Another example of socialism we already live with is automotive insurance. I live in Michigan (#1 for worst economy, worst unemployment, worst foreclosure, and worst utility shutoffs…. WOOT!!!), and among the many bad decisions our leaders made in the past is the "No Fault" car insurance law. Essentially, this limits liability so that it doesn't matter who caused the accident, the most either side can collect from the other in damages is $50. On the one hand, this does get rid of the "Oh! My whiplash! Cha-ching!" phenomenon, it also means that our insurance rates are right up there at the top of the scale, AND that everyone is required, by law, to have insurance.

I'm not against socialism, in general… but there are plenty of cases where it doesn't make sense. In THIS case, if the State is going to require me to have insurnace, they should issue me said insurance directly and have me pay via taxes. Requiring me to have it, but still making me buy it myself is salt in the wound.

One of the cases I would accept socialism is in infrastructure services that are considered essential. The privitization of the utility companies has done zero good in these parts, it just makes the prices go up even higher and the service quality go down (shocking as that may be). When the electricity goes out in January, people die. When it was a municipal utility, no politician wants to lose their bid at reelection over that, so it was forced to work. Now that it's private industry, they can write off the deaths and their insurance pays damages… acceptable losses for making more money.

No system of government is perfect for every case, the best form we can hope for is one that cherry-picks the best parts of each for the right situations. At least until an enlightened despot comes around (I think that was Aristotle's statement).

Nice.



Enjoy your freedom. You didn't answer my question, btw.

Do you think that government run police departments are socialist?

-Crat
http://lpmuds.net

Runter, why did you feel the need to distort my name? Do I call you Runtwhatever or otherwise distort yours? I'm not sure if you were trying to just be funny – it wasn't funny – or if you were actually trying to be derogative – why?? – but either way you've really done a good job at putting me off a conversation that was just starting to get interesting.

But hey, at least we live in a state that is best for… um… hmm. We're over 60% organic farmland, I guess that's something?

(And we have Zingerman's. Best. Place. Ever. Yes, I am typing this while at Zingerman's. Mmm. Zingerman's.)

</off-topic-ness>

Ann Arbor is pretty cool; MI is pretty known for that. And, err, what's Zingerman's?

Now that I find ironic.
:smirk:

What? The whole socialism nonsense was only just starting to get interesting (as it stopped being nonsensical mainly). Surely you don't think squabbling about quotation marks after several clarifications have been made is actually interesting.

I agree and would think that to refuse anyone medical attention purely because they don't have private medical insurance, inability to pay medical bills etc is plain and simply inhumane. I know that in times when I am not working, I am quite thankful for the medicare system in australia here, without it I most certainly wouldn't be in a clean bill of health. So if this is socialist, I guess Socialism isn't that bad afterall? :tongue:

This is why it's silly to lump everything together into one giant bucket and treat everything equally. There's a difference, for example, between not letting people die and giving considerably high unemployment benefits. Without placing judgment on either of these, it just doesn't make sense to think of them as the same thing.