep it.

[JRSCCivic98]

In order to have universal health care as an example, those that don't are given from those that have. Something people call wealth redistribution.

And if you think universal health care is a good thing (and I'm not saying you do think this way), a little beancounter in the government is deciding how much your life is worth and if and when you can get the needed treatment.

That wouldn't be needed if doctors (surgeons) wouldn't charge $95,000 for some back surgery.... and then break down and because they feel in the giving mood accept the $55,000 that insurance is going to pay for it. Oh, did I mention that those same doctors usually contribute to about 6 surgeries of the same type during the same day?

So, you tell me... is that overcharging or is he just trying to pay back his medical school loans? Give me a fracking break... there's people who don't have houses that cost $95,000, let alone able to afford surgeries that cost that much. The system is screwed up big time guys, like it or not.

[lssanjose]

Nope, maybe trying to help pay off certain overhead to do the job. I remember working retail, and it was told to us, "if we wanted more hours, we had to sell more product." In the same vein, that cost will probably go to the maintenance of the hospital (I hope), its equipment; operating costs, worker salaries; supplies; etc. Again, this is what's hoped. There may be shady hospitals here, and there, but I'd like to hope these were only a microcrosm to the greater whole.

[i7guy]

That wouldn't be needed if doctors (surgeons) wouldn't charge $95,000 for some back surgery.... and then break down and because they feel in the giving mood accept the $55,000 that insurance is going to pay for it. Oh, did I mention that those same doctors usually contribute to about 6 surgeries of the same type during the same day?

So, you tell me... is that overcharging or is he just trying to pay back his medical school loans? Give me a fracking break... there's people who don't have houses that cost $95,000, let alone able to afford surgeries that cost that much. The system is screwed up big time guys, like it or not.

I don't begrudge the doctors anything, its a long hard road to becoming a physician with a speciality. Do you think you can find a good neurosurgeon who gets paid 30 hour? If you had a brain hemmorage wouldn't you want the best surgeon moneys could buy.

The issue is the legal system, and medical malpractice rates. There are already concerns of a doctor shortage.

While some litigation deserves the award, awarding a huge some of money to say the person who got burned because she put a hit cup of coffee between her legs, deserves the darwinian award not $500K.

So I think a doctor should be able to charge what the market will pay. Free enterprise. Sports heros, rock stars can earn their millions. So can you.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[lssanjose]

I don't begrudge the doctors anything, its a long hard road to becoming a physician with a speciality. Do you think you can find a good neurosurgeon who gets paid 30 hour? If you had a brain hemmorage wouldn't you want the best surgeon moneys could buy.

The issue is the legal system, and medical malpractice rates. There are already concerns of a doctor shortage.

While some litigation deserves the award, awarding a huge some of money to say the person who got burned because she put a hit cup of coffee between her legs, deserves the darwinian award not $500K.

So I think a doctor should be able to charge what the market will pay. Free enterprise. Sports heros, rock stars can earn their millions. So can you.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

I couldn't have said that any better.

[grahamf]

There's a big difference in taxing ourselves for the common good and safety of such things as education, fire and police and giving direct handouts to individuals in the form of welfare.

In what way? You only get free education if you have kids, you only get firefighting service if your house is on fire, you only get police if your house is being robbed, and you only get welfare if you cannot survive on your current income (and have a reason why you can't get a better job- either because your ill or it's temporary or something). It's like disability insurance, but without the company escaping via loopholes.

That's the problem with socialism. While it may allow for a path to success, many people would rather lie comfotably in the safety net.

One of my mom's friends is an "artist" living on UI after ten years of education university courses. She claims that working is "uninspirational" and "detrimental to her being a successful artist." She lives in a little town in the middle Northern BC. Her house is essentially a wreak, she uses candles to heat it in the winter, and she grows her own food in a little garden.
And by your definition, she's "lying comfotably in the safety net."

[lssanjose]

Well, the thing is, she made the choice to live the way she did. As you stated, she said working was uninspirational, and detrimental to her being a successful artist. Could she have made her stuff more profitable (not say she didn't try, but all indications lead to such)? Possibly.

[Gawain]

That's weird... I don't remember seeing anyone complaining about forcing these content companies to help pay for the landline buildout when the Internet WANs were being implemented.

This is nothing but more of the Mobile Carrier BS that they think they're entitled to. All they want is to charge people too much for their service, get paid for their service, have someone else pay for their network buildouts, and go golfing. Screw that.... Each company should be responsible for their own "costs of doing business", whatever they may be. It's become all too normal for every company out there to just offset those costs to the consumers and THAT'S NOT RIGHT!!! This BS needs to stop!

European operators have much tighter controls from EU regulatory bodies, and have the added pinch of being a region with subscriber ratios are over 100%...so, they're grabbing at whatever they think they can get away with. Frankly, I'm surprised things like this aren't already in place in Europe, everything else is taxed, VAT, fees, et al...not too different from the US now that I think about it...

[grahamf]

Well, the thing is, she made the choice to live the way she did. As you stated, she said working was uninspirational, and detrimental to her being a successful artist. Could she have made her stuff more profitable (not say she didn't try, but all indications lead to such)? Possibly.

I suppose she could, if she actually produced anything that sells, let alone paints anything.