Why u.s. does not have health care

U.s. is a heterogeneous country, which means, that there are immigrants, people, and ethnic groups from everywhere. There are many different races and everybody of every kind. Because of this fact, people are not going to agree on much. And people do not feel familiar with each other. This eventually grows into distrust, strangeness, and disdain. People don’t know each other. Everybody is strangers. And even tribal loyalty and familiarity is undermined, by western liberalism. For example, white people are taught “white guilt” and males are shamed into submission. You are not supposed to be proud of your own kind, unless you’re a minority, non-white. This allows minority groups and foreign, non-white people some degree of flexibility that white people in the u.s. do not have.

Familiarity is important in a society, representing Homogeneity, because when you are a family, you care for the health of the members.

Let me repeat that for those who are hard of hearing, hard of reading, and hard of learning…

When you are a family, you care for the health of the members.

Because u.s. has an anti-familial society, people do not think of each-other, or view strangers, as “Part of my family”. Liberalism goes further, supporting divorces, “non-traditional marriages”, homosexuality, and other values that undermine familial loyalty. So on top of a nation of “rainbow people” there is a culture of liberalism, which pushes everything into the direction of Anti-Family.

So it’s no wonder that u.s. cannot agree on, and half do not support, a national healthcare system. People don’t care about each other’s lives (“Individualism”). Why should a complete stranger care about another complete stranger, when there is nothing familiar about him/her, and that the cost of healthcare cannot support everybody? So one person thinks that it’s better off somebody else dies from lack of healthcare, improving the chance that him/herself can afford and have healthcare. A selfish society, caused by the anti-familial foundation.

Homogeneous societies have healthcare down pat. Scandinavian countries have very high taxes, but, you don’t have to worry about being rejected from hospitals when you’re sick. You don’t have to worry about a lifetime of bankruptcy. East Asian countries, although many parts are poor, have solid social foundations to help and treat sick individuals. Since all are considered family, and all are family in the way that these are “racially solid” societies, unlike u.s.

Much of the cause of anti-familial sentiment comes from a deeply fragmented and foreign people. Liberalism is necessary in the u.s. otherwise there would be much more conflict and violence among the varying races and ethnic groups. Liberalism is an ideology meant to strip people of their individual and tribal identities, whittling social groups into “individuals” that are easier to indoctrinate, control, and enslave. People are easiest to manipulate as individuals, because they have no reinforcement. They have no families or tribes to rescue them. This is an essential aspect of liberalism.

But Nature and instinct is strong. People seek out their own kind, and join together, when times are tough. This fact was combated in the u.s. by “anti-segregation” laws. Whites segregated into their own groups, especially in the South, and blacks among themselves as well. Anti-segregation is another step in the wrong direction. Anti-segregation culture in the u.s. means that all people, everybody gets mashed together into one classroom, one society. This is how the u.s. public education system works. And it is why private school is so highly demanded. In public school, boys and girls are forced together (which is an inferior mode of education), races are forced together too. This all leads to a “tolerant” culture and society.

But tolerant does not mean familiar. Despite liberalism and anti-segregation, the u.s. does not consist of a solid “nation of people”. For a nation of people, a solid unity, where people genuinely care about each other, and would save one another from death, and would treat each other with healthcare, then you must look to homogeneity, Scandinavia, East Asia, and other countries where one race, or one ethnic group dominates.

There’s a few reasons for this.

  1. Fulltime employment that pays a good income for the majority of the working class is very rare where there is a large segment of the population unable to pay for their own health insurance.

  2. Insurance companies and hospital administrations have a monopoly on healthcare which makes the price for medical care skyrocket.

  3. Shortage of practicing doctors or physicians.

  4. The stranglehold by pharmaceutical companies on medicine have also in monopoly have made medical treatment or medicine skyrocket in price.

Do you think healthcare should be private or public?

Should people be taxed, and that money goes into “healthcare for everybody”? Or should they not, and allow health insurance companies to bulk up, monopolize, and dictate who lives and who dies? Health insurance has become so bloated as to become corrupt and deadly.

Thanks to health insurance companies in the u.s. going to the emergency room and taking a tylenol can cost you $2,000.

What’s the solution to that?

It would be interesting if citizens formed a medical coalition, structured their own health policies, formed their own types of insurance, and rented all the equipment and personnel needed to run a metropolitan operation.

People in the USA pay higher accumulative taxes (everything here is taxed several times over)than any other nation in the world and have less to show for it in regards to education and healthcare. Could a strong sense of national identity in the US, the family of a nation, bring its crazy people together in cooperation to take back the reins of its government, its laws, and the American dream way of life?

If a corrupt government is sacking its people both directly and indirectly, the people need to shut the government out and go their own way until they can drain the swamp themselves.

Privatisation versus nationalization is the biggest debate of our century in economics concerning civilization. There is no easy answer for either choice as both are equally fundamentally flawed.

Both ideas have fundamental problems inherent within them. I would say that I support a mixed economy but ultimately human nature being what it is human beings always find ways of making other human beings miserable by that of massive exploitation.

If more people were familiar and socializing, rather than individualistic and chasing independence “the american dream”, then at the very least, people would care about each other at least a little bit more.

Independence and “Society” don’t mix. Society implies that many, or the bulk of a group, are and will always be ‘Dependents’ upon a system.

The problem with socialization or nationalization is financing, eventually you run out of other people’s money. Then there is massive corruption and embezzlement of public money by government regulators not to mention also great financial waste concerning centralization through bureaucracy. National taxation runs into many problems.

Of course privatisation isn’t all that better by comparison either. There are no easy solutions to this ongoing problem.

What is “the American dream” to you? To me, it was great job opportunities and personal freedoms, a nice married couple with three kids, a nice house with a white picket fence, neighborhood involvement, extended family relations and get-togethers, a belief system based on common sense and the golden rule, money saved, money invested.

The American dream is dead, all that is left is a nightmare of epic proportions which becomes worse daily. Only naive childish buffoons believe in such dribble anymore.

That’s true. But I would say that the U.S. is in the process of homogenization. People who cannot become “grey” will simply die out. Then there will be no conflict between people. You’re all gonna be one big “grey” family. You need to get rid of the identitarians first. And in order to do that, you need to get rid of this ideal of unlimited freedom. You can’t let people freely choose their partners. You must teach them, using whatever means, to choose their partners in a balanced way. Bias must be punished. If a white man is only interested in white women, that’s a clear case of bias and racism, so he must be punished. He needs a more balanced choice of partners. Your parents are black and your grandparents are white? Well, you must marry an Asian or a Native American or someone else who is not black or white.

#-o :laughing:

I need to do more than complain about what seems lost, what about you?

In Europe you will be forced by gunpoint to marry a woman wearing a burka. :laughing:

Solutions being?

How’s about all the homeless, seniors and mentally ill without ample healthcare, the underemployed and unemployed crash meet and greets with congressman nationwide? :-k It’d make for some interesting town halls.

I’m okay with coming up with plans, but I’m a better facilitator, like I could get transportation and boxed lunches/dinners set up for all these people to make it to the meetings in my state.

How’s about Trump rallies across the nation where Trump supporters votes could be recounted and his supporters could make demands of mainstream media by refusing to support any of their advertisers products when they report biased news in their typical anti-Trump fashion?

I have a lot of ideas but I’m not exactly sure of how to combat self-serving greed on a large scale.

I have healthcare and I live in the US so this thread is wrong.

What is the cost of your healthcare Mr.?