[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

The things governments do well are essential services - police, fire, courts, military, roads and infrastructure.

You'll note that the ONLY one of these that is handled by the vast Federal Bureaucracy that is the military…which historically does a great job but money is thrown at it like it grows on trees, TONS of waste and corruption. Soldiers are treated like indentured servants with their ridiculously LOW pay and crappy, embarrassing healthcare.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

So, what has the history of the US Gov't's spending responsibility, waste management, decision making and efficiency shown that would give you the impression that letting them manage something as vastly important as healthcare that is such ginormous part of our economy is a GOOD F*CKIN' IDEA?

Yeah. sure, there ARE smaller programs and agencies that do a decent job, but a large and expensive undertaking like this? Please show me the evidence that they have what it takes to do this right?

We will go broke, or quality will go in the sh*tter, or BOTH.

A lot of people are already going broke and for a lot of people the quality is already in the shitter...so what now? Leave an inhumane system in place because it makes less than 1% of the population a shitload of money while screwing over more than 10% who live in poverty?

Come on. Is that the America you want to live in, or can we do better?

[smacintush]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

A lot of people are already going broke

That's the way it will ALWAYS be. There will always be poor people. WHY would you make it worse by taking EVEN MORE of THEIR money and using it for a program that we have NO reason to believe will be handled well?

and for a lot of people the quality is already in the shitter...so what now?

No, quality is there for all but very few. It's access and payment that is the problem.

Come on. Is that the America you want to live in, or can we do better?

We CAN do better, but the truly great things that we have accomplished in this country have been IN SPITE OF the government, not because of it. Turning healthcare over to the very entity that is helping to degrade it in the first place is lunacy.

You conveniently avoided answering the question. Where are all of these large programs that our government has managed well? You may be able to name a couple you like but I bet you can't name any that are efficient, effective and aren't corrupted.

Leave an inhumane system in place because it makes less than 1% of the population a shitload of money while screwing over more than 10% who live in poverty?

So how is taking the control of that money out of the private sector and giving the politicians a chance to waste or line their own pockets gonna help?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

We would be better off with our health care being managed by the government. We can't count on the populace becoming involved and giving a rat's ass, but at least the possibility exists.

Do you have health care?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Do you have health care?

Yes, why?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Yes, why?

Because I have health care also and I wonder how we are so fortunate over the thousands of uninsured. What did we do that the uninsured aren't doing?

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by smacintush 

That's the way it will ALWAYS be. There will always be poor people. WHY would you make it worse by taking EVEN MORE of THEIR money and using it for a program that we have NO reason to believe will be handled well?



No, quality is there for all but very few. It's access and payment that is the problem.



We CAN do better, but the truly great things that we have accomplished in this country have been IN SPITE OF the government, not because of it. Turning healthcare over to the very entity that is helping to degrade it in the first place is lunacy.

You conveniently avoided answering the question. Where are all of these large programs that our government has managed well? You may be able to name a couple you like but I bet you can't name any that are efficient, effective and aren't corrupted.



So how is taking the control of that money out of the private sector and giving the politicians a chance to waste or line their own pockets gonna help?

If they're lining their pockets, so be it, at least people will have coverage! I really don't care how inefficiently a US government run universal healthcare program would be--it would be better than what we have now. I'd take Canada's system in a heart beat. So sorry, your "the government can't do anything right" mantra has no sway with me. The private sector isn't doing anything for the people, they're the ones lining their own pockets, and the interiors of their mercedes, and the exteriors of their private jets. Behind every great fortune is a crime, they say, and behind the insurance and pharmaceutical fortunes are crimes that have body counts.

The government isn't degrading healthcare, the profit-motive is. You need to wake up. Capitalism isn't an absolute good. It's not any kind of good. The market doesn't solve problems, it only picks winners. There are some areas of our society, like education and our healthcare, that we should not trust to its indifference and the greed of those who already have the capital.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

I really don't care how inefficiently a US government run universal healthcare program would be.

With sentiment like the above, it's no wonder why statements like; "the government can't do anything right mantra" would have no sway with you, but then common sense may not either. Inefficiency is a crime that incurs body counts.

I'd take Canada's system in a heart beat.

Better take it soon because there are substantial calls for reform in moving towards privatization in Canada.

There are some areas of our society, like education and our healthcare, that we should not trust to its indifference and the greed of those who already have the capital.

I'm glad you mentioned one particular area of our society that has not succumbed to the greedy capitalist pig; education. Given the competitive edge of our publically-funded educational system, we are now ranked 9th for highschool graduation among industrialized nations. We consistently rank below average in mathematics. This and yet as of 2005 in all levels of education, the United States spends $11,152 per student. That's the second highest in the world. This adds up to inefficiency by definition. Private schools cost less per student on average yet, performance on standardized tests is higher in private schools than in public schools.

- Private schools produce an annual savings to taxpayers estimated at more than $48,000,000,000
- Private school students perform better than their public school counterparts on standardized achievement tests
- Ninety percent of private high school graduates attend college, compared to 66 percent of public high school graduates
- Private school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more than three times more likely than comparable public school students to attain a bachelor’s degree by their mid-20s, meaning that private schools contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty for their students;
- Private schools are racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. Twenty-three percent of private school students are students of color; twenty-eight percent are from families with annual incomes under $50,000
- Private secondary school students are nearly 50 percent more likely to take AP or IB courses in science and math than public school students
- The participation of private school students in community service projects is significantly higher than their public school counterparts

The knee-jerk; "I hate capitalism just because" argument is no longer good enough. Side-by side comparisons favor privatization hands down. Businesses are in business to make money-they will run more efficiently. Because they must continually focus on enrollment and excellence as the draw, it behooves them to be more competitive. There are statistics to affirm my point as opposed to philosophy and world view.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

Because I have health care also and I wonder how we are so fortunate over the thousands of uninsured. What did we do that the uninsured aren't doing?

We are employees of a large company that can buy into a group health plan.

Once I make my own company my primary source of income, this will all change. Buying an individual health plan is not even an option for most people because of astronomical costs. Are we setting up an economy where we are discouraging freelance work and sole proprietor type business? Where is our edge here?

Secondly, even with insurance there is no guarantee that everything will actually be covered. Not only are there deductibles to meet, but as Moore discusses in Sicko, medical insurance companies are in the business to make money. This is what they do, just like any other business, and this is what shareholders expect. Therefore, it makes perfect sense to deny as many claims as they can get away with. Where is our edge here?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

If they're lining their pockets, so be it, at least people will have coverage! I really don't care how inefficiently a US government run universal healthcare program would be--it would be better than what we have now. I'd take Canada's system in a heart beat. So sorry, your "the government can't do anything right" mantra has no sway with me. The private sector isn't doing anything for the people, they're the ones lining their own pockets, and the interiors of their mercedes, and the exteriors of their private jets. Behind every great fortune is a crime, they say, and behind the insurance and pharmaceutical fortunes are crimes that have body counts.

The government isn't degrading healthcare, the profit-motive is. You need to wake up. Capitalism isn't an absolute good. It's not any kind of good. The market doesn't solve problems, it only picks winners. There are some areas of our society, like education and our healthcare, that we should not trust to its indifference and the greed of those who already have the capital.

Well said!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

With sentiment like the above, it's no wonder why statements like; "the government can't do anything right mantra" would have no sway with you, but then common sense may not either. Inefficiency is a crime that incurs body counts.


Better take it soon because there are substantial calls for reform in moving towards privatization in Canada.



I'm glad you mentioned one particular area of our society that has not succumbed to the greedy capitalist pig; education. Given the competitive edge of our publically-funded educational system, we are now ranked 9th for highschool graduation among industrialized nations. We consistently rank below average in mathematics. This and yet as of 2005 in all levels of education, the United States spends $11,152 per student. That's the second highest in the world. This adds up to inefficiency by definition. Private schools cost less per student on average yet, performance on standardized tests is higher in private schools than in public schools.

- Private schools produce an annual savings to taxpayers estimated at more than $48,000,000,000
- Private school students perform better than their public school counterparts on standardized achievement tests
- Ninety percent of private high school graduates attend college, compared to 66 percent of public high school graduates
- Private school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more than three times more likely than comparable public school students to attain a bachelor’s degree by their mid-20s, meaning that private schools contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty for their students;
- Private schools are racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. Twenty-three percent of private school students are students of color; twenty-eight percent are from families with annual incomes under $50,000
- Private secondary school students are nearly 50 percent more likely to take AP or IB courses in science and math than public school students
- The participation of private school students in community service projects is significantly higher than their public school counterparts

The knee-jerk; "I hate capitalism just because" argument is no longer good enough. Side-by side comparisons favor privatization hands down. Businesses are in business to make money-they will run more efficiently. Because they must continually focus on enrollment and excellence as the draw, it behooves them to be more competitive. There are statistics to affirm my point as opposed to philosophy and world view.

Are you trying to suggest that the countries that are ahead of us have predominately private education systems? Definitely is not the case with Canada, where I'm from, and I'm pretty sure that Canada is currently ahead of the US in the areas you have cited.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

With sentiment like the above, it's no wonder why statements like; "the government can't do anything right mantra" would have no sway with you, but then common sense may not either. Inefficiency is a crime that incurs body counts.


Better take it soon because there are substantial calls for reform in moving towards privatization in Canada.



I'm glad you mentioned one particular area of our society that has not succumbed to the greedy capitalist pig; education. Given the competitive edge of our publically-funded educational system, we are now ranked 9th for highschool graduation among industrialized nations. We consistently rank below average in mathematics. This and yet as of 2005 in all levels of education, the United States spends $11,152 per student. That's the second highest in the world. This adds up to inefficiency by definition. Private schools cost less per student on average yet, performance on standardized tests is higher in private schools than in public schools.

- Private schools produce an annual savings to taxpayers estimated at more than $48,000,000,000
- Private school students perform better than their public school counterparts on standardized achievement tests
- Ninety percent of private high school graduates attend college, compared to 66 percent of public high school graduates
- Private school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more than three times more likely than comparable public school students to attain a bachelor’s degree by their mid-20s, meaning that private schools contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty for their students;
- Private schools are racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. Twenty-three percent of private school students are students of color; twenty-eight percent are from families with annual incomes under $50,000
- Private secondary school students are nearly 50 percent more likely to take AP or IB courses in science and math than public school students
- The participation of private school students in community service projects is significantly higher than their public school counterparts

The knee-jerk; "I hate capitalism just because" argument is no longer good enough. Side-by side comparisons favor privatization hands down. Businesses are in business to make money-they will run more efficiently. Because they must continually focus on enrollment and excellence as the draw, it behooves them to be more competitive. There are statistics to affirm my point as opposed to philosophy and world view.

I don't hate capitalism.

I hate it when people think market forces will solve all our problems, like our education system. The argument that because our education system is broken that the solution is to privatize it is absurd and shows a complete lack of understanding of what's really wrong in education. What's wrong is that we live in an anti-intellectual culture. Your "evidence" in favor of all private schools suffers from an abysmal selection bias which actually proves my case. Private schools are more successful because by definition, those students have families that care about education.

Privatization is just an excuse to institutionalize inequalities that are already dragging down our efforts to have an educated populace.

ebuddy, you're smart and you're a thinker, so really, tell me how market forces--the very ones that have perpetuated inequality throughout history--will create a just society? How can a system that operates darwinistically create opportunities for greater equality?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

The knee-jerk; "I hate capitalism just because" argument is no longer good enough. Side-by side comparisons favor privatization hands down. Businesses are in business to make money-they will run more efficiently. Because they must continually focus on enrollment and excellence as the draw, it behooves them to be more competitive. There are statistics to affirm my point as opposed to philosophy and world view.

"B-but...

Well yes, but...

NUH UH!

B-but a fat. overweight, unhealthy guy who in his 50's JUST DISCOVERED the importance of eating right and taking care of yourself on the Jay Leno show said...

Oh foo. I hate capitalism just because it's fashionable... and am willing to NEVER acknowledge the vast problems of socialized systems. So I want socialized heath care, even though I can't counter a single fact of direct private vs. public comparison, or answer a SINGLE relevant question posed in this thread! (Like what big government actually does efficiently that would give anyone reason to believe they should on top of everything else, controll our heathcare.)"

Heh, just predicting about how the rest of this thread will go, after the above "smackdown" post... IE, back into the same mindless tailspin.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

"B-but...

Well yes, but...

NUH UH!

B-but a fat. overweight, unhealthy guy who in his 50's JUST DISCOVERED the importance of eating right and taking care of yourself on the Jay Leno show said...

Oh foo. I hate capitalism just because it's fashionable... and am willing to NEVER acknowledge the vast problems of socialized systems. So I want socialized heath care, even though I can't counter a single fact of direct private vs. public comparison, or answer a SINGLE relevant question posed in this thread! (Like what big government actually does efficiently that would give anyone reason to believe they should on top of everything else, controll our heathcare.)"

Heh, just predicting about how the rest of this thread will go, after the above "smackdown" post... IE, back into the same mindless tailspin.

Thanks for this!

Now run along and go play...

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

"B-but...

Well yes, but...

NUH UH!

B-but a fat. overweight, unhealthy guy who in his 50's JUST DISCOVERED the importance of eating right and taking care of yourself on the Jay Leno show said...

Oh foo. I hate capitalism just because it's fashionable... and am willing to NEVER acknowledge the vast problems of socialized systems. So I want socialized heath care, even though I can't counter a single fact of direct private vs. public comparison, or answer a SINGLE relevant question posed in this thread! (Like what big government actually does efficiently that would give anyone reason to believe they should on top of everything else, controll our heathcare.)"

Heh, just predicting about how the rest of this thread will go, after the above "smackdown" post... IE, back into the same mindless tailspin.

Smackdown, my ass.

As I've said, the government efficiency question is irrelevant to me--I'm not talking about efficiency, I'm talking about justice.

That said, government manages infrastructure fairly well--so maybe that's the paradigm shift we need, to start thinking about our healthcare system as being as vital to a healthy society as highways or plumbing.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Thanks for this!

Now run along and go play...

Your post in answer to ebuddy's post was basically my #3.. the usual, "Nuh uh!"

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Your post in answer to ebuddy's post was basically my #3.. the usual, "Nuh uh!"

Crash, please add something of substance to this conversation. We don't really need your commentary.

[besson3c]

Okay guys, if you really think that governments don't provide efficient systems, great, some of us might even agree with you...

How about coming up with something better though rather than just shooting down these sorts of ideas? What are *your* recommendations for overhauling our system? How about laying them on the table?

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

We are employees of a large company that can buy into a group health plan.

Once I make my own company my primary source of income, this will all change. Buying an individual health plan is not even an option for most people because of astronomical costs.

Okay, besson, you claim that individual plans have "astronomical costs." Did you know that your employer pays more for the group plan he provides to all of you than you would paying for an individual plan? It just looks like it's more because your employer picks up so much of the tab for the group plan, thus distorting the true cost of the coverage. That's one of the big problems with insurance, but it would be made that much worse if the whole thing were transferred to the unaccountable, often incompetent and woefully inefficient hands of government.

Btw, if you came from Canada and love it there, why are you in the United States? What possible reason would you have to be here instead of there?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Smackdown, my ass.
As I've said, the government efficiency question is irrelevant to me--

So basically, the actual details of the whole debate are irrelevant to you, the details of the terrible system you're stumping for are irrelevant to you, the details of the nitwit politicians and bureaucrats who already can't run anything efficiently being put in charge of YET ANOTHER vast system they can fsk-up far worst than it is.... is all irrelevant to you. Because you just want something because you've bought into the hype it's better everywhere else, and have been willing to blind yourself to the rampant problems that exist.

I'm not talking about efficiency, I'm talking about justice.

The reality of that position, is just what ebuddy said- body counts stacking up when the inefficiency that you're clearly willing to overlook kicks in. There's nothing even remotely "just" about overlooking the realities of what you're trying to advocate for.

That said, government manages infrastructure fairly well--so maybe that's the paradigm shift we need, to start thinking about our healthcare system as being as vital to a healthy society as highways or plumbing.

First of all, it's been pointed out countless times that government really turns much infrastructure management over to private agencies- and giving an inefficient and bloated government control over your roads is a lot less of an erosion of freedom than giving them control over your health.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

So basically, the actual details of the whole debate are irrelevant to you, the details of the terrible system you're stumping for are irrelevant to you, the details of the nitwit politicians and bureaucrats who already can't run anything efficiently being put in charge of YET ANOTHER vast system they can fsk-up far worst than it is.... is all irrelevant to you. Because you just want something because you've bought into the hype it's better everywhere else, and have been willing to blind yourself to the rampant problems that exist.


The reality of that position, is just what ebuddy said- body counts stacking up when the inefficiency that you're clearly willing to overlook kicks in. There's nothing even remotely "just" about overlooking the realities of what you're trying to advocate for.


First of all, it's been pointed out countless times that government really turns much infrastructure management over to private agencies- and giving an inefficient and bloated government control over your roads is a lot less of an erosion of freedom than giving them control over your health.

So far efficiency has been discussed only in terms of bureaucratic waste, not body counts. If you want to explain to me how the government running things would actually lead to "body counts," which I take to mean a less healthy populace, then I'm willing to listen but you'll have to actually make some sort of argument there.

Fine, if we want the government to contract out the healthcare services, fine! The goal is universal healthcare coverage that doesn't deny life-saving medicine to those who can't afford it. If you've got a plan for that, super, but let's hear it.

Because so far, all you've been doing is nay-saying by airing typically vague gripes about government inefficiency. That's not too compelling when people's lives are on the line.

P.S. What freedom? I said above, if you want to pay more for private medicine, knock yourself out. But let's provide basic health coverage for everyone. The two are not related.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Btw, if you came from Canada and love it there, why are you in the United States? What possible reason would you have to be here instead of there?

Where you going with that? Because he thinks socialized medicine is better than our crappy system that leaves people out in the rain he has no right to come into the United States? Give me a break.

[Spliffdaddy]

Get a grip, people. I can't leave you alone for 5 minutes.

Nobody in the US is refused necessary medical treatment. Not the rich, not the poor, not the insured, not the uninsured.

You can keep on repeating baseless crap - but it won't make it true.

Now, please, let me retire in peace. If the USA isn't good enough for you, then PM me and I'll make sure you get to whatever socialist utopia you desire. Really, we don't care how they do things in Canada. And we *really* don't care how they do things in the UK. Maybe, just maybe, we care a little about how they do things in Australia. Australia is cool. Canada is the polar opposite of cool. The UK falls somewhere in between.

This is America. If you cannot achieve here, then you cannot achieve anywhere. Pay for what you owe. Be it medical care or food or that new iPhone that does nothing my free Nokia doesn't already do better.

Spliff out.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Canada is the polar opposite of cool.

You've obviously never been there. It's beyond cool. That place is practically the friggin' North Pole.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Okay, besson, you claim that individual plans have "astronomical costs." Did you know that your employer pays more for the group plan he provides to all of you than you would paying for an individual plan?

That doesn't make sense. If it were like that employers would simply pay for their employees individual plans and save money. Group plans are always cheaper or no group would form to buy one.

