Catholic Info

Traditional Catholic Faith => Health and Nutrition => Topic started by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 02:48:06 AM

Title: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 02:48:06 AM
https://www.businessinsider.com/an-american-uses-britain-nhs-2015-1?r=US&IR=T

It is interesting to read the views of people who have used both systems.  Some good write-ups on quora too,

I had a US colleague of mine (single women aged 56) die of undiagnosed stage 4 liver cancer because while she was paying $18000 per year in insurance premiums she was put off by the copay and deductibles.

Overall I think socialised medicine is a much better, fairer and kinder solution.

Will any of us live to see the day when the US has a 'free at the point of need' healthcare system?
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: DLaurentius on January 30, 2019, 04:01:25 AM
A government subsidized medical system is not wrong per se. Many Catholic governments such as the Spanish State and the Second Portuguese Republic actually had government subsidized medical systems. However, the term "socialism" often has materialist and Marxist connotations. It is a term that is almost solely used by enemies of The Church.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Nadir on January 30, 2019, 04:56:26 AM
DLaurentius, the term is socialised not socialist. I am not sure if that makes a difference. It's a question.
.
Almost all my experience is of socialised medicine and I have been satisfied with the treatment I have received. I am not a person to frequent hospitals, and only go when it is necessary, like in the case of heart attack, ruptured appendix, stroke. I have found our hospital system to be as efficient and responsive as can be expected considering how many go to hospitals if they have a cold or kick their toe (thus clogging the system). Of course many have other non-medical needs that are not attended to, but that is another topic.
.
I say almost all, but haven't time to go into my experiences of being a paying customer.
.
I have been in quite a few emergency situations. In an emergency there has been virtually no waiting time and I have been seen promptly and got good treatment. I do not pay any insurance. Our daughter, who worked as a nurse in two hospitals, told me that the treatment given to public patients is similar, or better than, that given to private patients. There is also the risk that doctors are inclined to give unnecessary treatments if they know that you are covered by insurance. One simple example is the greater amount of intervention in obstetrics for private patients compared with public patients with the same or similar risks. See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC27430/
.
Incidentally, I have used the health systems of Australia, Italy (where I am even entitled to free medications), U.K., Mauritius and Madagascar, so I have quite a wide experience of health systems.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: DLaurentius on January 30, 2019, 05:52:09 AM
DLaurentius, the term is socialised not socialist. I am not sure if that makes a difference. It's a question.

You are correct. The term "socialized" does not necessarily mean socialist. However, I live in the United States, where the terms "socialized medicine" and "socialized healthcare" are strongly associated with socialism.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 10:16:56 AM
Another thing I dislike about the US system is the amount of paperwork and due diligence you have to do.  I have read a lot of stories of big medical bills arriving for tests and xrays and peripheral stuff, or not being able to discover the price with any fixed costs before starting a procedure.  People haggling the price with their hospital or insurance company or 3rd party biller.

Bad enough being ill, but you then have to administer your own healthcare before and afterward? It appears to be as complex as your car, travel, home contents and life insurances and your tax returns all combined.

I am far too lazy to want to bother with all of that.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 30, 2019, 10:22:47 AM
Before Obamacare, my family paid 1/3 of what we are charged today under this American brand of socialized medicine. The best doctors from all over the world use to come to the USA to work and the rich from all over the world came to the USA for serious medical work (and from all the socialized medicine countries). I do not think that is the case anymore since Obamacare.

Obamacare was just a trick to get the government (our tax dollars) to pay insurance companies to insure 35 million people who were uninsured. It is all about enriching the insurance companies.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 10:39:09 AM
They also fly to Britain.  I had my teety cleaned in India, marvellous job (they spent much longer on it) and cost me 15 dollars.  People go to Bulgaria and Hungary for cosmetic surgery and dentistry.  Medical tourism exists all over the world.

$12,000 a year to cover your family?  I hardly pay much more than that in annual taxes if you ingore VAT (sales tax).  That is an astonishing amount of money.

Lots of Brits living in the US just fly home for 6 hours, even if they have insurance cover in the US to avoid the hassle.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jan/12/us-healthcare-system-leaves-brits-baffled-enraged
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 10:45:23 AM
If I was a yank, I would learn to speak with a British accent and just fly to the UK when I got really sick.  They never ask for ID here.

You'd have to sound better than Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins though.  Rene Zwillewegger was the best I have ever heard, she nailed it.

If you are dark Mexican just do a Pakistani accent.   Any Euro accent will work too.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: JezusDeKoning on January 30, 2019, 11:27:21 AM
Before Obamacare, my family paid 1/3 of what we are charged today under this American brand of socialized medicine. The best doctors from all over the world use to come to the USA to work and the rich from all over the world came to the USA for serious medical work (and from all the socialized medicine countries). I do not think that is the case anymore since Obamacare.

Obamacare was just a trick to get the government (our tax dollars) to pay insurance companies to insure 35 million people who were uninsured. It is all about enriching the insurance companies.
Obamacare isn't socialized medicine though... people buying private insurance through a market is very, very capitalistic. Something akin to the Swiss system, where it works over there.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Last Tradhican on January 30, 2019, 11:31:40 AM
$12,000 a year to cover your family?  
That rate is 10 years old. The Obamacare rate for my family of 6+ was $25,000 last time I checked like 2 years ago. For the average Joe, it's better to just not have insurance, pay the tax penalty. I've belonged to a shared care ministry for like 5 years and pay like $6000 a year and go to whatever doctors I choose. That's less than $800 a year per person.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on January 30, 2019, 11:55:33 PM
What happens with shared care schemes when it comes to big payouts?

You need expensive cancer treatment or dialysis and a kidney transplant.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Stubborn on January 31, 2019, 04:53:31 AM
That rate is 10 years old. The Obamacare rate for my family of 6+ was $25,000 last time I checked like 2 years ago. For the average Joe, it's better to just not have insurance, pay the tax penalty. I've belonged to a shared care ministry for like 5 years and pay like $6000 a year and go to whatever doctors I choose. That's less than $800 a year per person.
Yes, my insurance went from like $2000/year to over $9000/year and pretty much nothing was covered under that evil Obama care curse. And heaven help you if you have a really good paying job because the amount they take goes up exponentially the more you make. 

Such a perverted country praised that idiot for his "Affordable Care Act" forced upon the whole flipping country. Not sure if that's worse than the other side of the coin, where ignoramuses were screaming and protesting Trump's big tax cuts a few years ago. 

Health insurance should have been left alone because it has turned into a giant, expensive, corrupt cluster, same as everything else our government touches. 
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: cosmas on January 31, 2019, 02:13:26 PM
GGREG, WHY DON'T YOU GO BACK TO CHINA OR RUSSIA OR WHEREVER YOU CAME FROM. OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM IS NOT PERFECT BUT SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IS A FOOT IN THE DOOR FOR COMPLETE GOVT. TAKEOVER. TRY TALKING TO A REFUGEE THAT HAS ESCAPED RUSSIA CHINA OR CUBA. I HAVE ,IT LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER UNTIL YOU GET HIT WITH HARDCORE REALITY. COMPLETE TAKEOVER ! YOU LOSE ALL YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS. KEEP DREAMING !
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Nadir on January 31, 2019, 03:35:37 PM
GGREG, WHY DON'T YOU GO BACK TO CHINA OR RUSSIA OR WHEREVER YOU CAME FROM. OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM IS NOT PERFECT BUT SOCIALIZED MEDICINE IS A FOOT IN THE DOOR FOR COMPLETE GOVT. TAKEOVER. TRY TALKING TO A REFUGEE THAT HAS ESCAPED RUSSIA CHINA OR CUBA. I HAVE ,IT LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER UNTIL YOU GET HIT WITH HARDCORE REALITY. COMPLETE TAKEOVER ! YOU LOSE ALL YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS. KEEP DREAMING !
Something tells me you are ANGRY. HaHa  :jester:
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 01, 2019, 02:23:52 AM
There are plenty of countries with socialised medicine where people have civil rights.  Most of Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Chile and much of SE Asia.

I have lost count of the number of Americans who own small businesses but cannot grow them or are in jobs, but fear leaving them, because they are tied down by the replacement cost of medical insurance.  It is front of mind for many Americans.   Europeans are much more relaxed about the whole thing, plus I have never had to fill out a piece of medical paper work in my life other that those tick boxes for allergies. 

I doubt medical care in Cuba and Russia were good for the common peasant before socialism,  they just died early and had no house to sell.

Looking after sick people is one thing I don't mind paying taxes for.  I find it very unfree that a women who gives birth to a sick child or a person needing prescription medicine to keep them alive has to liquidate their assets or beg for charity to pay 1000s per month for pills.  No private corporation should have that power over live and death and be able to set the price for maximal profit.  And believe me they do exactly that.  An accountant works out the price to set the drug at to keep as many people alive who can afford it.  There is a need, demand, price optimization curve in the report, just like there is with Netflix pricing.  The difference being you don't need Netflix to stay alive or out of acute pain.

That is not freedom.  That is handing a licence to print money to an unelected corporate oligopoly who will use it to bleed you dry because your alternative is suffering and death.

Were it not for socialised medicine my father would have been bringing up 9 children on his own from 1971 onwards because my mother had kidney failure.  So I admit a personal bias.

Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: DLaurentius on February 01, 2019, 06:40:27 AM
Here in the United States, the tenets of liberal capitalism are a major plank of the American right, and even the left to some degree. Many Republicans and some traditional Catholics in the United States are almost categorically opposed to any sort of state involvement in the healthcare system, or social welfare in general.

I personally support government subsidized healthcare. However, I am wary of the dangers that could come with that, such as government funded abortions, euthanasia, and infanticide. 
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Stubborn on February 01, 2019, 07:22:11 AM
I personally support government subsidized healthcare. However, I am wary of the dangers that could come with that, such as government funded abortions, euthanasia, and infanticide.
The big problem with government subsidized healthcare is the taxes we, (the ones with money or jobs) have to pay for all the people who do nothing, pay no taxes and get their health care free.

Obama's evil mandate was all the incentive millions of people, here legally and illegally, needed to remain out of work. And of course the number of people not being charged anything while getting the benefits, grows and grows while the working stiffs pay the dead beat's doctor bills through sky high taxes. That's how our current government subsidized healthcare works - and it is terribly unjust and crooked.

     
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: JezusDeKoning on February 01, 2019, 08:52:08 AM
Here in the United States, the tenets of liberal capitalism are a major plank of the American right, and even the left to some degree. Many Republicans and some traditional Catholics in the United States are almost categorically opposed to any sort of state involvement in the healthcare system, or social welfare in general.

I personally support government subsidized healthcare. However, I am wary of the dangers that could come with that, such as government funded abortions, euthanasia, and infanticide.
I support it because this country is an oligarchy, fundamentally. Most of America is middle-class workers making $30k a year or less (https://dailycaller.com/2015/10/25/1-in-2-working-americans-make-less-than-30000-a-year/), and could not afford to financially survive a four or five-figure medical bill without significant trouble. They're going into more debt than they can handle to not die.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 01, 2019, 09:43:21 AM
Here in the United States, the tenets of liberal capitalism are a major plank of the American right, and even the left to some degree. Many Republicans and some traditional Catholics in the United States are almost categorically opposed to any sort of state involvement in the healthcare system, or social welfare in general.

I personally support government subsidized healthcare. However, I am wary of the dangers that could come with that, such as government funded abortions, euthanasia, and infanticide.
America is aborting plenty in the private sector now.
It's mothers (mostly unmarried pregnant women) who want to rid themselves of children that are driving the high numbers of abortions.
We like to find other victims, but with the exception of weird places like China and various commie gulugs, there ain't much forced abortion going on anywhere in the world.
And in first world countries they lives of single mothers are pretty comfortable.  Straight to the top of social housing and all sorts of help.  Compared to the mother of Oliver Twist it is a paradise being a single mother nowadays.  Just less of a paradise that aborting the child and continuing to fornicate and be untied.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Last Tradhican on February 01, 2019, 10:02:36 AM
What happens with shared care schemes when it comes to big payouts?

You need expensive cancer treatment or dialysis and a kidney transplant.
Coverage is $2 million per incident. 
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 01, 2019, 12:15:56 PM
Coverage is $2 million per incident.
Why doesn't everyone do it then?  Are there any big disadvantages?
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Ladislaus on February 01, 2019, 12:49:27 PM
If I was a yank, I would learn to speak with a British accent and just fly to the UK when I got really sick.  They never ask for ID here.

Thanks for the tip.   :laugh1:

Of course ... that would effectively be stealing.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Last Tradhican on February 01, 2019, 01:44:42 PM
Why doesn't everyone do it then?  Are there any big disadvantages?
Because  most people do not know about it. Look up Christian Health Ministries.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 01, 2019, 11:45:48 PM
https://www.clarkscondensed.com/thrifty-living/christian-healthcare-ministries-review/

Seems like a good idea hope it spreads.

I hate the paperwork though.  Hate admin.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Last Tradhican on February 02, 2019, 03:47:58 AM
https://www.clarkscondensed.com/thrifty-living/christian-healthcare-ministries-review/

Seems like a good idea hope it spreads.

I hate the paperwork though.  Hate admin.
Nothing comes for free. That CHM system costs  at least 1/4 of any socialized medicine. At least 1/4. "Saving the paperwork" costs you a mint in taxes, in other words, you will be well paid for your "paperwork" time.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 02, 2019, 09:04:04 AM
I think you have admin with regular insurance too correct?

Paperwork is purgatory for me as is doing expense reports.  I just bill the flights, hotels, and car hire and suck up the rest or make up for it in some other way.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Kazimierz on February 02, 2019, 09:39:11 PM
I confess I would have bankrupted many times over if it were not for the care received under the Canadian healthcare system. I can but examine what my three and a half week stay in hospital last summer, with all the test, day transfer to another hospital for specific tests, followed up my major surgery at the end would have cost in the US. Plus all the doc visits, meds, and specialists esp in the last decade.

But Canada is wayyyyyyy far too socialist if not downright Marxist in many respects.

That is why I am an Alberta secessionist :cowboy:
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: apollo on February 04, 2019, 02:18:32 PM
Socialized anything is government control and slavery for the people, 70% taxation, everybody is forced to work, and more.
Don't believe me?  Watch this video (it mentions healtcare which includes forced abortions and uthanasia):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-awkYhtey50 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-awkYhtey50)
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: JezusDeKoning on February 04, 2019, 03:17:16 PM
The marginal tax rate was very, very high for the 1% of society until the 1980s. It was somewhere between 70-91%. I don't have an opinion on it either way because I am not rich, but that's just how it is.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: apollo on February 04, 2019, 03:38:42 PM
The marginal tax rate was very, very high for the 1% of society until the 1980s. It was somewhere between 70-91%. I don't have an opinion on it either way because I am not rich, but that's just how it is.
Just how it is ? ... what, under socialism ?
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: MaterDominici on February 05, 2019, 12:52:21 AM
Why doesn't everyone do it then?  Are there any big disadvantages?
A. most insurance comes through your employer and people think whatever they're offered is their only choice, take it or leave it
B. most employers don't employ Christians 100% (you have to "follow Biblical principles" to join CHM)
C. people who don't qualify for employer insurance usually don't have enough money to afford ANY type of insurance whatsoever
.
Many people joining sharing ministries are self-employed.
.
There are situations that wouldn't work well with joining a sharing ministry. For example, if you're dependent on routine, expensive prescription medicines, you *might* find typical health insurance to be a better option. Or, you could find that the savings on monthly premiums is more than enough to cover your prescriptions.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: cosmas on February 06, 2019, 09:08:05 AM
What the Popes Have to Say About Socialism
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87)]February 24, 2010 | Gustavo Solimeo  8 Comments (http://www.tfp.org/what-the-popes-have-to-say-about-socialism/#disqus_thread)[/color]


Anyone who examines the ideology of socialism will see the contrast between the socialist doctrine and the doctrine of the Church.All the same, it is not out of place to review the condemnation of the popes starting with Pius IX and ending with Benedict XVI. Thus, we present what the popes have to say about socialism as they condemn the socialist doctrine thoroughly and entirely. This is not a comprehensive compilation, but just some samples.
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/2010_Pope_Pius_IX-242x300.jpg)PIUS IX (1846-1878):
“Overthrow [of] the entire order of human affairs”
“You are aware indeed, that the goal of this most iniquitous plot is to drive people to overthrow the entire order of human affairs and to draw them over to the wicked theories of this Socialism and Communism, by confusing them with perverted teachings.” (Encyclical Nostis et Nobiscum, December 8, 1849)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Leo_XIII.jpg)
Leo XIII (1877-1903): Socialists assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law.
[color][size][font]
LEO XIII (1878-1903):
Hideous monster
“…communism, socialism, nihilism, hideous deformities of the civil society of men and almost its ruin.” (Encyclical Diuturnum, June 29, 1881)Ruin of all institutions
“… For, the fear of God and reverence for divine laws being taken away, the authority of rulers despised, sedition permitted and approved, and the popular passions urged on to lawlessness, with no restraint save that of punishment, a change and overthrow of all things will necessarily follow. Yea, this change and overthrow is deliberately planned and put forward by many associations of communists and socialists” (Encyclical Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884, n. 27).
A sect “that threatens civil society with destruction”
“…We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning – the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever. Surely, these are they who, as the sacred Scriptures testify, ‘Defile the flesh, despise dominion and blaspheme majesty.’ (Jud. 8).” (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, December 28, 1878, n. 1)
Socialists debase the natural union of man and woman and assail the right of property
“They [socialists, communists, or nihilists] debase the natural union of man and woman, which is held sacred even among barbarous peoples; and its bond, by which the family is chiefly held together, they weaken, or even deliver up to lust. Lured, in fine, by the greed of present goods, which is ‘the root of all evils, which some coveting have erred from the faith’ (1 Tim. 6:10.3), they assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law; and by a scheme of horrible wickedness, while they seem desirous of caring for the needs and satisfying the desires of all men, they strive to seize and hold in common whatever has been acquired either by title of lawful inheritance, or by labor of brain and hands, or by thrift in one’s mode of life.” (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, December 28, 1878, n. 1)
Destructive sect
“…socialists and members of other seditious societies, who labor unceasingly to destroy the State even to its foundations.” (Encyclical Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888)
Enemy of society and of Religion
“…there is need for a union of brave minds with all the resources they can command. The harvest of misery is before our eyes, and the dreadful projects of the most disastrous national upheavals are threatening us from the growing power of the socialistic movement. They have insidiously worked their way into the very heart of the community, and in the darkness of their secret gatherings, and in the open light of day, in their writings and their harangues, they are urging the masses onward to sedition; they fling aside religious discipline; they scorn duties; they clamor only for rights; they are working incessantly on the multitudes of the needy which daily grow greater, and which, because of their poverty are easily deluded and led into error. It is equally the concern of the State and of religion, and all good men should deem it a sacred duty to preserve and guard both in the honor which is their due.” (Encyclical Graves de Communi Re, January 18, 1901, n. 21)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/1903/12/2010_Pope_Pius_X-1-202x300.png)[/font][/size][/color]
Saint Pius X (1903-1914)
[color][size][font]
SAINT PIUS X (1903-1914):
The dream of re-shaping society will bring socialism
“But stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, ‘the reign of love and justice’ … What are they going to produce? … A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.” (Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique [“Our Apostolic Mandate”] to the French Bishops, August 25, 1910, condemning the movement Le Sillon)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Benedict_XV-260x300.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
Benedict XV
[color][size][font]
BENEDICT XV (1914-1922):
The condemnation of socialism should never be forgotten
“It is not our intention here to repeat the arguments which clearly expose the errors of Socialism and of similar doctrines. Our predecessor, Leo XIII, most wisely did so in truly memorable Encyclicals; and you, Venerable Brethren, will take the greatest care that those grave precepts are never forgotten, but that whenever circumstances call for it, they should be clearly expounded and inculcated in Catholic associations and congresses, in sermons and in the Catholic press.” (Encyclical Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914, n. 13)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Pius_XI_1922.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
Pius XI (1922-1939): “No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”
[color][size][font]
PIUS XI (1922-1939):
Socialism, fundamentally contrary to Christian truth
“… For Socialism, which could then be termed almost a single system and which maintained definite teachings reduced into one body of doctrine, has since then split chiefly into two
sections, often opposing each other and even bitterly hostile, without either one however abandoning a position fundamentally contrary to Christian truth that was characteristic of Socialism.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931, n. 111)
Socialism cannot be reconciled with Catholic Doctrine
“But what if Socialism has really been so tempered and modified as to the class struggle and private ownership that there is in it no longer anything to be censured on these points? Has it thereby renounced its contradictory nature to the Christian religion? This is the question that holds many minds in suspense. And numerous are the Catholics who, although they clearly understand that Christian principles can never be abandoned or diminished seem to turn their eyes to the Holy See and earnestly beseech Us to decide whether this form of Socialism has so far recovered from false doctrines that it can be accepted without the sacrifice of any Christian principle and in a certain sense be baptized.
That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.” (Ibid. n. 117)
Catholic Socialism, a contradiction
“[Socialism] is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.” (Ibid. n. 120)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Pius_XII_sedia_gestatoria-221x300.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
Pius XII
[color][size][font]
PIUS XII (1939-1958):
The Church will fight to the end, in defense of supreme values threatened by socialism
“[The Church undertook] the protection of the individual and the family against a current threatening to bring about a total socialization which in the end would make the specter of the ‘Leviathan’ become a shocking reality. The Church will fight this battle to the end, for it is a question of supreme values: the dignity of man and the salvation of souls.” (“Radio message to the Katholikentag of Vienna,” September 14, 1952 in Discorsi e Radiomessaggi, vol. XIV, p. 314)The state can not be regarded as being above all
“To consider the State as something ultimate to which everything else should be subordinated and directed, cannot fail to harm the true and lasting prosperity of nations.” (Encyclical Summi Pontificatus, October 20, 1939, n. 60)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_John_XXIII.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
John XXIII
[color][size][font]
JOHN XXIII (1958-1963):
“No Catholic could subscribe even to moderate socialism”
“Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority.” (Encyclical Mater et Magistra, May 15, 1961, n. 34)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Paul_VI-150x150.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
Paul VI
[color][size][font]
PAUL VI (1963-1978):
Too often Christians tend to idealize socialism
“Too often Christians attracted by socialism tend to idealize it in terms which, apart from anything else, are very general: a will for justice, solidarity and equality. They refuse to recognize the limitations of the historical socialist movements, which remain conditioned by the ideologies from which they originated.” (Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens, May 14, 1971, n. 31)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_John_Paul_II.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
John Paul II (1978-2005)
[color][size][font]
JOHN PAUL II (1978-2005):
Socialism: Danger of a “simple and radical solution”
“It may seem surprising that ‘socialism’ appeared at the beginning of the Pope’s critique of solutions to the ‘question of the working class’ at a time when ‘socialism’ was not yet in the form of a strong and powerful State, with all the resources which that implies, as was later to happen. However, he correctly judged the danger posed to the masses by the attractive presentation of this simple and radical solution to the ‘question of the working class.’” (Encyclical Centesimus Annus − On the 100thanniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, May 1, 1991, n. 12)Fundamental error of socialism: A mistaken conception of the person
“Continuing our reflections, … we have to add that the fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature. Socialism considers the individual person simply as an element, a molecule within the social organism, so that the good of the individual is completely subordinated to the functioning of the socio-economic mechanism. Socialism likewise maintains that the good of the individual can be realized without reference to his free choice, to the unique and exclusive responsibility which he exercises in the face of good or evil. Man is thus reduced to a series of social relationships, and the concept of the person as the autonomous subject of moral decision disappears, the very subject whose decisions build the social order. From this mistaken conception of the person there arise both a distortion of law, which defines the sphere of the exercise of freedom, and an opposition to private property.” (Ibid, n. 13)
 
BENEDICT XVI (2005 – present):
“We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything”
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Benedict_XVI_WDC.jpg)[/font][/size][/color]
Benedict XVI
[color][size][font]
“The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person − every person − needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need. … In the end, the claim that just social structures would make works of charity superfluous masks a materialist conception of man: the mistaken notion that man can live ‘by bread alone’ (Mt 4:4; cf. Dt 8:3) − a conviction that demeans man and ultimately disregards all that is specifically human.” (Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, December 25, 2005, n. 28)
[/font][/size][/color]
What Does Self-Managing Socialism Mean for Communism:
A Barrier? Or a Bridgehead?
(http://www.tfp.org/what-the-popes-have-to-say-about-socialism/what-does-self-managing-socialism-mean-for-communism-a-barrier-or-a-bridgehead)
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: apollo on February 06, 2019, 09:44:04 AM
There is another side to this topic. 

Does Healthcare mean Medical Care or Chiropractic Care or Naturopathic Care.

If Medical Care only (which is usually the case), then it will be way too expensive
and mostly harmfulm, considering the fact that vaccines do more harm than good,
Iatrogenic disease (caused by medication) is the 3rd leading cause of death, and
the government will be paying for (and forcing) abortions and euthanasia. 

It will never cover my chiropractor's preventive treatment program (http://healthpromoting.com (http://healthpromoting.com)).

People who want natural care instead of medical care will still be forced to pay for it in through
taxation. 

Lastly, when the government does something it costs three times as much. ]

Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: cosmas on February 07, 2019, 03:47:04 PM
Poll: Voters Reject ‘Medicare for All’ — in Left-Wing California (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/07/medicare-for-all-poll-voters-reject-single-payer-health-care-in-left-wing-california/)
ff1,298 (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/02/07/medicare-for-all-poll-voters-reject-single-payer-health-care-in-left-wing-california/#disqus_thread)
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Cera on February 07, 2019, 06:12:01 PM
Two problems with socialized medicine:

1.  uncontrolled illegal immigration, with free health care as a "right" and

2.  limited resources "necessitating" death panels.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 08, 2019, 04:50:59 AM
Two problems with socialized medicine:

1.  uncontrolled illegal immigration, with free health care as a "right" and

2.  limited resources "necessitating" death panels.
Neither are big problems.
1.  Illegals in the UK are given emergency treatment only.  I know of a case where a British legal immigrant got her illegal (overstaying) Ukrainian mother-in-law cancer treatment and they tracked her down and put a lien on the daughter's UK house.
2.  If you are poor then it is no different than not having any or enough insurance coverage or not being covered for a precondition. If you are rich there is nothing to stop you having private health coverage.  Well off people in the UK have private healthcare.
There are always death panels in the sense that bureaucrats always decide the economic cost and benefit of a life.  This is done with safety inspections on aircraft, annual car inspections, road gritting and health screening.  If a country spent billions screening for cancer it could catch and cure 1000s of cases per year.  But it does not because the costs outweigh the benefits.
It is just a question of whether an accountant or a medical bureaucrat makes a decision as to whether your life is worth the money.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: cosmas on February 08, 2019, 09:13:38 PM
HOME DEPOT CO-FOUNDER: SOCIALISM ‘COMES RIGHT OUT OF THE UNIVERSITIES’
People want to come to the US for its free enterprise system, he stated
Infowars.com - FEBRUARY 8, 2019 


(https://www.infowars.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/020819berkeley.jpg) (https://www.infowars.com/home-depot-co-founder-socialism-comes-right-out-of-the-universities/)
IMAGE CREDITS: DAVID MADISON/GETTY IMAGES (https://www.infowars.com/home-depot-co-founder-socialism-comes-right-out-of-the-universities/).



The push for socialism in America is coming right out of the universities, Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus said.
During a recent interview with Fox News, Marcus talked about the decline of Venezuela and Cuba and how it served as a “perfect example of socialism gone wrong.”
“They [Cuba] took a great country and they put it right down the drain in every way possible,” he said. “People are starving to death. Medical [care] is not available for them.”

“And we have a group of people in Washington today, new representatives especially, that look at socialism as the way to go and if you don’t think that’s dangerous, I do.”
He said this push for socialism in the US begins in college.
“It comes right out of the universities. You see students graduating today and a very high percentage… almost 50% of students coming out of universities today believe that socialism is the answer,” Marcus added. “That’s frightening to me because the things that made this country great, that created the wealth of this country, and I mean the wealth of every single person right down the line, the best medical care in the world, the best housing in the world, that’s why people want to come here, is because of the system, and that’s the free enterprise system.”

Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 09, 2019, 12:16:51 AM
Free enterprise assumes you are free to do enterprise.

The talented and the naturally hard working are going to do well.  I have done very well in a free enterprise system.  CEOs are generally speaking alpha men with a close to psychotic level of competitiveness and ambition.  This was always true but in Christian nations in the past their behavior was steered and influenced by what would happen to them after death.

But the painfully shy, the very ugly, the less intelligent, the unhealthy (physically and mentally), those who are very badly raised by parents, those born into corrupt countries are going to do badly on the whole.  The rich will corrupt any free enterprise system, form monopolies and cartells and corrupt politicians to their own end.  They have the people skills, the money, the ambition and the lust for power to do that.

Then there is the fact that once you are rich, the supply costs of wealth go down in comparison to your wealth.  Money costs less to borrow, lawyers are relatively cheaper, you can pounce on a new opportunity or grease the palm of a bureaucrat or donate to a politician to get what you want.

Start a Home Depot rival and I guarantee you that Bernie Marcus and his shareholders and senior executives will use zoning laws, lobby groups, tax investigations and price manipulation to drive you out of business.  The only reason they won't succeed is that you are harder working and cleverer than they are, or their habits and assumptions cause them to make a mistake.  They talk free enterprise, but when your free enterprise affects theirs you will soon find they become fascist as possible.

Matthew works hard programming a computer but if a Chinaman or an Indian can provided the same service for 1/3 the price he is going to be out of work.  If a robot can write code then they will be out of work too.  Those lucky to be born and raised with the right parents, schooling, personality, drive and determination are going to adjust and move on and adapt their business.  Over the last 21 years I have morphed my business to deliver a different service than I used to offer, as technology has changed around me and the perception of value changed.

I am all for free enterprise but when read the Gospel I don't get the overall impression that Jesus is telling the rich to get richer or the poor to work harder.  Jesus examples of heros are the relatively wealthy who show mercy and compassion to the deserving poor, sick, destitute.

Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 09, 2019, 01:22:07 AM
Here is an example of how pathetic some people are.  Jesus never gave such an example other than the good thief, I suppose.  But even the good thief had the smarts to see a prophet when one passed his way.

I live in a house that butts up to a social housing estate.  Because I am in the best part of a UK market town, which is 97% white, the neighbours are respectable blue collar workers.  They were housed by a housing association charity that provides their secure tenancy at 50% of the market rate.  In the past the people at the housing association put the best people here, but in these politically correct days they have to sprinkle the scumbags in with the respectible people in order to not create sink estates.  Which ironically happen anyway.

About 5% are what you might term problem families.

A neighbour directly opposite has a common law wife, and a daughter who goes to school with my daughter.  He's an underclass scumbag par excellence.  My daughter and his daughter are in the same class at school.  He has a ladder on his station wagon rooftop so I assume he works casually as some sort of window cleaner as and when he gets work.  I would estimate he works for 15hours per week, most of the time he is inside his house watching cable TV.  He is not really a problem, just a lazy weirdo.

