Israels Universal Healthcare

[Oliver]

All I know about Israel's universal health care system (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Israel) I learned from Wikipedia - and according to Wiki, they seem to have a pretty good one, even if WHO's ranking of their UHC-system does not seem to be a matter of euphoria.

However, I never saw one single Conservative claiming that Israel's health system is socialism, communism or downright unamerican - despite the Heil Hitler (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/18/woman-shouts-heil-hitler_n_262554.html) remark about it, of course.

My question is: Why isn't Israel's UHC a matter of controversy in contrast to all the "socialistic", "communistic" UHC's around the world being ridiculed and criticized all the time from those same Conservatives? Is Israels system less Government controlled, less Tax related, less socialistic and less communistic? :confused:

Or in other words: Why doesn't the US adopt Israel's system if there isn't anything to critizise about it? :)

[Cleon]

However, I never saw one single Conservative claiming that Israel's health system is socialism, communism or downright unamerican

Can't imagine why that would be.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Can't imagine why that would be.

I think maybe you misunderstood his question. He means why would a system like that in Israel not be considered un-American but those of other countries (like Canada) be considered un-American were we in the U.S. to adopt it.

That is, the argument against a single-payer, government administered system is that they're socialist or hurt the free market or some such. If that's so, then that same criticism should be leveled against the system in a country we pretty much financially underwrite.
_____

This isn't an answer to the question you're asking, DC, but it annoys me that my income is lower than the median income of Israel, and I can't afford health insurance, but I do pay taxes that contribute a small portion to the huge amounts of money we give to Israel.

[Doctor Evil]

Can't imagine why that would be.
:D

That may prove to be a too subtle hint.

[JoeTheJuggler]

:D

That may prove to be a too subtle hint.
No. It's a misreading of the question. When Oliver asked:


Or in other words: Why doesn't the US adopt Israel's system if there isn't anything to critizise about it? :)

(With tongue in cheek, I think.) He wasn't saying that we should keep the system in Hebrew and keep all the Israeli bureaucrats and just move them from there to here to run our healthcare system. Saying it's "unamerican (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unamerican)" (meaning contrary to our ideals) because it's an Israeli system misses the point.

The point was, I believe, if their system isn't also socialist or whatever the complaints are against the UK, French or Canadian systems, then there's nothing inherently wrong with a system like this.

My addition to it, if the system is so horribly wrong, then why are we financially propping up a government that runs such a thing?

ETA: Perhaps the misreading hinges on taking "unamerican" to mean "not American"? Sen. McCarthy's red scare committte, the House Committee on Unamerican Activities, targeted Americans as practicing "unamerican" activities. So "unamerican" doesn't mean "not American"--at least when used this way. It means contrary to (someone's idea of) our ideals or traditions or some such.

[DC]

snip
_____

This isn't an answer to the question you're asking, DC, but it annoys me that my income is lower than the median income of Israel, and I can't afford health insurance, but I do pay taxes that contribute a small portion to the huge amounts of money we give to Israel.

:confused:
thanks for the info
and what question was i asking?

[Cleon]

I think maybe you misunderstood his question.

No, I understood, I just thought it was funny.

[Doctor Evil]

(With tongue in cheek, I think.) He wasn't saying that we should keep the system in Hebrew and keep all the Israeli bureaucrats and just move them from there to here to run our healthcare system. Saying it's "unamerican (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unamerican)" (meaning contrary to our ideals) because it's an Israeli system misses the point.

The point was, I believe, if their system isn't also socialist or whatever the complaints are against the UK, French or Canadian systems, then there's nothing inherently wrong with a system like this.

My addition to it, if the system is so horribly wrong, then why are we financially propping up a government that runs such a thing?

ETA: Perhaps the misreading hinges on taking "unamerican" to mean "not American"? Sen. McCarthy's red scare committte, the House Committee on Unamerican Activities, targeted Americans as practicing "unamerican" activities. So "unamerican" doesn't mean "not American"--at least when used this way. It means contrary to (someone's idea of) our ideals or traditions or some such.

You are charging at windmills here. I can not speak fro Cleon, but I was mostly amused by this:
However, I never saw one single Conservative claiming that Israel's health system is socialism, communism or downright unamerican - despite the Heil Hitler (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/18/woman-shouts-heil-hitler_n_262554.html) remark about it, of course.

