Why do americans fear anything that's slightly left wing, let alone socialist ?

[Schonerlebnis]

Admit it's a bit of a blanket statement but there seems to be this widespread fear of any kind of left wing policy. I'm on a non political facebook group (cooking related so as ordinary as you can get) which has many US members and was surprised by how many called obama care socialist
Even the Democrats are accused of being left leaning (correct me if I'm wrong but that's not even remotely accurate !) and I'm not sure that they even have unions anymore ? On a recent US election thread someone mentioned that people feared that changes to the benefits system to support the vulnerable would lead to a rise in taxes and so make them poorer..... Can any one explain why a country that claims to look after the persecuted and vulnerable has such odd views ?

@KenDodd

But there is no safety net to let you dwell on any problems you have. Even when sick, you drag you butt out of bed and get to work.

I can’t believe people see this as a positive.

Actually I think there is some truth in the first statement. Not necessarily 'hard work' being the cure but dwelling on problems though.

I worked in mental health for years with people will various problems, and claiming benefits. Two cases were of interest. One man and one woman, both had had depression and anxiety for years, unable to work, claiming benefits. In both separate cases they inherited a substantial about of money, not rich, but enough to live off for at least ten years (one longer). Huge levels of stress were lifted. They were both free of both the benefits system, with constant assessments, form filling and fear that their support would be stopped if they got better or appeared better. They were also free from the pressure of work and desperation to earn money. Their health improved enormously, they both got very good advice with their money and worked out that of they didn't go mad the money would last years so they were still careful. After about a year both came off medication and one was discharged from support services. One of them even got a part time job in a shop before I'd left, knowing she didn't have to do the job and was free to walk out anytime made a huge difference to her ability to cope.

Now neither of those people were malingering or fake or playing the system (there were also people who were) just the pressure of life and supporting themselves was more than they could cope with. The benefit system didn't really help them because they needed to stay sick to get the financial support they needed. I don't really know how you could design a better system for people like this though (maybe universal basic income). But perhaps an easy to access, no pressure to work, benefits system wouldn't actually lead to dependency or laziness, it might easy mental health problems (by removing one big cause of stress) free people up to work without risk.

Don't know, just musing.

I hope parliament will seriously consider universal basic income and this scenario is one of the reasons. Also, I believe it would help vulnerable young women and mothers.

I find many people (at least on mumsnet) extremely vulnerable, prone to depression, and making life choices that create even more vulnerability.
You’ll have people that are the same in the states, so what happens to them?

They become homeless and/or reliant on charity I suspect? Though I think in some states you can get some level of sickness benefits (I could be wrong).

There is social security disability that pays a monthly sickness benefit based on your lifetime earnings to date. If you have none, or too little past earnings, there is social security disability insurance that provides a monthly top up or full benefit to ensure you have sufficient to survive although in poverty.

Also, many US workers take out short term and long term disability insurance privately and these policies replace a % of your wage.

Some states subsidise short term disability through employer taxation, so employees don’t have to take out seoerate private insurance as it’s covered through the state.

But they're paying for somebody else's healthcare through insurance.

It's worse than that, around 30% of the price of insurance in the USA does not go on healthcare, it's spent on billing and insurance-related costs. As to the arguement that many employers pay for it, all that's doing is reducing people's wages. Add on the fact that pharmaceutical procurement is splintered and hence the unit cost of drugs in the USA are typically far higher than in the UK, and it starts to look like healthcare is run as a profit making series of enterprises skimming away money from actual healthcare.

By comparison, the NHS spends 8% on management costs, and a lot of that is wasted due to political interference. The NHS also pay a lot less for drugs due to centralised buying power, the USA spends roughly twice the average amount spent by other countries on pharmaceuticals per person.

The thing with health care is it's far more specialised than what we're used to. It is totally normal for typically healthy middle class American kids to have an endocrinologist, and allergenist, an pediatrician, a therapist etc etc for the very same conditions that we would try and get a GP appointment for. This is obviously very expensive and not possible on a single payer system. I would also say that is unnecessary, but if that's what you're used to having the alternative seems unpalatable.

My family is always surprised by the lack of specialists in my children's life

Plan
It would be interesting to see if that works out the same, leif the tax we pay is equivalent to their insurance, and do the benefits/insurance payout
align.
It might just be the difference between voluntarily paying the private sector or paying a mandatory tax to the state.

I'm not trying to suggest we should adopt a US-style system but we need to be wary of holding the NHS up as if it were a model way of doing things.
I think it is a model way of doing things but needs more funding which means more tax.

The NHS needs more funding and those people who are amazed that private companies are able to provide a quicker and more specialised service at a much greater cost need to learn some basic ideas about the world.

This is a really interesting thread. I don't really understand it either especially the idea of children being without healthcare because their parents are poor. It just seems cruel.
In regards to benefits in the uk, my in laws haven't worked in10+ years. On one hand they get their rent paid etc but honestly it's quite a miserable existence compared to my parents who until recent retirement have worked. The idea that people can ha e a lavish life on benefits compared to working is not the case anymore I don't believe.
When my dd was 6 months my dh was made redundant while I was on maternity leave, I am so glad for the 3 months he was without a job we could claim benefits tbh. Not sure how we would have survived.

@7days.
I did at one point do the maths because I moved to US for four years.
They are taxed on their wages- federal income tax, social security tax, Medicare tax and, if applicable, state income tax, and city income tax. This is all reported to you on a W-2 at the end of each tax year ( runs Jan-Dec)

There is also sales tax (similar to VAT) on the things you buy.

There is also property tax on your home, similar to council tax but only charged to the owners. Renters don’t pay property taxes, the LL does. But IRL, the rent charged is a bit higher to cover that cost to the LL so they can still make a bit of profit.

Their tax system is much more complex. You do your gross taxable income and then reduce that by deductions- standard or itemised. This then says what your taxable income is and the % tax on that varies by the taxable income bracket you fall into. These brackets thresholds differ based on whether you are single, married filing separate tax returns or married filing joint tax return.

But anyway, I seem to remember that for the US to switch to U.K. NHS universal system the average worker would see the an extra 2% tax taken from their pay. Compare that to the average % of income a US worker pays for health insurance, and most would save money in the long run. Remember health insurance is a bill they pay. It’s not a tax. That’s why their taxes are lower...the entire cost if healthcare is excluded and they pay it as a bill much like car insurance.
They might pay more under a U.K. NHS system than they would under US system while young, childless, healthy, but they’d slowly come out ahead as their health needs increased with childbirth, children, age, etc. It’s really a case of paying forward while young to have guarantee that any medical catastrophe- major accident, cancer, etc will not bankrupt you in middle or old age.

I work with an awful lot of Americans and there seems to be an ingrained attitude that if you have not 'succeeded' in life it is down to you being a lazy arse and therefore undeserving of any help from the state. They honestly believe that the opportunities to succeed are in place and if you fail to grab them that's on you. The idea that structural inequality from birth may impact on your life chances is simply ignored. It's very strange, some folk seem terrified that someone else less fortunate then them may get 'help'.

This Youtube channel is a demonstration of what happens to people who slip through the cracks in the US. I've watched a fair few and most if not all have been seriously abused/neglected in childhood. I imagine many people (here as well as in the US) would berate these people for their 'poor life choices' and question why they should pay to support such people but listening to their stories is heartbreaking and it is clear that not everyone in life is born with equal opportunities.

Sadly I feel we are heading the same way as a society. If there wasn't a welfare state/NHS here I know I could have easily ended up where these people are. Maybe I might yet......

@GalesThisMorning

The thing with health care is it's far more specialised than what we're used to. It is totally normal for typically healthy middle class American kids to have an endocrinologist, and allergenist, an pediatrician, a therapist etc etc for the very same conditions that we would try and get a GP appointment for. This is obviously very expensive and not possible on a single payer system. I would also say that is unnecessary, but if that's what you're used to having the alternative seems unpalatable.

My family is always surprised by the lack of specialists in my children's life

However, the process to get a specialist can be hellish. In the US with health insurance you have a PCP, or primary care physician. This is the same as a GP. You have problem x and need a specialist. You have to first book an appointment with the PCP who then, if they agree; has to apply for permission from your health insurance to refer you to a specialist. And the specialist must be one in your health insurances network or they won’t cover the costs. Health insurance usually replies to PCP saying “referral to specialist is approved for x many appointments or is approved for assessment only any treatment recommendations must be applied for pre-approval” it often lists in network specialist you can choose from. You then call around and hope one of these is accepting new patients. If they aren’t, you go back to PCP and they request permission of health insurance company to go out of network. If they are accepting new patients, you book an appointment and get whatever is authorised whether it’s ten sessions or an assessment only. If you got assessment only and it says, yes you need treatment the specialist sends that report and recommendation to insurance company for approval. And insurance company can deny treatment if it’s too costly or not listed as coveted by your insurance policy or if they think your medical condition is as bad as that. So actually getting under the care of a specialist conveys bragging rights in a way in the US.

Accepting that structural inequality is a common real thing is hard for many Americans... we believe in the American dream instead. We're optimists at heart.

Or were until Trump got into power. His agenda with foundations in resentment is deeply anti-American.,

@PlanDeRaccordement
Thanks for the detailed information. Interesting

Sounds like every dinner conversation I had growing up as a Democrat in a Republican house @DillonPanthersTexas . Some also think that St Jude’s children’s hospital is some kind of magical safety net for every child of those parents that ‘don’t work hard enough’ to have healthcare. Charming.

My df summed up Americans very well.
They believe in personal freedom even if their own personal freedom negatively impacts someone else's life.
This attitude explains the gun culture. They are free to bear arms and 8 children dying a day because of guns isn't their problem.

Many of their major cross state and interstate motorways are toll roads, not free.

But there is a choice, you don't have to use the toll roads, as there is another road going to the same place that is free - may take longer than the toll road and may have a worse surface, but its there free to use at source for all vehicles

I think its probably due to the dangers of socialism. Cuba , China, North Korea, Eastern bloc etc. Capitalism has flaws but at least people have the opportunity to make something of themselves. With socialism the ones with power and money tend to be self elected etc. A half way between socialism and capitalism I.e.healthcare, transport, education , etc state owned like Britain is my preference

barbaric maternity rules there, utterly barbaric!!

what are they?

I have seen there maternity healthcare isn't ranked highly en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_maternal_mortality_ratio

I blame hangover from the Cold War. It's still very much in living memory for the older generation.

Recent immigrants from dysfunctional South American socialist countries too.

Barbaric maternity, firstly the norm is to put babies 12 weeks old into care, nursery etc and have new mothers expressing at desks!

Sitting in rubber rings after difficult labour etc.

That's not the sign of a highly evolved civilised society. We all need to work towards babies having more time with their mothers until they are verbal and able to express themselves, not less.
Mothers should not have this pressure to go to work so quickly and made to feel bad if they do.

Ie state endorsed separation of newborns from their mothers at a critical time.

We all need to work towards babies having more time with their mothers until they are verbal and able to express themselves, not less.

I agree the lack of parental leave in the US is barbaric. It’s current law is 12 weeks unpaid maternity leave. Zero paid maternity leave and zero paternity leave. However I disagree that we need to work towards babies have more time with their mothers. I think it should be more time with their parents through shared parental leave.
Most of the gender pay gap is caused by unequal parental leave policies for birth and childcare. Yes obviously, a woman needs some maternity leave for recovery from childbirth. But apart from that both a mother or father can equally care for an infant or young toddler and the paid leave support a country has should be equally available with equal pay. Anything otherwise is using economic duress to ensure more women are staying home versus men.

The NHS needs more funding but also more transparency and more efficiency. I think just chucking money at it isn't the answer. Lots of money is wasted, too many people being paid to do very little at the top.

I live in the US and, while I do find the perspective of many Americans totally perplexing on these issues, the electorate is a lot more balanced than you'd expect. For example, overall 2/3 American voters support Medicare for All, and that includes 46% of Republicans! Numbers like these carry for other issues like climate change and maternity leave.

In my opinion, the issue with America is that, in the absence of a decent social welfare system, a large proportion of voters are disenfranchised. If you're poor and/or a member of a minority group, it's hard to get time off to go vote and if you do you're prioritising major elections over state or local. And in an environment like that, the rights and views of the average person will never be prioritised.

Look at Georgia in this election cycle- it has flipped blue and that's likely to hold because people like Stacey Abrams and Keisha Lance-Bottoms registered and education 800,000 voters from predominantly Black areas.

The other thing to remember is that issues like Medicare for All and climate change are incredibly complex, structural challenges and uncertainty often breeds fear in the electorate. To many Americans, especially business owners, the ACA massively increased their premiums because insurance companies had to cover pre-existing conditions. To voters in coal-producing states like Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, climate change legislation will decimate the only industry they were trained for and (as of yet) there aren't any booming green industries landing at their doors. Plus, without an employer, they are fucked medically if the jobs go away.

I think because we share a common language we forget how different we are culturally.

I lived in San Fran for six months on a work placement, I kept my standard British employment rights, holiday, sick pay etc for the duration. My American colleagues had standard American employment ‘rights’.

A colleague returned to work two weeks after having a baby, I had no idea that leave after a baby was not only unpaid, but in many cases could cause you to be fired in some states.

I’m a type one diabetic, people like me in the states have poorer outcomes because access to insulin is harder, insulin comes in a variety of makes, its really important you get the one that suits you, but in the states you have to have the one your insurance approves, even if it isn’t as effective. Insurance for people like me is costly, this was befor ObamaCare so it was completely normal for those with type one to be refused insurance. People in the states die because they cannot afford insulin, for a person who isn’t insured you can easily pay $300 for one vial, that means if I was that uninsured American I would need around $1,700 just for insulin.