Milton Friedman

[Neon]

'Bright Promises: Dismal Performance' is the best thing I've read all year.

He makes a good argument against socialized medicine. I wonder if any countries have ever tried the flat tax/negative income tax, though?

[Naiera]

Not having universal health care in the richest country in the world is a fucking joke.

It seems Milton Friedman is as well.

And flat taxes are for dumbasses.

[Samudra]

A country run by wealthy businessmen certainly will want to try.

[Randorama]

One thing, i would provide a link to the reference you propose for discussion. Not that i even remotely care about Milton Friedman, Naiera has spoken for me as well.

[MadSteelDarkness]

Not having universal health care in the richest country in the world is a fucking joke.

It seems Milton Friedman is as well.

And flat taxes are for dumbasses.

Quoted for truth.

[professor ganson]

Not having universal health care in the richest country in the world is a fucking joke.

It seems Milton Friedman is as well.

And flat taxes are for dumbasses.

Well put.

[Stormwatch]

Free to Choose and Capitalism and Freedom are two of my favorite books. Friedman kicks ass!

[Neon]

One thing, i would provide a link to the reference you propose for discussion. Not that i even remotely care about Milton Friedman, Naiera has spoken for me as well.

It's actually a book.

I should quote some of the relevant sections, though. I think he makes some good points. Later tonight when I'm not studying for this test.

I hope you've put more thought into this than you have differentiating Dragon Blaze from Gunbird, Naiera

[The n00b]

I'm still in awe why the United States doesn't have universal healthcare. It would be cheaper than any other healthcare option but people are too damn individualistic in my country for it to happen. They want as little of their money as possible going to the "common good."

It wasn't always like this. Americans use to be really patriotic. Remember the whole "It's not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country" stuff? Now it seems more and more people, from the wealthy to the poor in America, seem to be out for what they can get or bilk out of the next guy and to the hell with the rest of the country. American politicians at all levels continue to take bribes(see extremely shady campaign contributions), corporations run all over everyone and then scream for gov subsidies when they get in trouble, and war has become a profit seeking venture.

Just the other day I read an article about trying to get the bible back into public schools. I am almost ready to put my support behind that idea and I'm a freakin athiest. Maybe get a copy of Aesop's fables for every kid in school too. There's gotta be something that can cure so many of my fellow countrymen of their tendency to turn into amoral jerks.

[Acid King]

I'm still in awe why the United States doesn't have universal healthcare. It would be cheaper than any other healthcare option but people are too damn individualistic in my country for it to happen. They want as little of their money as possible going to the "common good."

It wasn't always like this.

You're right. We didn't always have property or income taxes. Hell, we used to be able to walk in to a pharmacy and buy heroin. We're a country built on the strength of the individual. People should not depend on big brother to provide for them. As far as the flat tax goes, a number of countries have flat taxes. Estonia, Russia, Latvia and Ukraine have them, all of them are 20% or below and all of them have income tax ceilings, where if you make less than a certain amount, you don't pay any income tax.

It seems Milton Friedman is as well.

Only on this forum could a Nobel prize winning economist be called a "fucking joke".[/quote]

[Ganelon]

People would likely have differing opinions if they were rich...

[dave4shmups]

I'm still in awe why the United States doesn't have universal healthcare. It would be cheaper than any other healthcare option but people are too damn individualistic in my country for it to happen. They want as little of their money as possible going to the "common good."

It wasn't always like this.

You're right. We didn't always have property or income taxes. Hell, we used to be able to walk in to a pharmacy and buy heroin. We're a country built on the strength of the individual. People should not depend on big brother to provide for them. As far as the flat tax goes, a number of countries have flat taxes. Estonia, Russia, Latvia and Ukraine have them, all of them are 20% or below and all of them have income tax ceilings, where if you make less than a certain amount, you don't pay any income tax.

It seems Milton Friedman is as well.

Only on this forum could a Nobel prize winning economist be called a "fucking joke".

[/quote]

Well, if he is a Nobel Prize winning economist, that doesn't speak very well for the state of that award.

IMO it's not a matter of socialism or capitalism, it's a matter of priorities, and that we here in the USA don't have our's straight. Socialized medicene is evil, while, for example, corporate welfare for rich professional sports teams is OK. (Hey, if they want their spiffy new stadiums, the rich primadonas can @#$#$ing pay for ALL the cost out of their OWN pockets.)

Arguments against socialized medicene fall flat on their face-that medical care isn't as good. Well, my own mother has had cronic dizziness since 1989, been to the frickin' Mayo Clinic, and no doctor in the Land of the Plenty has been able to cure it after almost 17 years. Meanwhile, Europe already has a vaccine for the Bird Flu, which could end up becoming a pandemic, and we won't have it here in the US for another year.

Of course, switching to socialized medicence would also involve having a Presidential Administration in power that would actually stand up to pharmacutical companies, and their ludicrus prices, but that will never happen; at least not with either the Republicans or the Democrats.

[Acid King]

Well, if he is a Nobel Prize winning economist, that doesn't speak very well for the state of that award.

IMO it's not a matter of socialism or capitalism, it's a matter of priorities, and that we here in the USA don't have our's straight. Socialized medicene is evil, while, for example, corporate welfare for rich professional sports teams is OK. (Hey, if they want their spiffy new stadiums, the rich primadonas can @#$#$ing pay for ALL the cost out of their OWN pockets.)

Arguments against socialized medicene fall flat on their face-that medical care isn't as good. Well, my own mother has had cronic dizziness since 1989, been to the frickin' Mayo Clinic, and no doctor in the Land of the Plenty has been able to cure it after almost 17 years. Meanwhile, Europe already has a vaccine for the Bird Flu, which could end up becoming a pandemic, and we won't have it here in the US for another year.

Of course, switching to socialized medicence would also involve having a Presidential Administration in power that would actually stand up to pharmacutical companies, and their ludicrus prices, but that will never happen; at least not with either the Republicans or the Democrats.

Actually, I think it says more about what the people that say things like that actually know about economics. Anyways, do you know why our drug prices are so high? Because the process of creating medicines is so expensive that they have to charge high prices in addition to releasing "blockbuster" drugs. Getting a drug developed and tested costs hundreds of millions of dollars. One study put drug development costs at over a billion dollars. At prices like that, how are they supposed to get their money back by giving drugs away? Do you want to socialize drug development or something? That and your story about your grandmother was silly. Are you suggesting that somehow socialized medicine would have cured your grandmother? As for the realities of socialized medicine I refer you to a post from the "If I win a mil" thread"...

Have enough money to go private instead of waiting onthe NHS, I'm still waiting for one appointment since January. (emphasis added)

currently waiting for a rheumatologist appointment and results from my E.E.G

Perhaps waiting 9 months for an appointment is a fair trade off for free health care. Personally, I'd rather pay $100 for a visit now and potentially eat ramen for a week, or not buy that shiny new import shooter, than wait 9 months for a doctors appointment

Healthcare costs are related to insurance competition and the amount hospitals and doctors are required to pay in insurance. Not to mention the fact that if you cut out the middle man (pharmacists) and allowed people to buy any medication over the counter, the costs of medication would undoubtedly drop.

And who ever said corporate welfare was allright? Price supports, farm subsidies, the fact that taxpayers pay for multimillion dollar bullshit like the Democratic and Republican National Conventions, are all ludicrous but are neither here nor there in this debate.

[Naiera]

It's not like you can't choose to go private in Denmark, England or any other country with UNIVERSAL health care. I've heard a lot of crap about the NHS in England, though mostly from people wanting to go American on the system, but the system over here is proof that it can be done.

The health care system in Denmark is as good or better than the one in the US. Studies have shown this, but for some, like me, it is quite obvious that it is better, because EVERYONE has access. 45 million Americans don't have access to proper health care because they can't pay for it themselves but are still not poor enough to have free access.

That's bullshit. No argument made by any dumbass conservative can beat the fact that it's a good thing that everyone has access to and can receive the same good care that any rich dude can.

Oh, and the system in the US is more than twice as expensive as the one in Denmark.

[PaCrappa]

That's called logic. Don't need a Nobel prize to see what's good for everyone is good for everyone.

