Bernie Sanders Joins the 2020 Presidential Race

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

8 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

I am not talking about wages. 

Fair enough.  There IS a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse in the military, especially where contracts are involved.

[Unidentified 2,930]

2 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

No, I mean if you take a look at the Nordic countries then you would see that they have a big social network because they don't spend money defense like what the USA. I really hate how the USA has a high maternity death rate compared to other industrialized countries I really do. But what people fail to realize is that we are ALOT bigger than the other industrialized countries, so everything is more spread out. A lot of states are moving towards paid family leave as it should be the case but then people complain it either being not long enough or not hiring someone because they are pregnant. 

2

How is being big a disadvantage? I don't like to assume but I think a lot of people look at Scandinavia and say "oh the government is paying for everything" and think it is not going to work in the US. I am rusty on the other Scandinavians so as a Swede I'll use Sweden as an example: the only thing the federal government in Sweden is doing is setting up policies. Then we have county councils (we have 20 of them), they're like administrative subdivisions of Sweden and they're the ones who set up a budget for the hospitals. We have policies on for example how much a stay at the hospital may cost per day (maximum of $10.75 per day) and caps on how much each person should have to pay for medicine each year and some medicine like insulin is free. 

 

Is it not illegal to not hire someone because they are pregnant? 

[Unidentified 2,930]

2 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

Fair enough.  There IS a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse in the military, especially where contracts are involved.

To be fair I can see how the word "overpaid" would imply that I was talking about wages. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

3 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

To be fair I can see how the word "overpaid" would imply that I was talking about wages. 

Do you mean overpaid actual soldiers or civilians??? There is a big difference FYI. 

[Unidentified 2,930]

Just now, Cyberfx1024 said:

Do you mean overpaid actual soldiers or civilians??? There is a big difference FYI. 

As I've already mentioned I wasn't talking about wages. 

[millefleur 5,046]

1 minute ago, Unidentified said:

How is being big a disadvantage? I don't like to assume but I think a lot of people look at Scandinavia and say "oh the government is paying for everything" and think it is not going to work in the US. I am rusty on the other Scandinavians so as a Swede I'll use Sweden as an example: the only thing the federal government in Sweden is doing is setting up policies. Then we have county councils (we have 20 of them), they're like administrative subdivisions of Sweden and they're the ones who set up a budget for the hospitals. We have policies on for example how much a stay at the hospital may cost per day (maximum of $10.75 per day) and caps on how much each person should have to pay for medicine each year and some medicine like insulin is free.

I think the main issue is that American political culture is just a lot more corrupt than Sweden. I know that Sweden has its own set of issues but it ranks much higher than the US on the Corruption Perception Index and I would wager that probably aligns with reality. Sure, the US isn't Russia level corrupt, but it's certainly more corrupt than many European countries (and Canada! lol).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

 

Americans are not as bothered by corruption as a broad concept. They tend to overly dwell on the corruption in the opposition party and will often turn a blind eye to what is going on in the party they do support.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

6 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

How is being big a disadvantage? I don't like to assume but I think a lot of people look at Scandinavia and say "oh the government is paying for everything" and think it is not going to work in the US. I am rusty on the other Scandinavians so as a Swede I'll use Sweden as an example: the only thing the federal government in Sweden is doing is setting up policies. Then we have county councils (we have 20 of them), they're like administrative subdivisions of Sweden and they're the ones who set up a budget for the hospitals. We have policies on for example how much a stay at the hospital may cost per day (maximum of $10.75 per day) and caps on how much each person should have to pay for medicine each year and some medicine like insulin is free. 

 

Is it not illegal to not hire someone because they are pregnant? 

Yes, technically it is Illegal to base your decision to not hire someone based off them being pregnant. But employers will find ways around that in many cases. 

 

Being big means that if something goes wrong with a pregnant mother then it can take a while before they get to a hospital. 

