Leave a comment

philmophlegm October 2 2013, 12:22:09 UTC
Wouldn't "socialized healthcare" be where the healthcare providers were owned by the workers, or at a stretch, the state? So Reagan's requirement that private healthcare providers have to treat people doesn't make that "socialized", but then neither does Medicare, or Obamacare. (And for that matter, neither does the healthcare systems of those developed countries which have private insurance or privately-owned hospitals, unless the owners of the hospitals are the workers.)

Reply

andrewducker October 2 2013, 12:23:48 UTC
I think that, in this case, they're using the US definition of "socialized" which means that the government gets to tell you to do something.

After all, if the government tells you that you have to treat people for free then it's effectively taken ownership of some of your means of production.

Reply

cartesiandaemon October 2 2013, 13:03:37 UTC
As it was explained to me, in America, "socialism" means "communism" and "communism" means "festering pustule on the nipple of Satan".

Reply

apostle_of_eris October 2 2013, 17:34:09 UTC
yes

Reply

apostle_of_eris October 2 2013, 17:33:44 UTC
yes

Reply


Leave a comment

Up