Frankly, the idea that US politician should refer to a foreign system and give it various ideological labels is absurd. Moreover, Oliver chose Israel as it is clear that he find it hard to think of it as a separate country. It becomes more amusing when you realize that Israel's health system definitely started as a socialist one. Even after privatization the government regulate directly many aspects of it. (I am not claiming that the system is bad. Just noting that Oliver's characterization of it is wrong.)

I am actually in favor of a universal health care system. But, I did not had the time to look closely into the details of the administration plan, and therefore did not involved myself in that debate.

[JoeTheJuggler]

You are charging at windmills here. I can not speak fro Cleon, but I was mostly amused by this:

Frankly, the idea that US politician should refer to a foreign system and give it various ideological labels is absurd.

I don't think "conservative" was meant to refer to a politician, but rather to people ranting at town hall meetings and such.

You don't think these nuts are saying this sort of thing? Have you heard about the exchange Barney Franks had (http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2009/08/town_hall_talk_frank_grills_op.html?hpid=topnews) with someone getting her information (http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11235) and the poster (http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11235) from the LaRouchePac website?

Maybe I'm misreading this, but I think this is the sort of rhetoric Oliver is referring to.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

You got your Israel thread in my health care debate!

No, you got your health care debate in my Israel thread!

It's the two great tastes that go great together!

[Skeptic]

You got your Israel thread in my health care debate!

No, you got your health care debate in my Israel thread!

It's the two great tastes that go great together!

Yes, but like all great cocktails, two ingredients which go great together aren't QUITE enough. You need a little tiny bit of some garnish or bitter or taste-changer or something. Let's see....

Just like the Nazis, the Hitler-like Israel...

There. Now it's a PERFECT thread.

[gtc]

I don't remember Conservatives complaining about the Luxembourg health system either or the Lichtenstein system or the Latvian or Lithuanian systems.

What is it with Conservatives and ignoring countries that start with L?

[WildCat]

I've heard that outside the US there are foreigners everywhere! (shudders)

[Thunder]

America is not Israel. America should not be compared to Israel. America cannot be compared to Israel. Israel is full of Jews. America is not full of Jews.

What was my point again?

[Oliver]

I don't remember Conservatives complaining about the Luxembourg health system either or the Lichtenstein system or the Latvian or Lithuanian systems.

What is it with Conservatives and ignoring countries that start with L?


Well, I suppose that comparing the own Health Care System with those of the strongest allies wouldn't be that stupid to start with. And as I said, Israel, the USA's strongest ally, does seem to have a pretty good system. Yet, pointing that out does not seem to be in the interest of those hypocrites that call themselves conservative while whining about foreign systems. ;)

[Rolfe]

I just looked at the Wiki link. It looks like a good system, very similar to several of the systems the anti-Obama brigade are damning vociferously as evil communism.

I wonder why none of these people has appeared on this thread?

Rolfe.

[JoeTheJuggler]

I don't remember Conservatives complaining about the Luxembourg health system either or the Lichtenstein system or the Latvian or Lithuanian systems.

What is it with Conservatives and ignoring countries that start with L?

If your point is that those countries bear the same relationship to conservative policy as Israel, you're wrong.

Not only has there been no expression of disapproval comparing Israel's healthcare system to Obama's proposals, but over the years, we've given more money to Israel (not a developing nation) than any other country.

So, if the criticism is that we shouldn't spend our tax dollars on something like a universal healthcare plan here, why are we doing it in Israel?

[JoeTheJuggler]

In Oliver's world, Israel is a US state.

Moreover, Oliver chose Israel as it is clear that he find it hard to think of it as a separate country.

Interesting criticism. Oliver brought up Israel, I think, as a response to critics of Obama's proposals who cite such "failures" of socialized medicine as Canada and the UK. So is it fair to say those critics think of Canada and the UK as US states?

For that matter, I'm quite sure there are US states that receive fewer federal tax dollars (net) than Israel does! This is NOT an argument that Israel should be considered a US state, but that discussion of Israel is pertinent to the US budget. If we shouldn't adopt a system like Canada's because it's "socialism" or "unamerican", then we probably shouldn't finance a similar system in Israel.

[JoeTheJuggler]

No, I understood, I just thought it was funny.
I guess it'd be funny if "unamerican" meant the same thing as "not American".

But it doesn't.

That's why I supposed you misunderstood.

[DC]

I guess it'd be funny if "unamerican" meant the same thing as "not American".

But it doesn't.

That's why I supposed you misunderstood.

they are not the same? :confused:

[JoeTheJuggler]

they are not the same? :confused:
No, they're not.

You remember Joe McCarthy's House Committee on Unamerican Activities?