He contributes nothing to community life, his garden is a mess, he appears to me to be a user of casual drugs.  Because he has an old car, once every month, he knocks on my door and asks for a jump start or a tyre inflated because I have the skills and the tools to help.  I always help him out to be neighbourly.  As far as possible I go out of my way to help my neighbours because it is a great way to stop them being envious of you or them thinking you look down on them which is a trait of the underclass.  Overall, I prefer working class neighbours to middle class ones.  Obviously, I  am something of an oddity in the street with 6 children and a Russian wife.  Since I grew up with an Irish immigrant underclass in London at school, and lived in an area populated by secular Jews and Hindus I know how to get along with everyone.

3 nights ago he and his girlfriend had a blazing row at 3am.  So loud that it woke my wife up she considered calling the police, because of all the f'ing and blinding but she didn't and nor did anyone else. The house is 120 feet away.  It was not a common occurence but from what my daughter told me they were somewhat troubled and the daughter was somewhat unhappy at school.

28 hours later I woke up to blue lights flashing and an ambulance outside.  My wife went down and spoke to the police then got straight onto Facebook.  I said an Our Father and three Hail Mary's since obviously something had happened and went back to sleep.  At 10am I got out of bed and saw undertakers bringing his body out on a gurney. He had taken a drug overdose.  Apparently it was over "debts".  He had mounting debts, was in arrears on his rent and going to get evicted.  Basically just one of life's pathetic characters.

I am all for not giving such people access to good social housing, giving them food stamps and not allowing them to get married/unmarried and spawn, if there is a practical way to achieve that, but I simply don't see how someone like this handles a 1000 dollar medical bill when they cannot pay a subsidized 700 dollar monthly rent.  You might as well just drown them at 21 when they get their first tattoo and don't show up to work for a week because the took a last minute holiday funded by a PayDay loan.

The untermenschen somehow have to be kept fed and watered and free medical care seems like a good idea.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: MaterDominici on February 09, 2019, 01:37:42 AM
The person your describing would have any major medical bills (hospital) written off once they submit paperwork showing their income. A write-off from the hospital often leads to a write-off from the doctor as well. Every non-profit hospital in the US has to write off a certain % of their business as "charity care" in order to keep their non-profit status.

This is to say nothing of the large percentage of poor Americans who qualify for free health care through Medicaid. What it takes to qualify varies by state. In some states, a family of 3 can make over $40,000 and qualify for Medicaid. The child(ren) in this scenario would always qualify for free or really cheap health care, but the parents might or might not depending on what state they live in.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 09, 2019, 01:50:40 AM
That then creates an incentive to not earn more than the threshold so you do not lose the entitlement.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: MaterDominici on February 09, 2019, 01:50:59 AM
What it takes to qualify varies by state. In some states, a family of 3 can make over $40,000 and qualify for Medicaid.
I looked it up and it's only Washington DC which is this generous ($46,000 for a family of 3). Most states that offer Medicaid for adults cut the adults off at $28,000 for a family of 3.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: MaterDominici on February 09, 2019, 01:59:28 AM
That then creates an incentive to not earn more than the threshold so you do not lose the entitlement.
True. Most people don't get the option of choosing exactly how much money they're going to make. Even the guy in your example who could do so in theory probably wouldn't be smart enough or ambitious enough to figure out exactly at what point he'd no longer qualify.
.
Plus, the incentive to not make more money is already built into food stamps, so unless you're also going to give everyone free food, keeping their health insurance is a secondary concern to keeping their food stamps.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: ggreg on February 09, 2019, 02:38:20 PM
The biggest problem with food stamps is that they are used on other stuff than food.

Society is easily rich enough to fund the poor and feckless in food and housing, free medical (not including expensive new treatments) and education for those who value it.  But like professional sailors or expert construction workers it would be a lot better if these people simply accepted the charity and lived out their lives.

With some exceptions, such as injured veterans, I don't think people on substantial government welfare programs should get a vote for example.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: MaterDominici on February 09, 2019, 08:39:04 PM
The biggest problem with food stamps is that they are used on other stuff than food.
I understand that fraud exists and with a bit of collusion, you can buy all sorts of things with food stamps, but for your average person with no criminal connections, what do you think you can buy other than food?
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: cosmas on February 09, 2019, 09:51:55 PM
One thing to also remember is that "Christ said "The poor will always be with us " I contend that so will the sick ! Its not a perfect world. We are all supposed to earn our own way ,its our road to Calvary. We are supposed to follow Our Lord, he was not rich ,did not have govt. handout. Did not have medi-care. It would be great if everyone had life easy ,but thats not reality .
We can do some things to help others but then you have to pause sometime and ask yourself am i really hurting or helping this person.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Disputaciones on February 10, 2019, 01:22:40 AM
Matthew works hard programming a computer but if a Chinaman or an Indian can provided the same service for 1/3 the price he is going to be out of work.  If a robot can write code then they will be out of work too.  
And who will program the robot?
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Cera on February 11, 2019, 01:54:26 PM
(https://www.startmail.com/attachment/download_received/image004.jpg?absolute_dl=1&passed_id=10033&mailbox=INBOX&ent_id=27)
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: forlorn on February 11, 2019, 02:18:01 PM
And who will program the robot?
Once a  programmer-robot with the ability to learn is designed(in the very distant future, hopefully), it'd be trivial to mass-produce it. So you'd get very few human programmers just overseeing, and updating/fixing the code of the robots etc. while the vast majority of programmers would be out of work. 
But in the realm of the present, in the next 10-15 years we could see millions of drivers lose their jobs. What will they do? They can't all become programmers. 
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Nadir on February 11, 2019, 02:21:52 PM
Remember the topic.
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: forlorn on February 11, 2019, 02:22:30 PM
What the Popes Have to Say About Socialism
[color=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.87)]February 24, 2010 | Gustavo Solimeo  8 Comments (http://www.tfp.org/what-the-popes-have-to-say-about-socialism/#disqus_thread)[/color]


Anyone who examines the ideology of socialism will see the contrast between the socialist doctrine and the doctrine of the Church.All the same, it is not out of place to review the condemnation of the popes starting with Pius IX and ending with Benedict XVI. Thus, we present what the popes have to say about socialism as they condemn the socialist doctrine thoroughly and entirely. This is not a comprehensive compilation, but just some samples.
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/2010_Pope_Pius_IX-242x300.jpg)PIUS IX (1846-1878):
“Overthrow [of] the entire order of human affairs”
“You are aware indeed, that the goal of this most iniquitous plot is to drive people to overthrow the entire order of human affairs and to draw them over to the wicked theories of this Socialism and Communism, by confusing them with perverted teachings.” (Encyclical Nostis et Nobiscum, December 8, 1849)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Leo_XIII.jpg)

