Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf [not sent]
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * In New Zealand we have a national health-care scheme that has its origins mainly in a deal between the private medical sector (GPs etc, but excluding dentists, who refused to buy in) and the 1st Labour government in the 1930s. t was a classic part of Labour's 'rescue capitalism from itself' plan in the depression, but it did at least give us access to a hospital. It demonstrates all the inadequacies suggested by the two previous posters but still seems vastly better than a fully private (or Obamacare type) model. My wife has had ten operations (plus numerous scans etc) in the last ten years, one operation was private because her rich brother in law paid for it. This resulted mainly in avoiding a six-month wait. One was carried out in a private hospital because the specialist doctors tend to work in private practice for part of their time and do some hours in the state system, so the state sector farms some procedures out to the private hospitals. On at least one occasion she's had the same surgeon operate in both the private and public system. the public system is always struggling but I will say that once you are in (the system has accepted your GP's referral), you are in and we've found the staff to be really good. I'd take this system any day over the kind of abomination that passes for a hospital system in the States but it's still far from socialism. The alternative, largely insurance funded private system that runs parallel to the public hospitals doesn't cover accident and emergency and other high risk, low margin work, provides hotel style facilities with cable TV and blah blah blah, but increasingly we're seeing the same problems that the US faces with staff in the insurance companies being employed to find the loopholes (like "was this a pre-existing condition?" etc) to avoid paying out. Cheers, John On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 7:06 AM jgreen--- via Marxism < marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote: > POSTING RULES & NOTES > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > * > > On 24 Oct 2018 at 19:23, Ralph Johansen via Marxism wrote: > > >>> Thoughts on single payer which, no less than Medicare, is at best a > > way > > station to what everyone deserves as birthright: adequate preventive > > and > > curative health assistance, at commensurate costs which do not > > obscenely > > enrich a few. In other words, it's an arrangement which if > > implemented > > still masks serious shortcomings. Present single payer schemes from > > what > > I see would not at all disturb the over all regime of the > > pharmaceutical/medical complex in this country. ... > > Indeed! I strongly agree that the issue isn't simply financing the health > care, and > that single-payer would be simply one step forward, albeit a very > important one. > > Back in 2007 I prepared a chart comparing four different things, > * the present US system > * Calif. and Mass. plans > * national health care > * socialist medicine. > > See. > http://www.communistvoice.org/40cChart.html > > Being prepared before the ACA (Obamacare), it didn't include that. But it > provided > a framework that could deal with that as well. > > I prefaced it as follows: > > "A single-payer system of national health insurance would be a tremendous > advance on the present system, but it still will not be socialist care. It > will be > subject to cost containment and budget-cutting, as all social benefits > have been in > the period of neo-liberal economic restructuring of the last few decades, > and it will > be important for the working class to insist that national health > insurance is truly > universal and covers all residents of this country, including the > undocumented > immigrants. Meanwhile the California and Massachusetts plans would funnel > yet > more money to private insurers, have a hard time finding the money to do > so, > continue the privatization of social services, and despite their promises, > will not > solve the problem of universal coverage." > > And I elaborted on this in such articles such as "What would socialist > health care > be like?" I contrasted a truly socialist system with capitalist medicine > on such > topics as > > -Universal coverage vs. private insurance > -The limits of single-payer plans and national health care > -It's still connected to profit > -What is socialism? > -Universality > -Preventive care > -Two-tier care > -At the work place > -Pollution >
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf [not sent]
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * On 24 Oct 2018 at 19:23, Ralph Johansen via Marxism wrote: >>> Thoughts on single payer which, no less than Medicare, is at best a > way > station to what everyone deserves as birthright: adequate preventive > and > curative health assistance, at commensurate costs which do not > obscenely > enrich a few. In other words, it's an arrangement which if > implemented > still masks serious shortcomings. Present single payer schemes from > what > I see would not at all disturb the over all regime of the > pharmaceutical/medical complex in this country. ... Indeed! I strongly agree that the issue isn't simply financing the health care, and that single-payer would be simply one step forward, albeit a very important one. Back in 2007 I prepared a chart comparing four different things, * the present US system * Calif. and Mass. plans * national health care * socialist medicine. See. http://www.communistvoice.org/40cChart.html Being prepared before the ACA (Obamacare), it didn't include that. But it provided a framework that could deal with that as