He targeted Americans almost exclusively.

ETA: From thefreedictionary.com citing the American Heritage Dictionary:
un-A·mer·i·can [pronunciation removed because the symbols didn't copy]
adj.
Considered contrary to the institutions or principles of the United States.
and citing the Collins Essential English Dictionary:
un-American
Adjective
1. not in accordance with the aims, ideals, or customs of the US
2. against the interests of the US
So mistaking the word to mean "foreign to the US" or simply "not American" especially in this context is just a misreading.

[Oliver]

I wonder why none of these people has appeared on this thread?

Rolfe.


Because they don't dare to criticize the Israeli UHC because it's a strong ally and does have a good system. In other words, they would make fools out of themselves in several ways.

But I wonder why Liberals didn't pick up the Israeli UHC as a counterargument to all the "Comrada* Health Socialism OMG" sort of criticism yet. What's their problem in daring to mention it? :confused:

*Canada

[DC]

No, they're not.

You remember Joe McCarthy's House Committee on Unamerican Activities?

He targeted Americans almost exclusively.

well i didnt remember :) but google did, thanks .

i think i understand the difference now :)

[JoeTheJuggler]

well i didnt remember :) but google did, thanks .


I'm surprised you weren't aware of this chapter in our history. Sen. McCarthy might be seen as a political antecedent of "Dictator Cheney" (at least in their common disregard for civil rights and limitations on government as guaranteed in the Constitution).

[Rolfe]

Yup. Seems like Britain isn't a "strong ally" at all. So much for the precious "special relationship".

Rolfe.

[JoeTheJuggler]

But I wonder why Liberals didn't pick up the Israeli UHC as a counterargument to all the "Comrada* Health Socialism OMG" sort of criticism yet. What's their problem in daring to mention it? :confused:

*Canada

I suspect because Israel is such an emotionally charged and politically hot issue that just mentioning it brings the sort of reaction we've seen here. It's hard to keep the discussion on healthcare.

[Cleon]

they are not the same? :confused:

No, they're not. Toyota is not an American company, but it's not an "un-American" company.

"Un-American" has a political context to it; as Joe pointed out, it has its roots in the Red Scare and McCarthyism. The assumption is that there is an overarching American ideology, and if your opinions stray beyond the arbitrary and vague limits of this ideology, you are therefore opposed to it - and by extension opposed to America, truth, justice, apple pie, and Superman.

In short..."Unamerican" is a buzzword used to demonize people with different opinions.

[DC]

No, they're not. Toyota is not an American company, but it's not an "un-American" company.

"Un-American" has a political context to it; as Joe pointed out, it has its roots in the Red Scare and McCarthyism. The assumption is that there is an overarching American ideology, and if your opinions stray beyond the arbitrary and vague limits of this ideology, you are therefore opposed to it - and by extension opposed to America, truth, justice, apple pie, and Superman.

In short..."Unamerican" is a buzzword used to demonize people with different opinions.

mmhh i got it but.

isnt Toyota Both? Non american but also unamerican? :D

or has Toyota cars for the US market with 5.x liter engines ? :D

[Oliver]

Yup. Seems like Britain isn't a "strong ally" at all. So much for the precious "special relationship".

Rolfe.


No no, Britain and Canada are strong allies as well, just not strong enough to circumvent healthcare related criticism.

I suspect because Israel is such an emotionally charged and politically hot issue that just mentioning it brings the sort of reaction we've seen here. It's hard to keep the discussion on healthcare.


Well, I suspect the same reason, but what bad things could happen to Liberals for bringing it up - I mean in a political context? Sure, the debate might go somewhat off-topic, but all the ridiculous comparisons by Conservatives about the hair-raising Canadian and British systems would vanish.

[JoeTheJuggler]

mmhh i got it but.

isnt Toyota Both? Non american but also unamerican? :D

I doubt it. It's a capitalistic corporation, so I think it is right in line with "American" principles. For that matter, it might be considered "American" in the other sense in that it has plants located in the US. I think their plants are non-union, so they might arguably be more "American" than the big 3 US companies!

An example of something not American and "unamerican" might be something like the USSR or Cuba.

[Ziggurat]

mmhh i got it but.

isnt Toyota Both? Non american but also unamerican? :D

or has Toyota cars for the US market with 5.x liter engines ? :D

Toyota sells SUV's and trucks too. Haven't you ever heard of the Landcruiser? It's got a 5.7 liter engine. But if you need a car with a 5 liter engine (a rare breed, BTW), don't forget that Lexus is part of Toyota, and they have a car with a 5.0 liter engine.

[Darth Rotor]

Oliver: If the US had an outside donor who pumped (proportionally and per capita) as many billions (trillions?) of $$$ aid for free into their system as Israel gets, then a comparison of budgetary choices might be made on this matter, and others. There's a certain irony in that, now that I see it through that lens.

On the other hand, we can't use the Israeli system, Oliver since we don't have a West Bank: we have a West Coast.

Oliver, just looking at a map ought to have helped you there. :p

DR

[JoeTheJuggler]

Oliver: If the US had an outside donor who pumped (proportionally and per capita) as many billions (trillions?) of $$$ aid for free into their system as Israel gets, then a comparison of budgetary choices might be made on this matter, and others.

So would you say the Israel health care system is "socialistic" and "unamerican"?

If that's so, then why do we support that system?

I realize the bulk of the aid we give Israel is military, but if they paid for that themselves, as you point out, without the outside donor, they couldn't provide this system to their citizens.

I guess my question is, if we have to choose between providing health care for Israelis or health care for us, it seems we're not making the right choice.

[Pardalis]

Because they don't dare to criticize the Israeli UHC because it's a strong ally and does have a good system.

There are alot of assumptions here. How do you know the Israeli system is not criticized by American conservatives, and how do you know they have a good system?

[Pardalis]

No no, Britain and Canada are strong allies as well, just not strong enough to circumvent healthcare related criticism.

Another big assumption without proof. How is Israel a "stronger" ally than Canada or Great Britain?

On what basis do you judge how one country is stronger an ally than the other?

[JoeTheJuggler]

There are alot of assumptions here. How do you know the Israeli system is not criticized by American conservatives, and how do you know they have a good system?

I think both of these (I guess two constitutes "alot"!) are pretty safe. Even liberal politicians tread lightly when criticizing Israel. Many conservatives seem to think Israel can do no wrong.*

As for how good their healthcare system is, I admit I rely on Rolfe's opinion:

I just looked at the Wiki link. It looks like a good system, very similar to several of the systems the anti-Obama brigade are damning vociferously as evil communism.


*ETA: I wouldn't paint with a large brush and say that all conservatives are reluctant to criticize Israel. I think the original point was that those most zealously opposed to Obama's proposals are probably among those who are loath to say anything negative about Israel.

[Pardalis]

I think both of these (I guess two constitutes "alot"!) are pretty safe. Even liberal politicians tread lightly when criticizing Israel. Many conservatives seem to think Israel can do no wrong.

Do you have anything tangible to provide except your best guess? Better yet, let Oliver provide this evidence, after all, it's his contention.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Another big assumption without proof. How is Israel a "stronger" ally than Canada or Great Britain?

On what basis do you judge how one country is stronger an ally than the other?
I'd suggest amount of foreign aid we give as a yardstick. In fact, I think the number of taxpayer dollars we hand out is more pertinent than whatever it means to be a strong or stronger ally.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Do you have anything tangible to provide except you're best guess? Better yet, let Oliver provide this evidence, after all, it's his contention.

"I am" best guess is based on the rhetoric I hear. Even Obama, who has been painted as anti-Israel (http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Barack_Obama_Israel_Iran/2009/06/22/227763.html)refers to Israel as one of our "stalwart allies" (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/18/obama.transcript/).

[Pardalis]

I wouldn't take a German's assumptions on American politics as read, especially when that particular German has shown time and again to have an anti-Israel bias.

If he has evidence, he should show it.

[Rolfe]

Well, it seems straighforward. Israel has a universal healthcare system very similar to several European countries. Just the sort of thing that's being damned to hell as evil socialism when the subject is US healthcare.

The USA gives Israel a lot of money, and this money is clearly supporting the healthcare system.

Why?

Rolfe.

[JoeTheJuggler]

This was in response to my citing Rolfe's assessment of the Israeli healthcare system:

I wouldn't take a German's assumptions on American politics as read,

I believe several people have brought up the problem of confusing Israel for a U.S. state.

On the other point, I could also cite examples of the U.S. (led by conservatives) vetoing censure and criticism of Israel in the U.N. in contradiction of broad international consensus. Unfortunately, I'm on my way out the door at the moment.

[Rolfe]

Well, I imagine he could tell you a fair bit about how the Israeli healthcare system works, because it's very similar to the system in Germany.

