A socialist, communist, corporatist, fascist, mandate?

[boppers]

I am having a hard time sorting out these arguments.

Is any of them actually correct?

[POAS]

1. no

[boppers]

2. Care to expound upon that?

(and a self-kick)

[POAS]

3. no but would a kick help?

[POAS]

4. A my rec brought you back to a nice round "0".

[boppers]

5. I don't care about rec, or un-rec.

The discussion's the thing.

[FrenchieCat]

6. He's everything to everybody,

cause folks just make up what they think they know,
when so many don't know a damn thing about this man,
cause they don't really listen to him when he speaks....
Why they don't, I don't know.

[boppers]

8. Sound like the first 300 years of christianity.

Gonna be messy 300 years from now.

[AllentownJake]

7. Well the right wing is about as fast and loose with words as ever

As far as the fascist argument, combining state and corporate power has been called fascism.

Fascism is generally radical nationalism combined with a corporatist economic system supported by the state and a one political party system.

Seeing that the nation already has radical nationalism world view, and this is the putting into the law a private insurance model for Health Care, the only thing missing is the one political party.

[ima_sinnic]

13. the "one political party" seems also to be forming

some might even call it "bipartisanship"--but the common interests of the moneyed class are well represented by "both" major parties.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[paulk]

18. some might argue that we already have a one party system

some might alos argue that ours is a kinder, gentler, friendlier sort of fascism...

[area51]

9. Fascist mandate

This is what Newt Gingrich wanted years ago, a law forcing people to buy private, for-profit insurance that has a proven track record of denying people funding for needed treatment, thus killing them. He must be very proud of himself now that the democrats have moved so far right that they've adopted one of his ideas.

[boppers]

10. Non-profit insurance is denied?

Care to cite the language?

[FrenchieCat]

11. Have you read the bill?

85% of folks already buy health insurance....
Those 65 years and older paid into a mandated system
that forced them to pay then for later on,
and quite a few will simply go onto their parent's health insurance
because they are under 27 years old.
Of those left, many are the 31 million who want health care insurance,
but it wasn't feasible for them to get it till this bill.

Sen. Sanders summed up my attitude on this bill well:

“The bill is not as strong as I wanted and I will work to improve it, but it begins to move this country toward the long-time goal of providing comprehensive, affordable health care for all Americans. The legislation would provide health insurance for 31 million people, end the odious practice of denying care for people with pre-existing conditions, and provide affordable primary care and low-cost prescription drugs for 25 million more Americans in 10,000 more communities. We can do better, but this is an important step forward.”

[TheKentuckian]

12. I don't care what you label a mandate to a predatory monopoly

but as long as the system is predatory and a monopoly then it is a sin to force feed people in to it.

Some may feel the regulations are enough to turn this long standing problem around and I appreciate their faith but I'm not inclined to trust these corporations to do right and if they screw people over the path to recourse is a mess. I'm also not inclined to believe a government that leaves an industry with an anti-trust exemption is actually serious about regulating that industry.

I also have a problem making people buy something that they cannot afford to actually make use of. Certainly the out of pocket caps will limit the damage if you get really sick but if you're responsible for big amounts out of pocket up front a lot of people are still going to be on the outside looking in. If we are serious about really helping people then it is important that we set up an affordable situation rather than just putting something in place that tells us as a society that we fixed the problem so we can have our guilt alleviated and pat ourselves on the back.

You also have a hell of a political looser on your hands if most people's normal out of pocket jacks up especially if the industry continues it's nonsense and we still have lots of uncovered people.

All I'm saying is you FIX the system and verify that it is fixed before you mandate it because anything else is being irresponsible to the people. Better the corporations who have made huge money take extra risk than forcefeeding people into their system and praying for the best.

[asdjrocky]

15. Corporatist.

[mcablue]

16. No one here is calling is communist or socialist

Bill opponents here in DU are being cosistent. Therefore you shouldn't ask us why right-wingers are calling it "communist." We argue the opposite of communism is occuring here. It is not the state benefiting. It's the corporations.

[boppers]

19. cosistent? huh? eom

[THUNDER HANDS]

17. it depends on what your expectations are

if you wanted a late-night infomercial version of health care reform (ie, everything you hoped and dreamed for that seems to have no downside, AND has the added bonus of fucking over the insurance industry) then this is a corporatist, fascist bill.

if you wanted a "keep the government out of my medicare" bill - which is an exchange between states and caps on med malpractice - then it's a socialist communist bill.

if you just wanted something better than what we have now - then its a bill. Just a bill. Better than what we had. Not as good as most of us want.

[Renew Deal]

20. Depends on which fringe group you talk to.

:shrug: