07.27.07
“From ‘Sicko’ to Sanity Coalition” makes ME sicko
Have you heard of these guys? I hadn’t until today, when I saw a press release from them that they are planning to protest in Madison as they demand health care for all. Interesting. It would seem that good ol’ Michael Moore’s film, Sicko, has spawned a psychotic fan club who goes around demanding health care.
You can read the whole press release here, otherwise I’ll just touch on some of the nuttier claims by this band of idiots.
To start with, they say:
“We demand that the Wisconsin Assembly hold public hearings to discuss the crisis in Wisconsin’s health care system”
Which of course, drives me to wonder… What crisis? Did I miss something out there? I mean, I live here in Wisconsin, and I don’t see a crisis. Since every socialist group out there has different numbers, I have no idea what the real estimate of uninsured in Wisconsin is, but it’s hardly a crisis. I have seen every number from 200,000 to 500,000… Either way, is this a crisis? I want more facts. How many can afford it and decide not to have it? How many are too concerned with drugs and alcohol? How many people are just wastes? The “crisis” is 100% fabricated.
Continuing… Check out this little bit of socialist-style tripe (emphasis is mine):
“Healthy Wisconsin would provide access to health care for the nearly half a million people living in Wisconsin who are currently uninsured; this legislation would provide health care to everyone in Wisconsin regardless of pre-existing medical conditions; access to health care would not be dependent on a persons employment status.”
Whoa! Wait just a minute here. This is socialism. When the working class carries the burden for everybody else so that everybody can enjoy the same “benefits,” it’s socialism. Are we really ready to head down this path here in America? I’m not. I don’t wake up at work my ass off every day so that some lazy bastard can have the same benefits that I have. And ya know what? That doesn’t make me a bad person. It makes me an American.
Continuing…
“The STS Coalition is unified in our goal to win quality affordable health care for every person living in the United States.”
I think I just had to suppress my gag reflex a little there. What do the rest of us win if they win? What does the hard working class win? This isn’t a win-win situation.
“It is a tragedy that this nation of wealth has neglected the poor, the minorities, and the working people who struggle on a daily basis to provide a decent living for their children and families.”
Yes… A huge tragedy. Massive! It’s so sad that the people who have worked hard to achieve wealth and security in their lives aren’t opening their arms to everybody else and taking care of them like a bunch of nannies. Shame on them.
“Americans are not afforded the basic human rights set forth by the U.N Universal Declaration of Human Rights”
Socialists… Whoever thinks the UN isn’t just a big tool of global socialism needs to have their head examined.
“On Thursday, health care providers and activists will be putting the Wisconsin Assembly on notice that there will be hearings starting Monday, July 30 at 5:00p.m., in the Capital Rotunda, and that their presence is required”
Required? Who are these people? I didn’t realize doctors and lunatic activists could storm the capital and require the presence of state legislators. What planet are these people living on? The only thing they forgot to put in that statement is an “or else” at the end.
So just who are these people, anyway? Much to my dismay, they do not have a website or any way to engage them in public debate. I tooled through Google and Yahoo! and a couple of other areas of the web trying to find information on this STS coalition with little luck. The closest I found was the Wisconsin Network for Justice and Peace website, which has the STS coalition’s event listed on their site, but once again, no forum for open discussion. I am dying to talk to these people in an open and public forum, but for some reason they aren’t there. Are they scared? I mean, it’s easy to threaten “hearings” in the capital rotunda where you can stand on a platform and shout at politicians, but what about solid and open debate online? Is it too much to handle to have to try to contend with people who would really make them answer questions?
If these people feel so strongly about their topic, then I want them to be open to dissenting opinions from Wisconsin residents like me. I would take them on face to face, but two things stop me. First off, I have seen these sorts of people in action, and face to face dissent is usually really bad because they break down into violent fits and screaming. Debate is impossible when it reaches that point. Second off, I work for a living. I can’t just hop over to Madison to protest and raise a stink every time I feel the urge.
So here we are. I welcome any STS coalition member who reads this and is willing to take this issue to the open public (i.e. internet).
micky2 said,
July 27, 2007 at 1:51 pm
I’ll be right here waiting with you.
I just got done informing a bunch of liberals how the global warming thing is starting to impose socialist results in our community.
We all subjected to jumping on a bandwagon being pulled by fear mongering horses.
Health care crisis, global warming crisis. Non if it has even been proven. And yet these jeks are all running around with their hair on fire, driving up the cost of everything.
Laurie said,
August 2, 2007 at 7:50 am
Wow, you are so brave, willing to stand up and take this thing on face to face…online. Wow, super tough man, you’re very impressive there behind your keyboard. What is it about a country full of healthier people that is so frightening for you and your friend (who doesn’t believe in global warming?!?)? The only thing that would directly affect your lovely life is that less of those tax dollars you pay would go to war and more to take care of this country’s people.