The rest of his question just seems to be, why is the US right wing OK about funding this, when it has described this sort of system as "evil" and "socialist" (which seems to be a derogatory term for reasons I don't entirely understand), and even "nazi".

Rolfe.

[DC]

I wouldn't take a German's assumptions on American politics as read, especially when that particular German has shown time and again to have an anti-Israel bias.

If he has evidence, he should show it.

so also not from any other GERMAN! but especially not THAT GERMAN?

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why don't you let Oliver do it? It's his argument.
What difference does it make who provides the evidence you're asking for?

I want to know how he knows all the way from his Bavarian basement about American affairs.

Same way I, living in the heartland of American know about this--Google.

Here's a huge listing of UN resolutions (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/usvetoes.html)critical of Israel that were vetoed by the U.S. Note the votes on these things. They're almost all some number to 1 (the U.S.'s veto vote).

[Oliver]

I wouldn't take a German's assumptions on American politics as read, especially when that particular German has shown time and again to have an anti-Israel bias.

If he has evidence, he should show it.


While I'm in support for a lasting peace in Israel for it's survival in a long run, which means that I don't support any peace-harming political decisions, what evidence are you talking about - evidence for what claim? :confused:

Israel has a universal healthcare system very similar to several European countries. Just the sort of thing that's being damned to hell as evil socialism when the subject is US healthcare.


Exactly, that's my point. And my "evidence" are the republicans whining about "Pardalis social/communist trash health care system".


Why don't you let Oliver do it? It's his argument.

I want to know how he knows all the way from his Bavarian basement about American affairs.


I should report you for calling me a Bavarian. http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/11107451db56d36f14.gif


:p

[ddt]

I wouldn't take a German's assumptions on American politics as read, especially when that particular German has shown time and again to have an anti-Israel bias.
Don't you think this heavily over the top? Taking into account your lack of participation in the health care debate on this forum, what is your knowledge on this? And your "Bavarian" comment is an obvious attempt at insult.

I think Oliver has a very good point in his OP, even if it only were for the wit. If there's one UHC country in the world where America has the obvious possibility of influencing it - due to the massive US subsidies - it is Israel. But we never hear about that.

[Tricky]

A few posts split to AAH for off topic, mostly for discussing other members rather than the topic. Please don't do that. It's unamerican.

[JoeTheJuggler]

Well, I suspect the same reason, but what bad things could happen to Liberals for bringing it up - I mean in a political context? Sure, the debate might go somewhat off-topic, but all the ridiculous comparisons by Conservatives about the hair-raising Canadian and British systems would vanish.

It could be that no one's thought to make this point in the healthcare debate. (And actually at this point the best we can hope for is health insurance reform with a public health insurance option, and nothing like a single-payer system or a true public healthcare system. So discussion of the systems in Canada or the UK or Israel really aren't what the current debate is limited to in the U.S.)

On the other hand, I think the reluctance to bring this up is the same sort of thing that leads to politicians walking on eggshells when they need to criticize Israel. Even relatively liberal Democrats who are trying to offer criticism seem to be required to repeat that Israel is our friend and we have no greater ally and such.

[Pardalis]

I think Oliver has a very good point in his OP, even if it only were for the wit.

The OP is all unsubstanciated assumptions.

If there's one UHC country in the world where America has the obvious possibility of influencing it - due to the massive US subsidies - it is Israel.

Maybe it's because the US respects Israel's sovereignty? Why would it care to influence Israel's internal healthcare system?

But we never hear about that.

Yes, we all know it's a great conspiracy. :rolleyes:

[JoeTheJuggler]

The OP is all unsubstanciated [sic] assumptions.
Name one.

People have indeed compared Obama's proposals to Nazism.

People have claimed that Obama's proposals (and the healthcare systems of places like Canada and the UK) are "socialism" or somehow contrary to American ideals.

Israel does indeed have a socialized healthcare system.

Maybe it's because the US respects Israel's sovereignty? Why would it care to influence Israel's internal healthcare system?
Because we give more aid to Israel than any other country, despite the fact that they're not a developing or 3rd world country. The fact is, we do influence their healthcare system--we provide some 3% of their national budget (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=151623).


Yes, we all know it's a great conspiracy. :rolleyes:
What are you talking about? He's pointing to a flaw in an argument against proposed healthcare reforms, not any kind of conspiracy. That's an obvious straw man you've constructed.

[Oliver]

What are you talking about? He's pointing to a flaw in an argument against proposed healthcare reforms, not any kind of conspiracy. That's an obvious straw man you've constructed.


Pardalis? :confused: