Is Socialism OK with Mormons now?


WhatMeWorry
 Share

Recommended Posts

What it tells me is that the Lord is a capitalist - in that he wants his resources used wisely and to the best of that person's ability. That's called stewardship.

Well that goes well with what I'm trying to say, it is obvious that the current system is definitely not the best stewardship. Every other healthcare system from developed nations have proven definitively that a socialist system is the best usage of resources. It costs less money per person and more people are treated. This is definitely what I would see as stewardship in relation to the healthcare of the people.

And if that person doesn't do well according to their abilities, then they are cast out.

There are plenty of people that are born into lower socio-economic class who had not the opportunity to attend tertiary education and have had no chance to get a good-paying job. Instead they work to the 'best of their ability' by working two jobs and strugle to live day to day let alone earn enough to pay for their healthcare.

Now, if you want to talk about failings in our current system... I'll agree with you that the current system isn't the best.

One of the problems is that under current law, no hospital can turn away anyone. Now that's in and of itself isn't a problem... except for the massive amounts of illegal aliens in our country. They don't have ANY health insurance and so they have to go to the ER to get their medical care. This is clogging up our system.

They may not be able to turn them away, but they are still left with a massive bill, this also leaves most illnesses left until they're an emergency when a small amount of care earlier could have prevented it.

Now, there are two ways to handle this:

1 - create socialized medicine and get the illegals to other doctors for care (and reward criminal behavior - yes that's my bias)

the system may not be perfect, but at the end of the day it's going to cost you and everyone else less money. Plus, its a far better system than what is already in place.

Let me state that all the examples you have stated are with countries that have better border enforcement than we do and they enforce the distribution of their healthcare much better that we do or would.

You seriously think that countries like the UK, France and other european countries don't have problems with border control. In the UK some major cities indigenous white people have just statistically become a minority, with other major cities 5-10 years away from the same fate. Yet manage to have the best healthcare in the world. Borders in europe are far far more relaxed than in America, and these countries treat immigrants regardless.

Now, I've side-stepped into another issue entirely, but it must be dealt with before implementing anything on a scale as large as our country. We simply can't have an "open-border" policy and have socialized medicine. The ECONOMICS of it would be that the US becomes the health care provider for the world... and who will pay for that? U.S. TAXPAYERS (of which I am one).

Healthcare provider for 'the world' is a tad dramatic, why would people from canada, uk etc etc travel to usa for treatment when they can receive it at home?

There isn't an endless supply of money. Just because the government can PRINT money doesn't mean that they can create WEALTH. They're just eroding the value of the current money in circulation, causing massive inflation and future tax increases to cover the money that they're printing.

BUt socialised healthcare costs LESS, not more.

I don't have solutions for your countries problems that it is facing at the moment, but there will always be a middle-class.

Anyways, I better stop now, its just hit the Sabbath in my part of the world, time I stopped talking about such worldly matters and got off the internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There are plenty of people that are born into lower socio-economic class who had not the opportunity to attend tertiary education and have had no chance to get a good-paying job. Instead they work to the 'best of their ability' by working two jobs and struggle to live day to day let alone earn enough to pay for their healthcare.

One solution which is coming from charity/church is the Church's Perpetual Education Fund. Note that this is a fund that is administered by the CHURCH and not the government. It was reported recently that this is having a great impact on the communities where it is being utilized.

Healthcare provider for 'the world' is a tad dramatic, why would people from canada, uk etc etc travel to usa for treatment when they can receive it at home?

I'm not worried about Canada & UK. We've got this huge population below us in Mexico, Central & South America. That is who we have an economic leak towards. They infiltrate our country illegally, get jobs (somehow) and tap into the welfare & other resources. If they came LEGALLY, I'd have no problem. But we have a serious problem with ILLEGALS coming in and nesting in our country... and our country is welcoming them in with open arms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

President Benson was highly educated and I am positive he was more aware of history than any of us!

so which definition do I use, do I use the current defiinition, the US definition, The UK definition? and when does matter the situation has changed. Liberal in Brigham Young's day in the UK meant hands off government to me in the UK it means left of centre not even close to socialist.

To me the countries President Benson was talking about were not socialist they would be called communist or totalitarian so do I take the content of his talks or do I apply his words and say actually he wasn;t talking about the States with dictatorships? Whilst I am sure President Benson knew exactly what he was saying, and I am sure I have interpreted it in the right way - however that is the key everyone interpreting his words like with any scripture is at their own level of understanding. My own level of education in history is not shabby, but some people reading his words do not have that background, some will not know the Whigs vs the Tories and who was Cromwell etc

-Charley

Edited by Elgama
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fail to see how a lifelong study of agriculture relates to the evils of socialism. He was the Secretary of Agriculture, not State.

YouTube - LDS Freedom Project II-Follow the Prophet

"The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time."

Just because you put something in quotes doesn't mean anything. Can you please provide an actual reference for this statement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trend I'm seeing on this thread is this:

Those that "have not" want things easier for them and want the government to step in. BUT THEY DON'T WANT QUALITY TO GO DOWN. (I'm sensing a paradox here.)

Those that "have" (from my experience) want to be in more control and do the planning to keep in more control.

So, what are our choices?

1 - Improve ourselves so that we can have the economic marketplace reward us more for the work we do.

2 - Continue to complain about the way things are and hope the government will do something about it.

One will empower and motivate us to do better for ourselves. The other is to put our power into the hands of others and wait for a (hopefully) favorable turnout.

Now, which of these 2 choices do you think the Gospel of Jesus Christ would have us do?

(Note: I won't answer that question as I'm sure that my opinion is obvious. But that's the question I pose to you.)

2 Tim 1:7

For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

I like this post. I think the answer is obvious that we should empower ourselves. But here's my question in return. How do we empower ourselves?

Since I posted a specific situation I will respons within that situation. My wife is going to have a baby and even with insurance we will barely have enough money to cover it. What do we nee dto do toempower oursleves so that the money is no longer a problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do we need to do to empower ourselves so that the money is no longer a problem?

That IS the first step - asking the right questions to yourself and others. :twothumbsup::bouncingclap:

The next step is the assessment: Where are you now?

After that is the goal & dream setting: Where would you like to be?

What is it that you currently lack in order to help you get to where you want to be?

How long will it take you to do that?

What else could you do?

Asking yourselves these questions is NOT easy.

Make sure you ask yourself these kinds of questions:

- What can I do within my current profession to earn more money and become more valuable? Do I need a certification? Do I need a degree? Do I lack certain training that once mastered would enhance all my other skills?

- Is there another profession that I know I'd excel in, but haven't tried? Can I try this other profession on a part-time basis?

- Have I ever wanted to start a part-time business? Could the tax-deductions and advantages of being in business help me lower my costs in other areas?

- What can I do to reduce my expenses? What can I do to restructure this expense? Who can I talk to for professional advice in this area and pick their brain? Perhaps they might have a solution that with their services I can reduce my overall costs?

I'll also tell you that the solutions are not immediate. So, with a baby due and you feel that you can barely afford it - BE PROUD! You CAN afford it! You just don't want it to eat up everything you've got!

Just keep asking yourself questions. The answers WON'T come right away. But be open to different answers and inspiration. You may be led to call someone. Give them a call, ask your question and seek input and counsel.

As a financial advisor myself, I'd advise that you should have the protections you need, the habit of saving at least 15% of your income and plenty of savings for 50% of your annual expenses. This is the foundation of a financial strategy because without that, any investments can be wiped out with a single accident, lawsuit, disability or death. With your protection in place first, you can now weather the storms.

Within your protection, make sure that everything is the optimum that it should - maximum benefits with the minimum out-of-pocket cost.

With heath care, I've advocated that if a group medical plan isn't available, you can have an HSA-type plan. This is where you have a lower-cost major medical plan combined with a savings account to save for the deductibles to be used. The cost of the insurance is quite low, but you must be able to save money in the HSA account. Contributions to the HSA plan are tax-deductible, grow tax-deferred and if used for medical expenses, can be withdrawn tax-free. Triple tax-advantages. You can make a once-in-a-lifetime IRA conversion to an HSA plan, but check with your insurance professional &/or a financial advisor in your state before proceeding with that idea.

Combined, you're saving about $5k in the plan and paying for the insurance. With a major accident, or other major occurance, you'll be covered. No, it isn't free, but nothing of quality in this life is. Until the annual deductible is met, everything is paid out-of-pocket. Once the deductible IS met, then insurance pays for the rest.

If you want more information on such a medical plan, check with an insurance professional who is licensed in your state. There may even be one in your ward or stake.

I hope this helps some!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Galt is the man that the socialists hate the most. But at the very same time they hate him, their entire system depends on him for everything. Thus, he is the god of socialism and his other name "the Mystery Worker" suits him.

-a-train

he's a work of fiction why get so het up about someone who doesn't exist except in a book and peoples minds/?

-Charley

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism is a horrible system of government....of course, except for ALL the other ones...

People, our socio-political and economic system may be flawed but there is none better...To argue beyond such reality is just being naive to the point where it may not be polite to describe it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skippy do you feel that we, as a nation, have a liberal (liberal as in the capitalism free market sence of the word) health care system now or would you like to see it more liberal? I would argue that what we have now isn't liberal at all. Insurance companies and what they pay doctors raises the prices for everyone. Seems like price fixing/monopoly to me. There should be a completely free market medical system or a completely socialized one. I do not like this thing in between though which is what we have now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism is a horrible system of government....of course, except for ALL the other ones...

People, our socio-political and economic system may be flawed but there is none better...To argue beyond such reality is just being naive to the point where it may not be polite to describe it.

I should ask, Islander:

What version of Capitalism?

Is the more hybrid Capitalism of Europe superior to the one of the US? Some would say yes. Is true Laissez-faire Capitalism the way to go, such as happened in the early 20th Century of the US? Some would argue both that it was the best of times and the worst of times.

Capitalism is simply the freedom to purchase what you want, when you want, from who you want. There are far greater civil liberties: The right to vote, freedom from imprisonment, freedom to voice dissenting opinions. Many people on here seem to confuse the economic system with the political system and the system of freedoms. The freedom to buy and sell what you want is a mostly empty freedom provided just as well by those who want to strip your real freedom from you as those who want you to be free.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time."

While I agree with this statement, I still do not accept the premise that everything a prophet says (even in General Conference) is or should be considered doctrine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capitalism is simply the freedom to purchase what you want, when you want, from who you want. There are far greater civil liberties: The right to vote, freedom from imprisonment, freedom to voice dissenting opinions. Many people on here seem to confuse the economic system with the political system and the system of freedoms. The freedom to buy and sell what you want is a mostly empty freedom provided just as well by those who want to strip your real freedom from you as those who want you to be free.

Freedom is a unit. It matters not whether it is our economic freedom, our freedom of speech, our freedom of religion, or any other division of freedom that is in peril, all freedom is good and all captivity is evil. Any bondage wherein man is brought is an injury to his freedom.

The case wherein an usurper of power is not concerned with harming one's religious freedom doesn't justify or make inconsequential his injury of their freedom in an area outside of religious freedom. Further, people suffering economically through economic subjection are hampered also in their religious freedom if it is the sort that prompts them to spend their resources in that endeavor. This is only one example of how all individual freedom is compounded in a single unit.

Additionally, if government makes the decision which "civil liberties" are the "far greater" ones, rather than allowing the individual to make this distinction if he even chooses to do so, then the right of conscience is already under attack. A free society allows the individual to make these definitions for himself, but not for others.

-a-train

Edited by a-train
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many people on here seem to confuse the economic system with the political system and the system of freedoms. The freedom to buy and sell what you want is a mostly empty freedom provided just as well by those who want to strip your real freedom from you as those who want you to be free.

You make a good point, FunkyTown. I think we see throughout history that the economic and political systems of the various governments are connected by their very natures- therefore, if one is corrupt the other must be weakened.

I think it is through the merger of the absolute best economic and political systems that we achieve the best possible society on earth- having the best political system and the worst economic system can still collapse a country's infrastructure in times of famine and drought; conversely the best economic system and the worst political system can be usurped by a charismatic, corrupt general (or other leader).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share