So unless you can back this statement up with some evidence I just don't believe it.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Get a grip, people. I can't leave you alone for 5 minutes.

Nobody in the US is refused necessary medical treatment. Not the rich, not the poor, not the insured, not the uninsured.

You can keep on repeating baseless crap - but it won't make it true.

Now, please, let me retire in peace. If the USA isn't good enough for you, then PM me and I'll make sure you get to whatever socialist utopia you desire. Really, we don't care how they do things in Canada. And we *really* don't care how they do things in the UK. Maybe, just maybe, we care a little about how they do things in Australia. Australia is cool. Canada is the polar opposite of cool. The UK falls somewhere in between.

This is America. If you cannot achieve here, then you cannot achieve anywhere. Pay for what you owe. Be it medical care or food or that new iPhone that does nothing my free Nokia doesn't already do better.

Spliff out.

God, that just shows how grossly ignorant you are!

As if any Nokia was as good as an iPhone.

Seriously, though, there are people in this country who struggle through the debt of medical bills. You pretending there isn't a problem won't make them go away. Just because you and I aren't affected by this issue doesn't mean it isn't a real problem, Spliff.

Nice try, though.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

I don't hate capitalism.

I must've read; "Capitalism isn't an absolute good. It's not any kind of good. The market doesn't solve problems, it only picks winners." as you hating capitalism. In the least, you really, really, really don't like it.

I hate it when people think market forces will solve all our problems, like our education system. The argument that because our education system is broken that the solution is to privatize it is absurd and shows a complete lack of understanding of what's really wrong in education. What's wrong is that we live in an anti-intellectual culture.

I'm going to have to challenge this by asking for some kind of affirmation here. This sounds like an opinion with no foundation in fact.

Your "evidence" in favor of all private schools suffers from an abysmal selection bias which actually proves my case. Private schools are more successful because by definition, those students have families that care about education.

So... the families that care more about education choose private over public schools and this proves your point how? It should be noted that private schools do a more effective job of including parents in the child's education through more creative Parent/Teacher drives and events geared towards the inclusion of the family. Personal contact is also greater in private schools over pamphlets and fliers the kids lose on their way home. This is all the product of capitalism maintaining its competitive edge. If they lose kids, they lose their profitability.

Privatization is just an excuse to institutionalize inequalities that are already dragging down our efforts to have an educated populace.

There is absolutely nothing to suggest private schools exacerbate or institutionalize inequalities over the public school system. Have you been to a public school? As a kid who didn't grow up under a lot of money, there were few things harsher than trying to fit in with the crowd of kids who could actually afford nice clothes and ski-trips. Kids are cruel. They are particularly cruel to other kids who don't look, talk, act, or spend like they do. Talk about institutionalizing inequality. There's nothing that institutionalizes inequality more than the public school system. Add that to the fact that kids are being bussed away from other kids they're familiar with in order to fulfill racial requirements causing tension between both whites and blacks. School uniforms are, but one way private schools eliminate the social exclusion and exploitation of inequality prevalent due to attire.

- Private school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more than three times more likely than comparable public school students to attain a bachelor’s degree by their mid-20s, meaning that private schools contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty for their students. The socio-economic factor brought up by many in an attempt to refute this point does not stand up to facts.

- Private schools are racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. 23% of private school students are students of color; 28% are from families with annual incomes under $50,000

With all due respect, it seems you're fighting this simply out of ideological opposition to capitalism instead of supporting government-run education. Opposing capitalism might be best for you, but not for kids. I'm opposed to damning them to a failing system.

ebuddy, you're smart and you're a thinker, so really, tell me how market forces--the very ones that have perpetuated inequality throughout history--will create a just society? How can a system that operates darwinistically create opportunities for greater equality?

Again, the above is nothing more than demagoguery. There are no facts to support the case for federally-funded education so we simply oppose the other solutions because... well we just really, really, really don't like them.

When I was 18 years old my then girlfriend, now wife had become pregnant with my first child. We were broke. We lived in an extremely poor neighborhood and were facing astronomical hospital bills for prenatal care, medication, the birth itself, and so on... We didn't originally qualify for Medicaid because I made just over $500.00/month and my wife was making a little less than this. Combined, our incomes were not pathetic enough to qualify for any assistance. She could either claim she didn't know who the father was or I could cut my hours back in order to qualify. Guess what? I cut my hours back. While on WIC and food-stamps, we were approached by several in the neighborhood to start selling our food-stamps for .50 on the dollar. The system has more holes than swiss cheese, creates a dependancy class, and exacerbates inequality by making the hand-out more tempting than progress. While under this government program we had healthcare, but you were in fact treated as a number. There are simply too many patients in your situation for you to stand out and we had absolutely no leverage for expecting better care.

Why all of a sudden is giving a man a fish more sensible than teaching a man to fish when discussing socialization? I've never understood this.

- Why are you smarter than the uninsured?
- Why are you more capable than those who are not successful?
- By what standard are you measuring compassion vs greed?
- Why would you think the power-hungry in Washington who soothe your ears just long enough for the vote have more integrity when it comes to the dollar? Have they shown you they are more accomplished and transparent than the private sector? *examples please.

- Why should the government care more about you than you?

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

Spliff out.

Welcome back junkie.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Okay, besson, you claim that individual plans have "astronomical costs." Did you know that your employer pays more for the group plan he provides to all of you than you would paying for an individual plan? It just looks like it's more because your employer picks up so much of the tab for the group plan, thus distorting the true cost of the coverage. That's one of the big problems with insurance, but it would be made that much worse if the whole thing were transferred to the unaccountable, often incompetent and woefully inefficient hands of government.

What is your source of this information?

Btw, if you came from Canada and love it there, why are you in the United States? What possible reason would you have to be here instead of there?

What does it matter?

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I must've read; "Capitalism isn't an absolute good. It's not any kind of good. The market doesn't solve problems, it only picks winners." as you hating capitalism. In the least, you really, really, really don't like it.

I should've finished that thought:

Capitalism isn't an absolute good. It's not any kind of good. It's not bad, either. It's valueless. It's cold. It's just logic, really. Like organisms in nature, capitalists will compete to their ultimate advantage. THEIR ultimate advantage, not the consumers.

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

So... the families that care more about education choose private over public schools and this proves your point how? It should be noted that private schools do a more effective job of including parents in the child's education through more creative Parent/Teacher drives and events geared towards the inclusion of the family. Personal contact is also greater in private schools over pamphlets and fliers the kids lose on their way home. This is all the product of capitalism maintaining its competitive edge. If they lose kids, they lose their profitability.


There is absolutely nothing to suggest private schools exacerbate or institutionalize inequalities over the public school system. Have you been to a public school? As a kid who didn't grow up under a lot of money, there were few things harsher than trying to fit in with the crowd of kids who could actually afford nice clothes and ski-trips. Kids are cruel. They are particularly cruel to other kids who don't look, talk, act, or spend like they do. Talk about institutionalizing inequality. There's nothing that institutionalizes inequality more than the public school system. Add that to the fact that kids are being bussed away from other kids they're familiar with in order to fulfill racial requirements causing tension between both whites and blacks. School uniforms are, but one way private schools eliminate the social exclusion and exploitation of inequality prevalent due to attire.

- Private school students from low socioeconomic backgrounds are more than three times more likely than comparable public school students to attain a bachelor’s degree by their mid-20s, meaning that private schools contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty for their students. The socio-economic factor brought up by many in an attempt to refute this point does not stand up to facts.

- Private schools are racially, ethnically, and economically diverse. 23% of private school students are students of color; 28% are from families with annual incomes under $50,000

With all due respect, it seems you're fighting this simply out of ideological opposition to capitalism instead of supporting government-run education. Opposing capitalism might be best for you, but not for kids. I'm opposed to damning them to a failing system.

Again, the above is nothing more than demagoguery. There are no facts to support the case for federally-funded education so we simply oppose the other solutions because... well we just really, really, really don't like them.

When I was 18 years old my then girlfriend, now wife had become pregnant with my first child. We were broke. We lived in an extremely poor neighborhood and were facing astronomical hospital bills for prenatal care, medication, the birth itself, and so on... We didn't originally qualify for Medicaid because I made just over $500.00/month and my wife was making a little less than this. Combined, our incomes were not pathetic enough to qualify for any assistance. She could either claim she didn't know who the father was or I could cut my hours back in order to qualify. Guess what? I cut my hours back. While on WIC and food-stamps, we were approached by several in the neighborhood to start selling our food-stamps for .50 on the dollar. The system has more holes than swiss cheese, creates a dependancy class, and exacerbates inequality by making the hand-out more tempting than progress. While under this government program we had healthcare, but you were in fact treated as a number. There are simply too many patients in your situation for you to stand out and we had absolutely no leverage for expecting better care.

Why all of a sudden is giving a man a fish more sensible than teaching a man to fish when discussing socialization? I've never understood this.


- Why should the government care more about you than you?

You are all over the map in this one. I would appreciate it if we'd not split up threads. It makes it too difficult to respond appropriately. Let's focus.

Privatizing schools and socializing healthcare are two different issues. Let me assure you that you are off base in thinking that my adamant rejection of the one and my partial support for the other stems from an aversion to capitalism. As I said above, capitalism is fine, but market forces are indifferent and will never accomplish the goal of providing healthcare for everyone (nor of educating everyone, for that matter). By their very nature, market forces hinge on inequality. There can be no competition if there is no inequality. That's the nature of the beast and the very reason that these two systems--education and healthcare--should not be subjected to the market.

They are social services that should be open to all Americans.

By the way, don't you see that your critique of the system that allowed for the "loopholes" you cite wouldn't exist in a universal healthcare system? The problem you pointed out is obviously a product of the half-assed implementation we have in this country.

And buddy, I'm treated as a number now!

Oh, and since every question must be addressed explicitly, lest I invoke the wrath of Crash:

- Why are you smarter than the uninsured? Who said I am?

- Why are you more capable than those who are not successful? Who said I am?

- By what standard are you measuring compassion vs greed? I said nothing about compassion that I'm aware of.

- Why would you think the power-hungry in Washington who soothe your ears just long enough for the vote have more integrity when it comes to the dollar? Have they shown you they are more accomplished and transparent than the private sector? *examples please. Because they answer to me via the vote--weak as that incentive has become. In a system where I have no choice, like now, and which does not respond to consumer market pressures, as this so-called private system does not do, I lose just as badly as I would under socialized medicine, but a lot of poor people lose much, much worse.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL 

That doesn't make sense. If it were like that employers would simply pay for their employees individual plans and save money. Group plans are always cheaper or no group would form to buy one.

So unless you can back this statement up with some evidence I just don't believe it.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

What is your source of this information?

You guys were floored by that one, huh? Well, it's the truth. Ask an employer or ask an insurance company if you don't believe me, a licensed insurance agent. Group plans always cost more than corresponding individuals plans. The reason why? The insurer needs to charge extra to allow for the additional risk of the "open enrollment" feature provided by a group plan, which allows all employees to sign up without being individually underwritten and thus subject to rate-ups or declines due to preexisting conditions. Let me repeat it for good measure: Group plans always cost more than corresponding individual plans. You just don't realize that because your employer is picking up the lion share of the cost for you. What, did you think insurance companies give huge breaks to benefit employers out of the goodness of their corporate hearts? Of course not. Quality, cutting-edge, competitive health coverage costs real money.

What does it matter?

Because if you're in the United States despite your love for Canada and its solutions, there must be a compelling reason. And I'm willing to bet that would be an economic reason - either because you have access to our much more vibrant economy with superior prospects for you in your line of work, or you enjoy the lower tax rates. And if I'm right, the next logical question to you is, why do you presume to come to my country, benefit from its system, and then lobby in favor of throwing away the solution that works in America to deliver the best care on the planet (albeit one that definitely has room for improvement) for a failing European scheme that would have a seriously negative, if not outright deleterious, impact on my country? Especially when you evidently don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the financial aspects of health care?

[besson3c]

Big Mac, sorry, but I've lost interest in continuing in this thread. To much talking past each other and reactionary Fox News-style statements that really have little to do with what was actually said.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

I should've finished that thought

I agree, but you might be a little late.

You are all over the map in this one. I would appreciate it if we'd not split up threads. It makes it too difficult to respond appropriately. Let's focus.

It doesn't do any good at all to make a throw on a runner then, once he's ran a base on you, indict him for lacking focus. More later...

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Big Mac, sorry, but I've lost interest in continuing in this thread. To much talking past each other and reactionary Fox News-style statements that really have little to do with what was actually said.

So be it - it's your choice to scuttle the debate. Of course, I choose to believe you've resigned from this thread because the argument is not going your way.

[Spliffdaddy]

I do not have medical insurance. I am self-insured. Do you know what that means? it means I have to pay for my medical care. I don't want health insurance. I don't want any sort of insurance. If you can afford medical insurance, then you can afford to NOT have medical insurance - simply put.
There exists no *right* to receive medical treatment in the USA. Look at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Do you see medical care mentioned?
If it were up to me, we'd have the right to marry a hot redhead. To hell with the right to free speech. Free speech ain't worth a damn. Even if you had the worst job in the world, it would all be worth it if you could come home to a hot redhead.
When the day comes where everything in life is given to you by virtue of living in the USA - that's the day I leave. When hard work and sacrifice is worth nothing, then there will be no hard work and sacrifice. We will become no better than the worst nations on Earth. In all seriousness, this country was never intended to be a haven for losers. The only people complaining about the USA are foreigners (misery loves company) and American slackers. Show me one country that is successful because their population is lazy.
If you cannot or do not want to succeed, then, yes, your life will be one of misery here in the USA. If your goal is to make something of yourself - there is no better place on Earth to be.
Stop being a victim and start being something more worthwhile. God didn't put you here to be a burden on others. He put you here to help others.

[Spliffdaddy]

WTF, people? I spend literally years of my life trying to talk sense into you folks - all for nothing. I can't even leave for a few months without everything around here going straight to hell. Listen, there is no better source of life-changing information than Spliffdaddy. When I'm not here it seems everybody starts thinking that 9/11 was created by Dick Cheney and a shadow government. You start believing that Nancy Pelosi is the answer to your troubles. You think that Republicans are the cause of government corruption.
I'm here to help. To be your friend. And to let you know that Newt Gingrich will be the next President. I predicted that years ago. Yes. Yes, I understand the plight of the liberals. I am against factory farms and Fois Gras. I am all for a greeener environment. I support gays and lesbians. That being said, there's no excuse for being both a liberal and being a slacker. Those are not interrelated. You can be a hard working successful liberal. True, I've never witnessed it, but there's no reason it can't be done.
I know a lot of you think I'm an idiot. But this idiot has been remarkably successful despite all the roadblocks inherent in this capitalist society. What's your excuse? Are you not as good as me? Why do you need assistance and I don't?
These are important questions. What makes you less of a person than myself? I never ask for help from government - yet you beg for it.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I agree, but you might be a little late.


It doesn't do any good at all to make a throw on a runner then, once he's ran a base on you, indict him for lacking focus. More later...

I just hate cutting and pasting the "quote" tag all over the place. Besides, in my experience, clipping up a response and going line by line leads to squabbling over minutia instead of discussing the issues.

If you really, really want to go line by line we can, but I was just arguing for a format, not against your content.

And if I can make one more request, can we stop the self-congratulatory remarks? If someone on the other side wants to credit you with a point, maybe I'll concede one, but when it's just you and Crash thinking you've scored, it don't count for much in my book.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

WTF, people? I spend literally years of my life trying to talk sense into you folks - all for nothing. I can't even leave for a few months without everything around here going straight to hell. Listen, there is no better source of life-changing information than Spliffdaddy. When I'm not here it seems everybody starts thinking that 9/11 was created by Dick Cheney and a shadow government. You start believing that Nancy Pelosi is the answer to your troubles. You think that Republicans are the cause of government corruption.
I'm here to help. To be your friend. And to let you know that Newt Gingrich will be the next President. I predicted that years ago. Yes. Yes, I understand the plight of the liberals. I am against factory farms and Fois Gras. I am all for a greeener environment. I support gays and lesbians. That being said, there's no excuse for being both a liberal and being a slacker. Those are not interrelated. You can be a hard working successful liberal. True, I've never witnessed it, but there's no reason it can't be done.
I know a lot of you think I'm an idiot. But this idiot has been remarkably successful despite all the roadblocks inherent in this capitalist society. What's your excuse? Are you not as good as me? Why do you need assistance and I don't?
These are important questions. What makes you less of a person than myself? I never ask for help from government - yet you beg for it.

Never?

I'd be willing to bet money that's not true, but since we could hardly prove one way or the other, let's move on.

Being a liberal has nothing to do with asking for help for yourself, but seeking to correct injustices.

Are you, sir, a minority? Were you born into poverty? Have you faced sexism or other discrimination?

I for one, am not, was not, and have not. That doesn't stop me from facing the reality that inequalities do exist. It would be far too convenient for me to credit everything I have--and damn, do I have a lot--to hard work alone. Plenty of people work really damn hard and get no where. Plenty of people have rough shakes and find themselves at society's mercy.

I refuse to endorse a society that would have no such mercy to extend.

"Are you not as good as me?"

So you like to believe that your success is proof of your superiority? I suppose that's proof positive that the white race is genetically superior, right? That is the same logic, you know. Look deeper...or better yet, look past yourself.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy 

There exists no *right* to receive medical treatment in the USA. Look at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Do you see medical care mentioned?

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? I know it's not the constitution, but come on?

And if God put you here to be a help to others, why are you so reluctant for government to provide that help?

[besson3c]

SpliffDaddy,

You are just a gay old goat that likes ointment. Go eat a can.

[Spliffdaddy]

i love you, besson. Welcome to America.

As for the previous poster..

So what efforts are you making toward fixing these "inequalities"? Are you selling your Mac and downgrading to an Athlon 800? Or are you waiting for others to do the work for you? You say your success is an innocent byproduct of hard work? Then I'm certain you can cite many examples where being lazy has accomplished something meaningful. I'll tell you what. Wake up tomorrow and don't do anything. And keep doing that for weeks and months on end. When you're done, I will stand by your side and agree that you are a decent person. I won't agree that you deserve for me to buy you lunch.
I'm guessing you don't drive through the downtown areas handing out Happy Meals, shoes, and clothing to all the 'less fortunate' people. Yet I wonder how you can justify *not* doing so. After all, those people are no better than you. And you have sooo much unwarranted good luck. Do you ever stop and consider that your good luck is nothing more than the result of hard work and good decisions? Should there be no penalty for spending your money on a crack rock or, God forbid, a fat spliff of ganja? Would you agree with me that it might be a bad decision? Of course it's a bad decision. Yet you expect people to believe you when you say that you are no better than a ganja-smoking homeless mofo? Pfft. I didn't get this far in life by ignoring and glossing over my bad decisions. I learned from them. And I smoked more weed than Snoop Dogg and his entire posse.
There absolutely needs to be a price to pay for making idiotic decisions. Otherwise there's no point in being responsible. The "safety net" should exist for people who make good decisions but, nevertheless, experience some setbacks. How many months of your life have you been destitute? Hell, I've been there. And if I there was no price to pay for my bad decisions, I'd still be there.
Just like you, I do everything I can to help the less fortunate. I do more than my share, if there's such a thing. But I won't lift a finger to do the impossible. Sometimes the best way to help somebody is to not help them. Most of the so-called 'unfortunate' people are merely self-imposed captives of victimization. To assist them is to do them a great disservice. It's akin to buying a heroin balloon for a junkie.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Privatizing schools and socializing healthcare are two different issues. Let me assure you that you are off base in thinking that my adamant rejection of the one and my partial support for the other stems from an aversion to capitalism. As I said above, capitalism is fine, but market forces are indifferent and will never accomplish the goal of providing healthcare for everyone (nor of educating everyone, for that matter). By their very nature, market forces hinge on inequality. There can be no competition if there is no inequality. That's the nature of the beast and the very reason that these two systems--education and healthcare--should not be subjected to the market.

I thought this was the "focus" segment of our discussion. Either education and health care should be lumped together ideologically or they shouldn't. Now I'm arguing content. When I gave you a direct comparison between privatized education and public education and showed you why public was inferior; education and health care were two different things. Now you're lumping them back together as if they both require socialization. I've shown you different, but I guess this is where we pretend I didn't say anything to the contrary and we'll just keep repeating the same statements over and over again.

- inequality is the product of human nature. You can't govern that out of the collective. In this world there are over-achievers and under-achievers. The public school system has not elevated its standards to those at the top, it has catered to those at the bottom. Social programs do not elevate the base of users, it holds them down. I've given you a personal example of this, but again this is where we pretend I've not said anything. As a result, our nation is no longer competitive in education. We're #2 in spending yet #9 in academics. You can talk about equalization, but there's no basis in fact. In fact, we are no longer equal. I've given you stats comparing the two. I've given you examples of how inequality is institutionalized in the public school system from one who went there. I asked if you attended public school and you didn't answer. I gave you line-for-line comparisons between public and private schools and you did not address this. You're free to address those points at any time.

They are social services that should be open to all Americans.

I disagree. Few can bungle these more important aspects of society more than the government. They've shown it time and again. I've asked you for examples to the contrary and you've not provided one. Tell me how the government is more qualified and resourced to meet the needs of our health and education without institutionalizing inequality. You don't think those in the higher rungs of society will still receive superior care? Are you kidding me?

By the way, don't you see that your critique of the system that allowed for the "loopholes" you cite wouldn't exist in a universal healthcare system? The problem you pointed out is obviously a product of the half-assed implementation we have in this country.

Wrong. It's not half-assed, it's full-bore. This is why the corruption and holes exist and a host of the dependancy class waiting to exploit the system.

And buddy, I'm treated as a number now!

I'm sorry to hear that. I've been on social services and lived it. Have you? I'm now not living that unfortunate circumstance and am seeing the other side. It's much better on this side. I'd like to teach others how to attain this side as opposed to keeping them on that side.

- Why are you smarter than the uninsured? Who said I am?

You're not and there's no reason they can't be at least as successful as you or me in affording health care in our system.

- Why are you more capable than those who are not successful? Who said I am?

You're not and there's no reason they can't be at least as accomplished as you or me.

- By what standard are you measuring compassion vs greed? I said nothing about compassion that I'm aware of.

Ahh, but when you repeatedly invoke the "capitalist greed" argument, you're suggesting there's an option with more integrity. What is that option, government greed? No thanks. I've seen what they are and are not capable of doing and managing socialization is not their strength. If I give a child $10 to manage and they bungle it, I'm not giving them another $100 to try again. Given their track record of success, I'm personally opposed to giving them even more responsibility. I've given the direct comparison of private VS public using education. The proof is in the pudding.

- Why would you think the power-hungry in Washington who soothe your ears just long enough for the vote have more integrity when it comes to the dollar? Have they shown you they are more accomplished and transparent than the private sector? *examples please. Because they answer to me via the vote--weak as that incentive has become.

Not good enough. They've bungled your vote. There is currently more corruption and waste in government than at any time in our history and yet you keep voting. Interesting no? Answer; there is absolutely nothing less transparent and more inefficient than government programs which is why you're not able to provide the requested examples. Period. This is not a call to give them more responsibility. Particularly regarding something as profoundly important as our health.

In a system where I have no choice, like now, and which does not respond to consumer market pressures, as this so-called private system does not do, I lose just as badly as I would under socialized medicine, but a lot of poor people lose much, much worse.

You've got low expectations. The times I've had to use medical services, my expectations are high. You might call me a "pain in the ass", but then I pay a great deal for those services. I have a choice of doctors and hospitals and I have a say in my health care. I'm not smarter than those who don't. I'm not more capable than those who don't and I don't believe the government has more integrity than the private sector. I don't believe the vote holds as much value as the dollar and I vote with my pocketbook.

It has been my personal experience that by voting with my dollar, results have been much more forthcoming than any vote at the polling place. You've admitted that our vote holds little value (in your words; as "weak" as that is), now try voting with your money and expecting more. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. As someone who has been on both sides of this issue, one is clearly better than the other.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

And if I can make one more request, can we stop the self-congratulatory remarks? If someone on the other side wants to credit you with a point, maybe I'll concede one, but when it's just you and Crash thinking you've scored, it don't count for much in my book.

It apparently counts for enough to merit a rebuke from you. Which means equally little with all due respect.

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

And if God put you here to be a help to others, why are you so reluctant for government to provide that help?

IMO it goes a little like this. There's a thirsty man in need of a drink of water. He is #10. You line up a group of 9 others to disseminate the needed water. You pour a cup of water into the cupped hands of man #1, who in turn pours the contents of his cupped-hands into the cupped hands of man #2 and so on. By the time #9 tips his hands for #10, there is little if anything left. You'd be much better served by having #10 pump his own damned water. Why are you so opposed to self-empowerment?

Personally, I'm reluctant for government to provide that help because they can't. They've shown it time and again throughout history. We can't simply pretend their ineptitude is not apparent in favor of some utopian ideal that will never come to fruition. There's a reason those countries with universal care are courting privatization and it's not because universal health care is so overwhelmingly successful.

Where are the "ask not" Democrats? Are there any left in this place? Speak up and be heard!!!

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

It apparently counts for enough to merit a rebuke from you. Which means equally little with all due respect.

Ok, just so we're clear on who's getting snippy, rude, and arrogant.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

IMO it goes a little like this. There's a thirsty man in need of a drink of water. He is #10. You line up a group of 9 others to disseminate the needed water. You pour a cup of water into the cupped hands of man #1, who in turn pours the contents of his cupped-hands into the cupped hands of man #2 and so on. By the time #9 tips his hands for #10, there is little if anything left. You'd be much better served by having #10 pump his own damned water. Why are you so opposed to self-empowerment?

Personally, I'm reluctant for government to provide that help because they can't. They've shown it time and again throughout history. We can't simply pretend their ineptitude is not apparent in favor of some utopian ideal that will never come to fruition. There's a reason those countries with universal care are courting privatization and it's not because universal health care is so overwhelmingly successful.

Where are the "ask not" Democrats? Are there any left in this place? Speak up and be heard!!!

Ok, so what, given you metaphor, would constitute giving a man a pump? Surely he has no handle to work in the current system. So what is your solution?

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by ebuddy 

I thought this was the "focus" segment of our discussion. Either education and health care should be lumped together ideologically or they shouldn't. Now I'm arguing content. When I gave you a direct comparison between privatized education and public education and showed you why public was inferior; education and health care were two different things. Now you're lumping them back together as if they both require socialization. I've shown you different, but I guess this is where we pretend I didn't say anything to the contrary and we'll just keep repeating the same statements over and over again.

- inequality is the product of human nature. You can't govern that out of the collective. In this world there are over-achievers and under-achievers. The public school system has not elevated its standards to those at the top, it has catered to those at the bottom. Social programs do not elevate the base of users, it holds them down. I've given you a personal example of this, but again this is where we pretend I've not said anything. As a result, our nation is no longer competitive in education. We're #2 in spending yet #9 in academics. You can talk about equalization, but there's no basis in fact. In fact, we are no longer equal. I've given you stats comparing the two. I've given you examples of how inequality is institutionalized in the public school system from one who went there. I asked if you attended public school and you didn't answer. I gave you line-for-line comparisons between public and private schools and you did not address this. You're free to address those points at any time.


I disagree. Few can bungle these more important aspects of society more than the government. They've shown it time and again. I've asked you for examples to the contrary and you've not provided one. Tell me how the government is more qualified and resourced to meet the needs of our health and education without institutionalizing inequality. You don't think those in the higher rungs of society will still receive superior care? Are you kidding me?


Wrong. It's not half-assed, it's full-bore. This is why the corruption and holes exist and a host of the dependancy class waiting to exploit the system.


I'm sorry to hear that. I've been on social services and lived it. Have you? I'm now not living that unfortunate circumstance and am seeing the other side. It's much better on this side. I'd like to teach others how to attain this side as opposed to keeping them on that side.


You're not and there's no reason they can't be at least as successful as you or me in affording health care in our system.


You're not and there's no reason they can't be at least as accomplished as you or me.


Ahh, but when you repeatedly invoke the "capitalist greed" argument, you're suggesting there's an option with more integrity. What is that option, government greed? No thanks. I've seen what they are and are not capable of doing and managing socialization is not their strength. If I give a child $10 to manage and they bungle it, I'm not giving them another $100 to try again. Given their track record of success, I'm personally opposed to giving them even more responsibility. I've given the direct comparison of private VS public using education. The proof is in the pudding.


Not good enough. They've bungled your vote. There is currently more corruption and waste in government than at any time in our history and yet you keep voting. Interesting no? Answer; there is absolutely nothing less transparent and more inefficient than government programs which is why you're not able to provide the requested examples. Period. This is not a call to give them more responsibility. Particularly regarding something as profoundly important as our health.


You've got low expectations. The times I've had to use medical services, my expectations are high. You might call me a "pain in the ass", but then I pay a great deal for those services. I have a choice of doctors and hospitals and I have a say in my health care. I'm not smarter than those who don't. I'm not more capable than those who don't and I don't believe the government has more integrity than the private sector. I don't believe the vote holds as much value as the dollar and I vote with my pocketbook.

It has been my personal experience that by voting with my dollar, results have been much more forthcoming than any vote at the polling place. You've admitted that our vote holds little value (in your words; as "weak" as that is), now try voting with your money and expecting more. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised. As someone who has been on both sides of this issue, one is clearly better than the other.

Either you completely misunderstood me or you just don't want to do it this way, but when I said "focus," I meant let's stop breaking the posts apart.

For example, I'm going to focus on your statement that inequality is inherent in human nature. Of course it is. It's more than just human nature, it's nature. And that fact is precisely why we should have a largely free market economy.

However, there are some areas that are so essential to providing the opportunities for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that we must make every effort as a society to extend these services to all our citizens, or else we run the risk of these inequalities becoming institutionalized instead of being simply the results of merit and competition.

I, along with most thinkers to the left of your position, believe that such a situation already exists. There are endemic inequalities that prevent us from achieving the equity and justice I think we would all like to see in society. You, Spliff and Crash, apparently believe we have already achieved a true meritocracy. That, I must say, is a naively myopic and self-centered view of the nation.

You also believe that there is nothing government can do right, so how can they do this. I mean, how do I argue against such formless anti-government prejudice. I believe in limited government as a means of protecting our liberty, but your position that government's absolutely good for nothing is just absurd. Government exists to serve us. Your defeatist attitude is self-serving in this instance, and on some level disingenuous. You want what, a counter example of something government's done right? God, I don't know, winning WWII. Um, ending segregation. Eradicating Polio. I'm out of time...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Ok, so what, given you metaphor, would constitute giving a man a pump? Surely he has no handle to work in the current system. So what is your solution?

For that matter, what is the Republican solution here, period? What needs to happen with our health care? Surely you recognize the severe and crippling problems it faces now? What do we do?

[peeb]

Originally Posted by Helmling 

Smackdown, my ass.

As I've said, the government efficiency question is irrelevant to me--I'm not talking about efficiency, I'm talking about justice.

That said, government manages infrastructure fairly well--so maybe that's the paradigm shift we need, to start thinking about our healthcare system as being as vital to a healthy society as highways or plumbing.

Harddrive is not interested in facts, but, for the record, the US govt healthcare administrations are more efficient than US private healthcare management companies (in terms of percentage spent on administration). Let's try to have a reality based conversation.

[Helmling]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

For that matter, what is the Republican solution here, period? What needs to happen with our health care? Surely you recognize the severe and crippling problems it faces now? What do we do?

No, there's no problem. If there's someone who can't pay his bills then he's just not as capable and it's obvious that he's a product of the entitlement culture produced by the welfare state. It's the individual's poor work ethic and lack of values that has led to poor life choices, leaving him without the resources to cope with his own problems.

If our hypothetical patient was a better person, then he'd understand how self-empowering it is to have no healthcare system.