Pa

[Samudra]

Anyways, do you know why our drug prices are so high? Because the process of creating medicines is so expensive that they have to charge high prices in addition to releasing "blockbuster" drugs. Getting a drug developed and tested costs hundreds of millions of dollars. One study put drug development costs at over a billion dollars. At prices like that, how are they supposed to get their money back by giving drugs away?

This can be viewed from two sides. This side is one that the drug industry encourages.

See, there are many "diseases" for which this industry is "hard" at work to create all kinds of medicines.
Take cancer for one. We know about many things that can cause cancer and these things are increasing. Yet, the research on cancer keeps sucking in money eventhough the solution here is to take away the known sources of the problem.

The industry even goes as far to invent diseases. Creating medicines against shyness for example. See High Anxiety.

The drug industry, especially in the USA, has become a terrifying thing.

[PaCrappa]

More logic. Looking forward to creative rebuttals from folks that think pharmaceutical companies are doing the world a favor. This is good stuff guys.

Pa

[thesuperkillerxxx]

^^^it's coming

I am at work now and don't have time...

[dave4shmups]

More logic. Looking forward to creative rebuttals from folks that think pharmaceutical companies are doing the world a favor. This is good stuff guys.

Pa

How, by overcharging for medications so that, for example, elderly people in this country have to drive or take the bus to friggin' Canada just to get the medications they need for a reasonable price? Not all of the money charged by drug companies in this country even goes into research, a great deal of it goes into "fluff", like enormus salaries and other "necessary" expenses.

And sense these drug companies are spending so much, the least they could do is come up with medications that don't solve one problem and tack on another (or several others) to a person's life. Yet, even worse, there have been many FDA approved drugs on the market, which were approved by the FDA courtesy of a little money (err, I mean't "prodding") by the pharmacutical companies that have resulted in a lot of unecessary deaths. There have been many cases of drug company scientists who have written of the possible dangers of these medications, and their writings were ignored to the detriment of the general public, and due to the fact that said companies were content to stay in bed with the FDA.

Look, I'm thankful to God for providing me with two anti-anxiety drugs that have helped me get back on track in my life. But just as thankfullness is commanded in the Bible, so is speaking out against injustice.

[dave4shmups]

The industry even goes as far to invent diseases. Creating medicines against shyness for example. See High Anxiety.

Anxiety disorders are no laughing matter; the "shyness" you are talking about is social anxiety disorder, a legitmate medical disease; it is not something that was made up by any company.

[howmuchkeefe]

I haven't read Milton Friedman's book yet. Does he write as well as he played guitar back when he was in Megadeth?

[Samudra]

The industry even goes as far to invent diseases. Creating medicines against shyness for example. See High Anxiety.

Anxiety disorders are no laughing matter; the "shyness" you are talking about is social anxiety disorder, a legitmate medical disease; it is not something that was made up by any company.

True enough, but I was not referring to that. I meant actual, basically harmless, shyness. Please read the article linked to if you are interested.

Also the ideas, currently practised, to combat mental diseases using physical means is questionable at the very least. Please do understand that this does not mean a denying of the actual problem.

[dave4shmups]

The industry even goes as far to invent diseases. Creating medicines against shyness for example. See High Anxiety.

Anxiety disorders are no laughing matter; the "shyness" you are talking about is social anxiety disorder, a legitmate medical disease; it is not something that was made up by any company.

True enough, but I was not referring to that. I meant actual, basically harmless, shyness. Please read the article linked to if you are interested.

Also the ideas, currently practised, to combat mental diseases using physical means is questionable at the very least. Please do understand that this does not mean a denying of the actual problem.

Oh, I'm not accusing you of denying the problem. I'm not sure what kind of physical means you're referring to, but physical exercsises do help anxiety. For example, the anxiety specialist that I see every few months put together a relaxation CD for me to listen to in bed, before I fall asleep. On the CD, there are physical exercises-namely, tensing up certain muscle groups in the body when you inhale, and then releasing that tension when you exhale. It definately helps, although I do need to start exercising regularly again as well.

[Samudra]

I see now my statement was too general for its own good.
Medication was meant. Exercise I can't find fault with; it being done in moderation of course.

Also it was the practise itself denounced, regardless of (possible) benefit. Some treatments may have some benefits, but big drawbacks also (chemotherapy for instance).