well. I prefaced it as follows: "A single-payer system of national health insurance would be a tremendous advance on the present system, but it still will not be socialist care. It will be subject to cost containment and budget-cutting, as all social benefits have been in the period of neo-liberal economic restructuring of the last few decades, and it will be important for the working class to insist that national health insurance is truly universal and covers all residents of this country, including the undocumented immigrants. Meanwhile the California and Massachusetts plans would funnel yet more money to private insurers, have a hard time finding the money to do so, continue the privatization of social services, and despite their promises, will not solve the problem of universal coverage." And I elaborted on this in such articles such as "What would socialist health care be like?" I contrasted a truly socialist system with capitalist medicine on such topics as -Universal coverage vs. private insurance -The limits of single-payer plans and national health care -It's still connected to profit -What is socialism? -Universality -Preventive care -Two-tier care -At the work place -Pollution -Elitism -Overmedicated. -Poverty -Workers must put their stamp on the health system See http://www.communistvoice.org/40cCompare.html -- Joseph Green --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * It seems to me the other important point to make about this "report" is that the attempt to use GDP as the way to measure the "better" well being of Americans vs. the populations of the Nordic countries is to remind anyone who reads the "report" (or journalists who write about it) that what is left out are all the collectively provided goods in the Nordic countries that because they don't go through the "market" they show up as a lower "value" for GDP -- whereas because (for example) our health care system is private there is an artificially high "value" created for their products --- the over=pricing of pharmaceuticals due to patents, the over pricing of medical services due to artificiallly created shortages of medical professionals ---the lack of decent public transportation systems leading to overconsumption of individual motor vehicles and fuel --- etc. etc. Which then permits a real examination of all the work done by the Stiglitz-Sen commission on how to TRULY measure human well being --- AND FINALLY --- since the key to socialism however defined is the human instinct for collective solutions to problems --- the ONLY way to prevent climate induced disaster (or to survive it without a turn towards total barbarism or a worse than fascism centralized set of mini-governments wherever humans survive) is for some form of socialism to come to the fore. > > > > > > > > > > > > _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf [not sent]
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * MM wrote "“The Trump chart doesn’t say what the White House seems to think it says,” Kliff concludes. “It isn’t telling us that single-payer healthcare has long wait times. If anything, it says that it is possible to build a single-payer system with short wait times—and our Medicare program has already done it.”” https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/10/buried-hilariously-stupid-white-house-attack-socialism-accidentally-strong-argument-medicare.html Thoughts on single payer which, no less than Medicare, is at best a way station to what everyone deserves as birthright: adequate preventive and curative health assistance, at commensurate costs which do not obscenely enrich a few. In other words, it's an arrangement which if implemented still masks serious shortcomings. Present single payer schemes from what I see would not at all disturb the over all regime of the pharmaceutical/medical complex in this country. We might come to the point where we are universally protecting each others' health, as best we think we can, through an insurance scheme into which everyone pays who is able, similar to any practical solution to a common problem like auto and accident or unemployment insurance. But at what hidden taxed costs, increased social rot and ill-health, profit-taking and related gross inefficiencies? What do about systematic inflated charges, over billing, the many overpaid (possibly many overburdened) doctors in a system of guild restrictions on entry (now mitigated to the limited extent that substantial returns on investment allow by a less-trained phalanx of physicians' assistants and nurse practitioners)? What about over-reliance on allopathic, chemical-based medicine to the virtual exclusion of serious peer-reviewed research on and evaluation of naturopathic, herb-based and other possibly more effective types of medicine, and the need for much greater emphasis on nutrition, preventive care, and on the ways in which the toxics in our food and environment combine to undermine health - - not to mention the undermining effects of social inequality? What do about the bloated and rapidly increasing profits of clinics, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, government-funded or subsidized institutional and university research labs, all the others who benefit from the profit-making subsidized, proprietary and other rights built into medical, biological, and other health-related research and marketing? All of which are hidden beneath any current health scheme. This may be one reason that the medical-industrial complex might ultimately accede inasmuch as profit-taking will still be there, on stilts, protected with all necessary caution in back-filling increments which protect their flanks, as they have to an extent elsewhere. How has that worked for the