[Dashinka 24,496]

6 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

How is being big a disadvantage? I don't like to assume but I think a lot of people look at Scandinavia and say "oh the government is paying for everything" and think it is not going to work in the US. I am rusty on the other Scandinavians so as a Swede I'll use Sweden as an example: the only thing the federal government in Sweden is doing is setting up policies. Then we have county councils (we have 20 of them), they're like administrative subdivisions of Sweden and they're the ones who set up a budget for the hospitals. We have policies on for example how much a stay at the hospital may cost per day (maximum of $10.75 per day) and caps on how much each person should have to pay for medicine each year and some medicine like insulin is free. 

 

Is it not illegal to not hire someone because they are pregnant? 

How close is this to the actual price?  In economics, price fixing is generally detrimental to an overall economy.  What would be really interesting is if the US stopped subsidizing the cost of pharmaceuticals for the rest of the world.  I am all for equalizing everyone there. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

7 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

To be fair I can see how the word "overpaid" would imply that I was talking about wages. 

Then what do you mean because you never went in to detail about that? 

1 minute ago, millefleur said:

I think the main issue is that American political culture is just a lot more corrupt than Sweden. I know that Sweden has its own set of issues but it ranks much higher than the US on the Corruption Perception Index and I would wager that probably aligns with reality. Sure, the US isn't Russia level corrupt, but it's certainly more corrupt than many European countries (and Canada! lol).

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_Perceptions_Index

 

Americans are not as bothered by corruption as a broad concept. They tend to overly dwell on the corruption in the opposition party and will often turn a blind eye to what is going on in the party they do support.

That's based off of public perception as a whole which the USG sure hasn't looked good in the public's eyes the last 10 years. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

15 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

To be fair I can see how the word "overpaid" would imply that I was talking about wages. 

Meh, didn't sound like you, hence my post about salaries. I reckon I should have asked as opposed to assuming, sorry 'bout that!

 

I didn't realize the US maternal death rate was so high until you said something. This is a stat that simply should NOT be, with our current level of medical care ability in the US.  Thanks for pointing it out.

[Unidentified 2,930]

12 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

How close is this to the actual price?  In economics, price fixing is generally detrimental to an overall economy.  What would be really interesting is if the US stopped subsidizing the cost of pharmaceuticals for the rest of the world.  I am all for equalizing everyone there. 

 

What do you mean "how close is this to the actual price?" If the price cap is $10.75 no hospital may charge you more per day.

America is not the only country with pharmaceutical companies... Isn't the US pharmaceutical companies currently worried about the proposed "International Pricing Index" which would align prices with those of other countries? 

[Dashinka 24,496]

Just now, Unidentified said:

What do you mean "how close is this to the actual price?" If the price cap is $10.75 no hospital may charge you more per day.

America is not the only country with pharmaceutical companies... Isn't the US pharmaceutical companies currently worried about the proposed "International Pricing Index" which would align prices with those of other countries? 

What I mean is that price caps are just that, caps, and often times they do not capture the actual cost of the item (in this case the room), so services or other things get cut so the financial loss is not so bad.  I never said there were not global drug companies, but the US is the one industrialized country with little price controls or artificial price caps on those drugs.  So where do you think these companies (from around the world) turn to make back their R&D costs? 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

18 minutes ago, ALFKAD said:

I didn't realize the US maternal death rate was so high until you said something. This is a stat that simply should NOT be, with our current level of medical care ability in the US.  Thanks for pointing it out.

I heard about it a good 1-2 years ago when I read a article detailing the issues with it. It's primarily due to how rural and spread out the country is. If there are problems with a mother before or during childbirth then a fair number of times they will have to be sent 1-2 counties away for proper medical attention beyond a simple country clinic. 

Edited February 20, 2019 by Cyberfx1024

[Unidentified 2,930]

29 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

Then what do you mean because you never went in to detail about that? 

That's based off of public perception as a whole which the USG sure hasn't looked good in the public's eyes the last 10 years. 

It was in response to the irrelevant connection between what a country is spending on its military and the social welfare of its citizens. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 minute ago, Unidentified said:

It was in response to the irrelevant connection between what a country is spending on its military and the social welfare of its citizens. 

it's not irrelevant when it directly correlates.