-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
-
Topics
-
-
-
Popular Contributors
-
1
.thumb.jpeg.d2d19a66404642fd9ff62d6262fd153e.jpeg)
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
-
-
-
Latest posts...
-
89
USA immigration and customs enforcement ,protecting the homeland…News
Right. Which according to the judge's order they have not been doing. -
47
[QUIZ] 15 August - British Youth Culture 1960s & 1970s
I just completed this quiz. My Score 50/100 My Time 104 seconds -
86
How often do you hear song lyrics you consider profound?
The bass line is good -
13
-
22
I'm worried I might have cancer. But, don't ask me why. Do you worry about this, too?
Are you saying that you now agree with my friend and fellow-alumnus, Noam Chomsky? If only everyone would read more Chomsky, then this would be a better world. And, what might Chomsky say, today, if he could talk, which, very unfortunately, is impossible, due to his incapacitation as a result of his stroke? "Based on Chomsky's consistent and long-standing critiques, Chomsky's assessment would be sharp and framed by his broader political and economic philosophy. The United States: An "International Scandal" Chomsky has repeatedly described the U.S. healthcare system as an "international scandal." He would argue that its fundamental failures at the present time are direct consequences of its design. Failures of the U.S. System: Extreme Inefficiency and Bureaucracy: Chomsky points out that the U.S. spends far more per capita on healthcare than any other developed nation. He attributes this to the enormous administrative waste inherent in a privatized, multi-payer system. This includes money spent on marketing, complex billing, executive salaries, and denying claims—costs that do not contribute to patient health. Fundamentally Immoral: A core of Chomsky's critique is moral. He argues that a system that ties healthcare to employment and profitability is inherently cruel. It leaves millions uninsured or underinsured, leading to preventable deaths and financial ruin for those who get sick. He sees the commodification of health as a profound moral failing. Poor Outcomes: Despite its astronomical costs, the U.S. often has worse health outcomes (like lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality) compared to other wealthy nations. Chomsky would see this as the ultimate proof that the for-profit model fails to deliver on its most basic promise: health. Undemocratic and Dominated by Elites: He would argue that the system is not a reflection of what the public wants. Polls have consistently shown that a majority of Americans would prefer a government-guaranteed healthcare program. However, powerful insurance and pharmaceutical lobbies fight viciously to maintain the status quo, which serves their profits, not the public good. This is a key example of what he calls the "class war" fought by elites against the general population. Pluses of the U.S. System: From Chomsky's perspective, there are virtually no pluses to the overall structure of the U.S. system when viewed from a societal or ethical standpoint. While acknowledging that the U.S. has excellent doctors, hospitals, and medical research, he would argue that access to this excellence is rationed by wealth, which is not a "plus" but a central feature of its cruelty. Canada: A More Rational, Humane Alternative Chomsky frequently uses Canada as a direct point of comparison to illustrate the failings of the U.S. model. He would frame the Canadian system as a more civilized and rational approach, though not without its own challenges. Pluses of the Canadian System: Universal Coverage: The primary advantage is its principle of universality. Healthcare is treated as a fundamental right. Every citizen is covered, regardless of their income, employment, or health status. This removes the fear of financial ruin from illness that plagues so many Americans. Greater Efficiency: By having a single-payer system (or more accurately, a provincially administered single-payer system), Canada eliminates the massive administrative waste of the U.S. private insurance industry. This allows it to provide universal care for a fraction of the per-capita cost of the U.S. system. Focus on Health, Not Profit: Because the system is publicly funded and administered, its primary goal is to provide healthcare, not to generate profit for shareholders. This aligns the system's incentives with the public good. Chomsky would see this as a result of successful popular struggle, particularly by labor unions, who fought for healthcare for everyone, not just for their own members. Failures and Vulnerabilities of the Canadian System: Chomsky is not an uncritical admirer and would acknowledge the system's vulnerabilities, especially in the current political climate. Wait Times: He would recognize that wait times for certain procedures can be a legitimate issue. However, he would immediately reframe this by stating that the U.S. also has rationing—it's just rationed by wealth. If you can't afford a procedure, you have an infinite wait time. He would argue that a publicly managed system that struggles with wait times is still preferable to a system that rations care based on ability to pay. Threat of Privatization: Chomsky's biggest concern for Canada would be the persistent efforts by conservative political and business interests to undermine the public system and introduce more for-profit, U.S.-style elements. He would see this as part of the same elite-driven "class war" that has so thoroughly shaped the U.S. system, and he would warn that this is the primary danger to the integrity and success of Canadian healthcare. Underfunding: He would likely argue that many of the problems within the Canadian system, such as wait times, stem from political decisions to underfund it, often by the same groups who advocate for privatization. In summary, at the present time, Noam Chomsky would argue that the debate between the two systems is not a close call. He would present the U.S. system as a failed, cruel, and deeply undemocratic outlier, and the Canadian system as a fundamentally more sane and humane model that, despite its challenges, gets the big things right by treating healthcare as a public good rather than a commodity." Also, I endorse everything that Chomsky said, or might say, if he could say it. We have lost a very valuable asset. Now, I ask you, who will take up Chomsky's cudgel, now that he is down? You???? Why don't you THINK ABOUT IT, while you are waiting for your next visit to your doctor..... But, do not worry because..... With GROK 6, we will finally begin to address this issue of wait times....FOR SURE...!!! -
77
Search for survivors after Houthis sink second Red Sea cargo ship in a week
Reuters called it an agreement. Which is what I called it. If you've got a problem with that, take it up with Reuters.
-
-
Popular in The Pub
.thumb.jpeg.42eea318e3350459f0aaaa5460326bca.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now