2/5 http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/05/edwards.2008.ap/index.html
"Edwards: Raise taxes to provide universal health care"
Edwards will lose. Most Americans hate immigrants and social
programs and thus don't want universal anything. It's the
era of corporations and privitazition baby!
\_ 60-70% polled say universal helth care is the fed's responsibility:
\_ Christ this discussion is fucking stupid. -dans
\_ 60-70% polled say health coverage is the fed's responsibility:
http://pollingreport.com/health3.htm
62% want universal health insurance:
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/living/US/healthcare031020_poll.html
\_ Move to Canada.
\_ No I intend to stay and fight. Where are you going to run
to after you lose?
\_ Sure, I want someone else to pay my bills, too, but I'm not
willing to pay the taxes for it. I'll pay more to get less.
Any cash that goes through government hands before turning into
a service that you could otherwise buy yourself is always going
to cost more and yield less. Government, by its very nature,
is inefficient and has costs. No one really believes Edwards
"tax the rich" thing. That sort of thing always turns into a
universal tax. AMT is the perfect example of sticking it to the
rich but nailing the middle class (as always).
\_ And who has been in the position to "fix" the AMT for the
past 12 years, and did nothing? You spew a lot of talking
points, but you're not saying anything.
\_ AMT was created decades ago. During the absolute iron
fisted rule of both parties during that time and during
the creation process itself, no one thought to consider
that the numbers didn't scale with inflation. Or didn't
care. The "GOP is evuuuul!" meme is tired. Let it rest.
If you had something to say on the topic, please join in,
but don't waste precious bits with partisan nonsense.
Neither party will do jack shit for the middle classes
that are already starting to get nailed by this, starting
in more expensive states like CA. --gpp
\_ This is funny. The pp criticized "government", not a party.
"Government" has been in charge for the last 12 yrs.
\_ This is a bullshit point. As is "Government ==
inefficient". And it's a point formed and fed by
one party in particular. Ergo my reply.
"Government is incompetent, and by God, we're going
to prove it."
\_ Yes, gov't == inefficient and incompetent is true in
general, simply because there's no driving force to
fix those problems. See, I can counter your
assertion with mine!
\_ Yes, Enron did a much better job of supplying
California with power than the regulated utilities
and the City of Los Angeles.
\_ Ah, but it was because of the government's
\_ But it was because of the government's
handling of energy contracts that Enron was
able to screw us.
\_ On average, we pay 2x as much for poorer health care than in the
socialized medicine countries. The elite can get very good care,
but most of the rest of us are screwed. Further, efficiencies will
accrue. Preventative care is a lot cheaper. Prescribing diet
change, quitting smoking, and exercise costs less than
triple bypass surgery.
\_ You're insane. Efficiencies do not _ever_ accrue in government
services. You can prescribe all you want, no one is going to do
it and then you'll need triple by pass surgery. That surgery
will be denied by some government flunky because you didn't
excercise like the nice government doctor told you so you are
not allowed the surgery and die horribly. Good call.
\_ Look it's the "you are insane" guy! Welcome back to the
guy who thinks that anyone who disagrees with him is
literally crazy!
\_ Ad hominem. Try again if you like.
\_ The "you are insane" guy is complaining about
ad hominem attacks? Or is that intended to be
a compliment???
\_ If you skip the first two words you're obsessing
over and try to respond to the points made you'd
be on firmer ground.
\_ If you'd skip the ad hominem attacks, you'd
have a better chance of convincing people
that you had a reasonable point worth
thinking about.
\_ Are you saying that a road system built by corporations
would be more efficient? How about a national defense?
Those are two areas where Gov't is more efficient at
serving the people. There's a lot of inequity and waste
\_ Health care is not a public service and does not
need to be. It worked just fine before HMO's were
allowed to monopolise and destroy the system so the
answer is to create an even bigger monopoly but at
the federal government level. Oh great, yeah that
will be wonderful. A service that requires skill
and personal service being provided by government
robots. That you can even consider compare the
road system to personal health care says volumes.
There are zero similiarities. The closest gov't
provided personal service I can think of to health
care is housing. Oh yeah, The Projects. Section
8 housing has been so uplifting for so many.
in the current health system due to insurance overhead.
Having Gov't as single-payer (with revenue taxed out of us)
would eliminate the insurance nightmare. It would *also*
allow for much more safely regulated hospitals. The NTSB
\_ So you think your hospitals are unregulated? What?
has made commercial aviation the safest mode of travel.
You're quite likely to die in hospitals due to medical
fuckups which are endemic to the healthcare system, and
with gov't regulation could be fixed across the whole
system, as the NTSB has done for commercial aviation.
\_ Because healing a sick person\
is just like flying
an airplane or running an airport. Uhm, yeah.
\_ Because healing a sick person is just like
flying an airplane or running an airport.
Uhm, yeah.
\_ Does no one here understand the distinction
between "health care" and "paying for health
care"? The answer becomes increasingly clear..
\_ Who ever has the bucks has the power. You
are not going to get quality health care
from Doctor A when Government or HMO Flunky
B says you don't need that procedure. Once
you figure that out you'll see why so many
scream about government healthcare. Whoever
has the bucks has the power and makes the
decisions. In a government/hmo system that
isn't you or your doctor.
\_ Actually, you're right about the bucks.
Nobody can pay their own medical bills,
So we buy health insurance, and the
insurance company pays the bills. So the
insurance company has the power. Their
interest is profit, so they make it hard
for doctors to collect. This makes it
expensive for doctors to collect. Which
gets passed onto us--to the point where
many of us can't afford health insurance
anymore. However, hospitals cannot just
refuse someone care because they're poor.
(By law.) So doctors have to increase the
prices on those of us who do have insurance.
This situation is spiralling out of control,
and is wasteful. We *could* simply not offer
any medical care at all to the poor (poor
meaning "not rich", so fuck the middle class
as well as the true poor.) *Better* is for
prices on those of us who do have
insurance. This situation is spiralling
out of control, and is wasteful. We
*could* simply not offer any medical care
at all to the poor (poor meaning "not
rich", so fuck the middle class as well as
the true poor.) *Better* is for
the government to get involved, kick out
the insurance companies, reduce the overall
cost of health care, and make the poor pay
for health care again via taxation. And
health care *better* be a public service,
because Joe Contageous with intractable
TB who isn't being treated because he's
poor is going to give it to *you*.
Right now hospital A kills people with the same damn
fuckups that hospitals C, D, E, F, G, H....-->Z have
\_ Yes, the federal government is the driving force
for innovation in this country. Not even God can
save us if that ever becomes true.
killed people with because they refuse (and can refuse)
to learn best-practices learned elsewhere the hard way,
by people dying.
\_ I used to believe that about roads and military, but I
don't any longer. Do you know how many private security
contractors are in Iraq? Nearly 50,000. I'm fairly
confident that if the government employed a few companies
to perform military functions, it would be cheaper and more
efficient. And the gov't might actually attempt to obey
the constitution as well (since it wouldn't have the
biggest guns).
\_ This is, quite possibly, the most uninformed post
evah.
\_ If you have something to say, say it. All you've
done is stick your tongue out and go, "NYAH! YOU ARE
A DUM POOPYHEAD!"
\_ Because that's all you deserve. Never argue with
fools. They'll pull you down to their level and
beat you with experience.
\_ You still said nothing. Here's the best
response you can get from what you've said,
"NYAH! YOU ARE A DUM POOPYHED TOO!" Now
we're at the same level of discourse at least.
Or the adult version, "I'm soooo smart and you
are soooo dumb I can't even begin to explain
it!" which is known as, "I have no clue what
I'm talking about but I'm going to tell you
you're an idiot for not thinking like me,
anyway".
\_ Iraq has been by far the most expensive war the US
has ever fought (yes accounting for inflation). Those
50,000 private security contractors have a lot to do
it costing so damn much.
\_ Where's your data for this? How much are they
costing compared to US uniformed troops in comparable
positions?
\_ I'm curious as to where your "Nearly 50k" number
came from. As the pentagon has claimed they
don't have any numbers on contractors in Iraq,
they may be interested in your powers of
divination.
As for the cost overruns, Henry Waxman just
started his hearings. After almost 4 years of
R delay, he may just be able to get you an answer
on that.
\_ Well, you are wrong and he is wrong, but just
read this and see:
http://www.csua.org/u/i08
(Washington Post)
\_ An external organization giving an estimate
does not negate my claim that the pentagon
has said they don't know how many contractors
are in iraq.
\_ The GAO giving an estimate does not negate
my claim that the pentagon has said they
don't know how many contractors are in iraq.
\_ That wasn't the question.
\_ The question was "Do you know
how many private security
contractors are in Iraq?"
The answer is "By necessity, no."
\_ What is wrong with the GAO
estimate? Why does it matter if
the Pentagon knows or not when
we're discussing if random motd
poster whos or not from another
source?
Ah, I see. P has blessed the results of
the external survey.
the external survey. So you're taking them
as the Pentagon claim. So.. the auditiors
have to tell the P just how many contracts
they've given out... You don't see a problem
here?
\_ I see no problem with working with the
best numbers available, instead of
throwing up my hands and claiming
that since I can't get perfect
information, there is no point in
even trying to understand the situation.
\_ It doesn't concern you that the P
is spending $Bs on contracts, and
doesn't know where it's going?
\_ You're comfortable with the idea of corporations
having bigger guns than the government? Seriously?
Our government may be incompetent and wasteful, but
corporations are psychopaths.
\_ Yes, I'm comfortable with that. Corporations are no
more than aggregates of people, with a corporate aim.
Sounds like the gov't to me. Since the gov't doesn't
care what the voters think, how precisely is that
different?
\_ The main difference between corporations and
the government is that corporations compete
against each other. The government, through
legislation, does not have to compete with
industry and can control markets. The
government is a form of dictatorship and
monopoly rolled into one. Sometimes it's
a benevolent dictatorship, but it's still a
dictatorship. Smaller government is better.
\_ Mega corps that have legal rights as people is
just as bad as having an over bearing uncarin
gigantic federal system.
\_ Actually, technically, corporations are sociopaths,
but otherwise I agree with you. What the person
above me doesn't understand is that corps are
different from government due to profit motive. If
that can make a buck by killing you horribly, the
corp won't hesitate a second. To get the government
to kill someone means making a bunch of slack
government employees fill out paperwork, attend
meeting, record metrics, and general interfere with
other things they'd rather be doing.
\_ Ha ha! Talking with people who have lived in countries with
socialized medicine has made it clear you're full of crap. Do
you really want hospitals to turn into the DMV?
\_ Actually this was from news stories in the US.
\_ Which news stories?
\_ Six years of living with socialized medicine in Japan made it
clear to me that hospitals can be efficient, competent, and
cheap. Where's your personal experience to the contrary?
\_ Canada.
\_ How long were you there, and what did they screw up?
\_ A friend, and he needed an MRI and found out the
waiting list was 18 months long--people dying before
they could get an MRI, etc.
\_ Anecdotal hearsay evidence isn't very strong.
\_ http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba369
http://www.cato.org/dailys/9-23-96.html
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=855
etc. etc. etc. |
http://csua.com/feed/