Leo XIII (1877-1903): Socialists assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law.
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
LEO XIII (1878-1903):
Hideous monster
“…communism, socialism, nihilism, hideous deformities of the civil society of men and almost its ruin.” (Encyclical Diuturnum, June 29, 1881)Ruin of all institutions
“… For, the fear of God and reverence for divine laws being taken away, the authority of rulers despised, sedition permitted and approved, and the popular passions urged on to lawlessness, with no restraint save that of punishment, a change and overthrow of all things will necessarily follow. Yea, this change and overthrow is deliberately planned and put forward by many associations of communists and socialists” (Encyclical Humanum Genus, April 20, 1884, n. 27).
A sect “that threatens civil society with destruction”
“…We speak of that sect of men who, under various and almost barbarous names, are called socialists, communists, or nihilists, and who, spread over all the world, and bound together by the closest ties in a wicked confederacy, no longer seek the shelter of secret meetings, but, openly and boldly marching forth in the light of day, strive to bring to a head what they have long been planning – the overthrow of all civil society whatsoever. Surely, these are they who, as the sacred Scriptures testify, ‘Defile the flesh, despise dominion and blaspheme majesty.’ (Jud. 8).” (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, December 28, 1878, n. 1)
Socialists debase the natural union of man and woman and assail the right of property
“They [socialists, communists, or nihilists] debase the natural union of man and woman, which is held sacred even among barbarous peoples; and its bond, by which the family is chiefly held together, they weaken, or even deliver up to lust. Lured, in fine, by the greed of present goods, which is ‘the root of all evils, which some coveting have erred from the faith’ (1 Tim. 6:10.3), they assail the right of property sanctioned by natural law; and by a scheme of horrible wickedness, while they seem desirous of caring for the needs and satisfying the desires of all men, they strive to seize and hold in common whatever has been acquired either by title of lawful inheritance, or by labor of brain and hands, or by thrift in one’s mode of life.” (Encyclical Quod Apostolici Muneris, December 28, 1878, n. 1)
Destructive sect
“…socialists and members of other seditious societies, who labor unceasingly to destroy the State even to its foundations.” (Encyclical Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888)
Enemy of society and of Religion
“…there is need for a union of brave minds with all the resources they can command. The harvest of misery is before our eyes, and the dreadful projects of the most disastrous national upheavals are threatening us from the growing power of the socialistic movement. They have insidiously worked their way into the very heart of the community, and in the darkness of their secret gatherings, and in the open light of day, in their writings and their harangues, they are urging the masses onward to sedition; they fling aside religious discipline; they scorn duties; they clamor only for rights; they are working incessantly on the multitudes of the needy which daily grow greater, and which, because of their poverty are easily deluded and led into error. It is equally the concern of the State and of religion, and all good men should deem it a sacred duty to preserve and guard both in the honor which is their due.” (Encyclical Graves de Communi Re, January 18, 1901, n. 21)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/1903/12/2010_Pope_Pius_X-1-202x300.png)[/font][/size]
Saint Pius X (1903-1914)
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
SAINT PIUS X (1903-1914):
The dream of re-shaping society will bring socialism
“But stranger still, alarming and saddening at the same time, are the audacity and frivolity of men who call themselves Catholics and dream of re-shaping society under such conditions, and of establishing on earth, over and beyond the pale of the Catholic Church, ‘the reign of love and justice’ … What are they going to produce? … A mere verbal and chimerical construction in which we shall see, glowing in a jumble, and in seductive confusion, the words Liberty, Justice, Fraternity, Love, Equality, and human exultation, all resting upon an ill-understood human dignity. It will be a tumultuous agitation, sterile for the end proposed, but which will benefit the less Utopian exploiters of the people. Yes, we can truly say that the Sillon, its eyes fixed on a chimera, brings Socialism in its train.” (Apostolic Letter Notre Charge Apostolique [“Our Apostolic Mandate”] to the French Bishops, August 25, 1910, condemning the movement Le Sillon)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Benedict_XV-260x300.jpg)[/font][/size]
Benedict XV
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
BENEDICT XV (1914-1922):
The condemnation of socialism should never be forgotten
“It is not our intention here to repeat the arguments which clearly expose the errors of Socialism and of similar doctrines. Our predecessor, Leo XIII, most wisely did so in truly memorable Encyclicals; and you, Venerable Brethren, will take the greatest care that those grave precepts are never forgotten, but that whenever circumstances call for it, they should be clearly expounded and inculcated in Catholic associations and congresses, in sermons and in the Catholic press.” (Encyclical Ad Beatissimi Apostolorum, November 1, 1914, n. 13)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Pius_XI_1922.jpg)[/font][/size]
Pius XI (1922-1939): “No one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.”
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
PIUS XI (1922-1939):
Socialism, fundamentally contrary to Christian truth
“… For Socialism, which could then be termed almost a single system and which maintained definite teachings reduced into one body of doctrine, has since then split chiefly into two
sections, often opposing each other and even bitterly hostile, without either one however abandoning a position fundamentally contrary to Christian truth that was characteristic of Socialism.” (Encyclical Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931, n. 111)
Socialism cannot be reconciled with Catholic Doctrine
“But what if Socialism has really been so tempered and modified as to the class struggle and private ownership that there is in it no longer anything to be censured on these points? Has it thereby renounced its contradictory nature to the Christian religion? This is the question that holds many minds in suspense. And numerous are the Catholics who, although they clearly understand that Christian principles can never be abandoned or diminished seem to turn their eyes to the Holy See and earnestly beseech Us to decide whether this form of Socialism has so far recovered from false doctrines that it can be accepted without the sacrifice of any Christian principle and in a certain sense be baptized.
That We, in keeping with Our fatherly solicitude, may answer their petitions, We make this pronouncement: Whether considered as a doctrine, or an historical fact, or a movement, Socialism, if it remains truly Socialism, even after it has yielded to truth and justice on the points which we have mentioned, cannot be reconciled with the teachings of the Catholic Church because its concept of society itself is utterly foreign to Christian truth.” (Ibid. n. 117)
Catholic Socialism, a contradiction
“[Socialism] is based nevertheless on a theory of human society peculiar to itself and irreconcilable with true Christianity. Religious socialism, Christian socialism, are contradictory terms; no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist.” (Ibid. n. 120)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Pius_XII_sedia_gestatoria-221x300.jpg)[/font][/size]
Pius XII
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
PIUS XII (1939-1958):
The Church will fight to the end, in defense of supreme values threatened by socialism
“[The Church undertook] the protection of the individual and the family against a current threatening to bring about a total socialization which in the end would make the specter of the ‘Leviathan’ become a shocking reality. The Church will fight this battle to the end, for it is a question of supreme values: the dignity of man and the salvation of souls.” (“Radio message to the Katholikentag of Vienna,” September 14, 1952 in Discorsi e Radiomessaggi, vol. XIV, p. 314)The state can not be regarded as being above all
“To consider the State as something ultimate to which everything else should be subordinated and directed, cannot fail to harm the true and lasting prosperity of nations.” (Encyclical Summi Pontificatus, October 20, 1939, n. 60)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_John_XXIII.jpg)[/font][/size]
John XXIII
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
JOHN XXIII (1958-1963):
“No Catholic could subscribe even to moderate socialism”
“Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority.” (Encyclical Mater et Magistra, May 15, 1961, n. 34)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Paul_VI-150x150.jpg)[/font][/size]
Paul VI
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
PAUL VI (1963-1978):
Too often Christians tend to idealize socialism
“Too often Christians attracted by socialism tend to idealize it in terms which, apart from anything else, are very general: a will for justice, solidarity and equality. They refuse to recognize the limitations of the historical socialist movements, which remain conditioned by the ideologies from which they originated.” (Apostolic Letter Octogesima Adveniens, May 14, 1971, n. 31)
 
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_John_Paul_II.jpg)[/font][/size]
John Paul II (1978-2005)
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
JOHN PAUL II (1978-2005):
Socialism: Danger of a “simple and radical solution”
“It may seem surprising that ‘socialism’ appeared at the beginning of the Pope’s critique of solutions to the ‘question of the working class’ at a time when ‘socialism’ was not yet in the form of a strong and powerful State, with all the resources which that implies, as was later to happen. However, he correctly judged the danger posed to the masses by the attractive presentation of this simple and radical solution to the ‘question of the working class.’” (Encyclical Centesimus Annus − On the 100thanniversary of Pope Leo XIII’s Rerum Novarum, May 1, 1991, n. 12)Fundamental error of socialism: A mistaken conception of the person
“Continuing our reflections, … we have to add that the fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature. Socialism considers the individual person simply as an element, a molecule within the social organism, so that the good of the individual is completely subordinated to the functioning of the socio-economic mechanism. Socialism likewise maintains that the good of the individual can be realized without reference to his free choice, to the unique and exclusive responsibility which he exercises in the face of good or evil. Man is thus reduced to a series of social relationships, and the concept of the person as the autonomous subject of moral decision disappears, the very subject whose decisions build the social order. From this mistaken conception of the person there arise both a distortion of law, which defines the sphere of the exercise of freedom, and an opposition to private property.” (Ibid, n. 13)
 
BENEDICT XVI (2005 – present):
“We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything”
(http://www.tfp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/2010_Pope_Benedict_XVI_WDC.jpg)[/font][/size]
Benedict XVI
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]
“The State which would provide everything, absorbing everything into itself, would ultimately become a mere bureaucracy incapable of guaranteeing the very thing which the suffering person − every person − needs: namely, loving personal concern. We do not need a State which regulates and controls everything, but a State which, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, generously acknowledges and supports initiatives arising from the different social forces and combines spontaneity with closeness to those in need. … In the end, the claim that just social structures would make works of charity superfluous masks a materialist conception of man: the mistaken notion that man can live ‘by bread alone’ (Mt 4:4; cf. Dt 8:3) − a conviction that demeans man and ultimately disregards all that is specifically human.” (Encyclical Deus Caritas Est, December 25, 2005, n. 28)
[/font][/size]
What Does Self-Managing Socialism Mean for Communism:
A Barrier? Or a Bridgehead?
(http://www.tfp.org/what-the-popes-have-to-say-about-socialism/what-does-self-managing-socialism-mean-for-communism-a-barrier-or-a-bridgehead)
It's amazing how eloquent the old Popes were. Meanwhile all Pope Francis has to offer are platitudes and meaningless mumbo-jumbo. Not to mention that he practically endorses socialism on the daily. 
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Nadir on February 11, 2019, 02:45:44 PM
One thing to also remember is that "Christ said "The poor will always be with us " I contend that so will the sick ! Its not a perfect world. We are all supposed to earn our own way ,its our road to Calvary. We are supposed to follow Our Lord, he was not rich ,did not have govt. handout. Did not have medi-care. It would be great if everyone had life easy ,but thats not reality .
We can do some things to help others but then you have to pause sometime and ask yourself am i really hurting or helping this person.
When Christ said not  "The poor will always be with us " but
.
"For the poor you have always with you: and whensoever you will, you may do them good: but me you have not always." [Mark 14:7]  
.
For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always." [Matthew 26:11]
.
"For the poor you have always with you; but me you have not always." [John 12:8]
He was correcting those who begrudged the wasting of money on expensive ointment for His burial.
.
I don't see how this can be construed as an argument against socialised medicine, which BTW is not necessarily socialism. Understanding the difference seems to be problematic. On a personal note my experience of socialised medicine has generally been far more satisfactory than my experiences of private medicine.

Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Cera on February 11, 2019, 03:42:56 PM
(https://www.startmail.com/attachment/download_received/image004.jpg?absolute_dl=1&passed_id=9345&mailbox=Deleted+Messages&ent_id=27)
Title: Re: Socialised healthcare
Post by: Disputaciones on February 11, 2019, 04:34:06 PM
Once a  programmer-robot with the ability to learn is designed(in the very distant future, hopefully), it'd be trivial to mass-produce it. So you'd get very few human programmers just overseeing, and updating/fixing the code of the robots etc. while the vast majority of programmers would be out of work.
But in the realm of the present, in the next 10-15 years we could see millions of drivers lose their jobs. What will they do? They can't all become programmers.
Yeah, I thought about that later. 
I saw this video about programming and how the "big tech leaders" like the Zuck, Gates etc. are all saying that there will be millions of jobs in this field and not enough demand to fill them, and how everyone should "learn to code." I guess that's why they're trying to invent robots to program?