We are debating the need for health care reform based on health care. Not government waste, not government corruption, not crooked politicians, not if it rains too much in Seattle.
As I've said before please argue if we need health care reform based on our current health care system. If there is a need, then the means to address it must be discussed. If you think our health care system is fine the way it is, I would ask you why you thought so. It costs more than any other place in the world, it is no better than average based on rankings of World Health Orginizations, and its current lack of universal coverage potentially exposes the broader population to epidemics. Not to mention a healthier work force is better for our economy. *Not directed at you frank, but I wish everyone would look up two very important terms: "Red Herring, and Straw Man" Please stop making these types of arguments, they are fallacious in there composition and not valid. Please make valid arguments. On Oct 1, 8:14 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Surely you don't think that the Government does not commit wasteful > > spending? > > Of course not and that's the point. Fraud and waste are not going away > anytime soon. Too many people who make policy have their hands in the > cookie jar. Yet you fail to account for this when you argue; "If we > can get everyone Health Care without more taxes, without healthcare > quality going down and without healthcare costs going up, what is the > problem?" At the end of the day you guys keep forgetting *someone* has > to pay for this. If you think the government will be able to achieve > healthcare nirvana without raising taxes then I have a bridge to sell > you. > > On Oct 1, 3:40 pm, LimboIndo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Fraud and waste, emphasis on waste. Surely you don't think that the > > Government does not commit wasteful spending? Why haven't they done it > > yet? Who knows? Most likely Politicians afraid to rock the boat and > > stop pandering to swing voters, or politicians with millions or > > hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations from insurance/ > > medical companies (like most of the ones trying to the block the > > reform). > > > On Oct 1, 12:45 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > If we can get > > > > everyone Health Care without more taxes, without healthcare quality > > > > going down and without healthcare costs going up, what is the problem? > > > > Sounds great, now prove it can be done. The CBO doesn’t seem to think > > > it will work. Common sense says it won’t work. A significant portion > > > of the funding supposedly will come from the elimination of fraud and > > > waste in the current system. Exactly how that will be done is still a > > > black box secret and one that most believe can’t be done. And if it > > > can be done, why isn’t it being done today? After all, the biggest > > > single complaint with the current system is cost, and if you can > > > eliminate fraud and waste you can reduce cost. > > > > On Oct 1, 12:16 pm, LimboIndo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In response to Plain'ol > > > > > It depends on what you mean by "efficient?" It is dangerous to confuse > > > > "efficiency" with "what is best for the American people." > > > > > In response to MJ-- > > > > > What reforms have Government instituted thus far? This is the first > > > > proposal of a major (emphasis major)reform of health care instituted > > > > by the Government that has ever been proposed, to my knowledge. > > > > > In response to the snippet about socialist, government etc... > > > > It would appear Mr. Bastiat confuses a Democratic Society and any > > > > other Society. In Democracy the people are the government. > > > > > And it seems both of you have danced around the question. "If we can > > > > get > > > > everyone Health Care without more taxes, without healthcare quality > > > > going down and without healthcare costs going up, what is the > > > > problem?" > > > > > If there is no problem with the ideal, then we need to work on the > > > > details of how to implement it. If you do have a problem with the > > > > ideal, then your problem might be larger than you suspect. > > > > > On Oct 1, 9:06 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > LimboIndo > > > > > But is healthcare reform the right thing to do for our country? > > > > > > MJ > > > > > You presume that Government -- who gave us 'reform' after > > > > > 'reform' after 'reform' that put us *in* this mess in the first > > > > > place -- is the appropriate facilitator for this so-called 'reform'. > > > > > > Unless Government 'reform' involves a wholesale 'repeal', > > > > > then the answer is definitively ... No. > > > > > > Regard$, > > > > > --MJ > > > > > > Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, > > > > > confuses the distinction between government and society. > > > > > As a result of this, every time we object to a thing > > > > > being done by government, the socialists conclude that > > > > > we object to its being done at all. -- Frédéric Bastiat- Hide > > > > > quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