Scandinavian countries, or UK, France, Canada? Another factor that is important where I live: care supply. What of the fact that, in small rural communities such as mine, hundreds and thousands of people cannot find a doctor to care for them? Doctors typically seek out remunerative regions in which to plant their practice, those large urban complexes with attractive returns on their investment in education, more comfortable amenities and better prospects for their children. Among patchwork remedies might be that medical schools require as a condition of scholarships or lightening the debt load for an education in medicine, or the federal government requires as a condition of license to practice, that on some equitable basis doctors do a far more extended period of service than mandated so far, or mandate total career commitment, to under-served communities. That includes most especially under-served, more populous communities in urban areas. Without some better equalizing arrangement we in poorer, less well-educated, isolated communities have neither the local means nor infrastructure to bring in competent medical staff and facilities in sufficient quantity and quality to maintain our health. (And by the way, is it possible that any adequate solution to our social and polluting environmental problems will mean extensive dispersal to underpopulated areas, exacerbating this problem as well?) The result of course is that rural health and that of poor urban regions lags far behind. Looking for solutions brings up Cuba. Although I have little information from what I see they are gradually being forced into the capitalist, profit-oriented medical system, particularly as it applies to r and pharma trade and and
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * > On Oct 23, 2018, at 6:13 PM, Louis Proyect via Marxism > wrote: > > Weird. "But a look beyond the CEA’s hysterical rants against socialism’s supposedly totalitarian nature reveals that the White House accidentally makes a strong case for Medicare for All, which the paper describes as the “headline American socialist proposal.” "After attempting to discredit single-payer healthcare programs—which multiple polls now show most Republicanvoters support—as “similar in spirit to Lenin and Mao,” the CEA produced a chart showing short wait times for seniors under the current U.S. healthcare system compared to those under the Canadian and Nordic systems. "As Vox‘s Sarah Kliff notes, the CEA conveniently omits the fact that “America’s seniors are essentially in a single-payer system”: it’s called Medicare. "“The Trump chart doesn’t say what the White House seems to think it says,” Kliff concludes. “It isn’t telling us that single-payer healthcare has long wait times. If anything, it says that it is possible to build a single-payer system with short wait times—and our Medicare program has already done it.”” https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2018/10/buried-hilariously-stupid-white-house-attack-socialism-accidentally-strong-argument-medicare.html _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Fascinating... I will keep chiseling away at the edifice Dr Ismail LagardienVisiting ProfessorWits University School of Governance Nihil humani a me alienum puto On Wednesday, 24 October 2018, 05:10:07 GMT+2, RKOB via Marxism wrote: POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Yes weird, but very interesting that our enemies feel the need to polemicize against the idea of "socialism". Also the Guardian article reflects that the idea of "socialism" ins more and more on the table. Yes, all this is still confused, unclear, not organized. These are clear (and positive) indications of ideological shifts among sectors of the masses. Am 24.10.2018 um 00:13 schrieb Louis Proyect via Marxism: > POSTING RULES & NOTES > #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. > #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. > * > > Weird. > > https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf > > > _ > Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm > Set your options at: > http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/aktiv%40rkob.net > -- Revolutionär-Kommunistische Organisation BEFREIUNG (Österreichische Sektion der RCIT, www.thecommunists.net) www.rkob.net ak...@rkob.net Tel./SMS/WhatsApp/Telegram: +43-650-4068314 --- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/ilagardien%40yahoo.com _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
Re: [Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Yes weird, but very interesting that our enemies feel the need to polemicize against the idea of "socialism". Also the Guardian article reflects that the idea of "socialism" ins more and more on the table. Yes, all this is still confused, unclear, not organized. These are clear (and positive) indications of ideological shifts among sectors of the masses. Am 24.10.2018 um 00:13 schrieb Louis Proyect via Marxism: POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Weird. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/aktiv%40rkob.net -- Revolutionär-Kommunistische Organisation BEFREIUNG (Österreichische Sektion der RCIT, www.thecommunists.net) www.rkob.net ak...@rkob.net Tel./SMS/WhatsApp/Telegram: +43-650-4068314 --- Diese E-Mail wurde von Avast Antivirus-Software auf Viren geprüft. https://www.avast.com/antivirus _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
[Marxism] The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf
POSTING RULES & NOTES #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. * Weird. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/The-Opportunity-Costs-of-Socialism.pdf _ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
