a blog of questions, comments and quotes...inspired by this challenge: You see things; and you say, 'Why?'
But I dream things that never were; and I say, "Why not?" -George Bernard Shaw
OK Tim I'll bite. You know the story about the camel and his nose in the tent? In other words if you let the camel's nose in pretty soon you have a whole camel sleeping with you! I really think that is the main objection to the involvement of government in health care. Obama can say all he wants to about this not being a take over of the health care system but that involves a high level of trust in the government intentions not to grab more power for themselves in the future. Since when has that been the case?The history of Social Security and the income tax are strong illustrations that the government gathering power to itself is just what it does. The below is a direct quote from a Social Security pamphlet written in 1935 when it started.And finally, beginning in 1949, 12 years from now, you and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year. That is the most you will ever pay. http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecurity.asp#TaxesIncome taxes have gone from a low of 2% (1913) to today low of 10% with the high going from 15% to 35%http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.htmlYou see how well that has worked out.Secondly the promises to make sure everyone is insurable and can't lose their insurance while at the same time making insurance lower cost just doesn't make sense.Then why in all this debate not a single word, that I have heard, about tort reform? Surely if there is anything that is driving health costs up it is the pressure to preform unnecessary tests to protect doctors and that are of course paid for by insurance companies driving costs up etc.Is he lying? Who can tell? What does he know? But if he is lying or not is not really the point. The point is it isn't the best policy. In my view there needs to be an honest debate that doesn't protect either party's sacred cows. And that doesn't involve a rush to spend trillions on "something".Randy
Tim,Please name for me 1 social program the federal government has ever created and then run well. Do that and I will be on board with Universal Health Care. Okay, not really, but nobody can answer that question for me. What does the government run well? There are many other major problems I have with this plan but won't mention them here. Except this: explain to me Constitutionally how the Federal Government has the right/power to run the health care system in this country. There are specific powers given to the Federal Government and nationalizing health care is not one of them.
J&J,The USPS is a remarkably well run service despite facing some incredibly tough circumstances. Even now they are having to work extremely hard to overcome high fuel costs since they rely on huge quantities of gas to get the mail delivered. In spite of all that their postage rates have remained remarkably stable for over 100 years if you adjust for inflation.Unfortunately the USPS gets the "Newman/Cliff Claven" treatment most of the time. But if you've ever lived overseas you come to appreciate the USPS pretty quickly.Not sure how that relates to UHC but you were asking for just one government run program that is run well.
Post a Comment