John,

>Doug
>
>First, Happy Christmas, I believe I am still allowed to wish you that.

*chuckle* You have my permission to wish me that any season of the year, should you so please. <s> I should hope I'd do the same for you sir. <s>

>
>>>The fundamental flaw of socialism is that while it's goals are laudible and usually considered more 'noble' than capitalism's goals of mere material wealth...<
>
>Socialised care is not socialism, many/most first world countries offering socialised healthcare are overtly capitalist.

?? <g>

So.. "for profit" health care is not capitalistic then? <g>

Ehrmmm.. Uhmm.. Uh.. John.... <g> Isn't that a bit of a mangling of meanings?

Ok.. How's this: socialized medicine is the bastard stepchild of socialism and socialistic thought.

<bg>

I think perhaps my dear friend that I have not been as clear as I ought to have been. I would think that capitalism (for profit) medicine, if not directly associated with the very non-capitalistic notion of "mercy" is a horrible monster at best. If examined from that point of view, well, yes, at least socialized medicine 'nods' towards the notion of compassion. True capitalism certainly only does so within the de Tocqueville'ish notion of "enlightened self interest" if viewed apart from the ever-so-obvious Judeo/Christian-based ethic of mercy, forgiveness and healing based upon the concept of self-denial. I suppose medicine sees no higher highs than the fabulously successful medical doctor abandoning their sources of wealth generation in order to voluntarily choose to serve those who are unable to recompense them in the normal terms.

My point all along has been the difference between socialized systems that compel doctors to care and who will utterly and ultimately fail miserably at this task and those who at least voluntarily choose to serve for reasons other than external compulsion(s).

A truly (only) capitalistic doctor must certainly be a brute, as would a corresponding system.

Perhaps those within a socialized system at least have the fantasy that they care more than those without whereas those within a capitalistic system may more honestly acknowledge that they are in it for the buck.

I have been remiss to remind one and all that from my point of view the symbol of the snake upon the pole is not one of allegory, but of an historical origin, and of huge metaphorical significance. I will presume that these you know unless you'd wish the explanation.

I suppose therefore I must admit that you are quite right in your assessment that even those within a socialised (sp? <g>) system are equally capitalistic. This much is true as human nature does not change based upon which of man's flawed political system it resides within. Socialized folks are equally as selfish by nature as are capitalized ones I suppose.

Only when the heart of the individual chooses to deny self and change will the corresponding political systems begin to reflect these changes indeed.

>
>>>In all of the world, what country's health care is considered the best?<<
>
>I guess it depends who is doing the considering. ;-)

LOL!! (see above!!!! <bg>)


Are you buying a Porsche Cayenne? If not, I imagine it is because you judge that its list of "features" includes things you don't need, or do not wish to pay so much for. Surely we agree that this does not automatically mean that your current car is deficient or that you are anti-capitalist. And surely you would resent having to pay the Cayenne price for your current car.
>
>It is reasonable to apply the same reasoning to healthcare. The US achieves a high level of care but most people are paying the Cayenne price to get the Mercury Mountaineer they want. This (rightly) worries your legislators. I would not be at all surprised to see existing HMO and federal rules, which FWIW are already more soviet than capitalist, starting to more and more resemble the socialised policies you seem to despise.

Certainly it is reasonable to apply the same reasoning. The problem, though, historically within socialized systems is that efficiencies are compelled, not desired. Compelled efficiency always will fall short of desired efficiency, even if the desire is borne of personal gain.

Here is tne US we pay a higher price for medical costs as a direct result of federal meddling and higher malpractice judgements, both of which are protected from the free market by fiat. In particular, the legal system is a case example for free enterprise if you examine it closely. It is currently weighted towards (Democratic donors many who give generously - here's the true 'key' if you examine it closely) rewarding 'winners' of these legal battles in such a fashion as to make tort law a huge growth industry.

As far as the federal angle goes it's ultimately all about power - pure and simple.


>
>Regards
>
>JR