” “The STS Coalition is unified in our goal to win quality affordable health care for every person living in the United States.”
I think I just had to suppress my gag reflex a little there.”
Yeah, I can see why you’re having difficulty here, equality and the ability to see a doctor is gross. You ask what you, “the hard working class” wins? Cheaper prescriptions, surgeries, dental care, co-pays, etc. EVERYTHING associated with health care in our current system is exorbitantly expensive, and you, along with the single mothers who work two jobs, neither of which offer benefits, and most other people would win all the benefits for which we are fighting. Sorry there is no website for you to rant on, but we’re a little busy doing things in actual living breathing world. Good luck, I hope you are able to maintain your view that you’re better and more deserving then everyone else, because if you ever come around to realizing you’re not, you’re going to feel real sheepish.
arclightzero said,
August 2, 2007 at 8:48 am
Laurie, you’re awfully delusional there… And certainly one to talk about strength from behind a keyboard.
Personally, I would love to take you people on face to face. I have no fear of you, and I’ve certainly done it before. The only reason I don’t is because I can’t just take off work and hop over to Madison every time some nutball left wing group decided to have a hoedown and protest for some socialist cause. Come out to Polk County some time on a weekend and I’ll be happy to chew the fat with you. Until then, it’s all about the internet.
See, here is what really kills me about you though. You get all spun up and immediately go into an insulting and defensive mode. I ask for civil debate, and this is what I get from you. It amazes me how ignorant you are in the sense that you only see two goddamned feet in front of your nose, and you take the typical liberal view that the best answer to a problem is to throw more money and more government at it and hope it goes away for a little while longer.
I’m not sure who it is exactly that you think will win by pushing for this. Will I win? No, not at all. I currently have good and relatively inexpensive health care (much like most people who work a good job and make a moderate income). By the numbers, my costs go up with this new plan. Is that fair to me? No, of course not, but of course, I would have to take your cheery altruistic view of things before I could accept that things don’t need to be fair for me so long as they’re fair for somebody else. How sick is that sort of thinking?
You’re dead wrong in assuming that I think I am more deserving than somebody else. I don’t think I am more deserving than anybody, BUT I also don’t think that anybody is more deserving than me. Why should I? If all things are equal, why should anybody be more deserving than me? This isn’t about equality to you and your kind. This is about knocking the rest of us down a peg so that other people can go up one. It doesn’t matter to you what’s fair to people like me, so long as everybody else gets what you think is fair to them.
Laurie said,
August 2, 2007 at 10:30 am
First you said:
“I’ll just touch on some of the nuttier claims by this band of idiots.”
“How many are too concerned with drugs and alcohol? How many people are just wastes?”
“like a bunch of nannies.”
“face to face dissent is usually really bad because they break down into violent fits and screaming.”
“It amazes me how ignorant you are in the sense that you only see two goddamned feet in front of your nose.”
Then you said “You get all spun up and immediately go into an insulting and defensive mode. I ask for civil debate, and this is what I get from you.” Anyways, sorry about the insults.
global warming said,
August 19, 2007 at 8:50 am
global warming is becoming such a obvious problem that someone somewhere other than Al Gore needs to step up to help drive the bus!
David Ingold said,
August 19, 2007 at 7:24 pm
You wrote:
… What crisis? Did I miss something out there? I mean, I live here in Wisconsin, and I don’t see a crisis. Since every socialist group out there has different numbers, I have no idea what the real estimate of uninsured in Wisconsin is, but it’s hardly a crisis. I have seen every number from 200,000 to 500,000… Either way, is this a crisis?
my response:
Even one persopn denied health care because of insurance status is a crisis.
You wrote:
When the working class carries the burden for everybody else so that everybody can enjoy the same “benefits,” it’s socialism.
My response:
Problem is: the victims ARE the working class — working two jobs to pay for diabetes meds.
You wrote:
I don’t wake up at work my ass off every day so that some lazy bastard can have the same benefits that I have.
My response:
Since when is health care a “benefit?”
You wrote:
I think I just had to suppress my gag reflex a little there. What do the rest of us win if they win? What does the hard working class win? This isn’t a win-win situation.
My response
I don’t know what rock you are hiding under but the hard working class is the class without health insurance. It may just be a matter of time when some God forbid, illness or accident strikes and you may be denied coverage. Many hard working people are denied who believe they are “fully” covered. Those with insurance pay out more and more of their hard-earned paychecks into ever-increasing premiums and getting less and less in claims pay-outs.
You wrote:
Yes… A huge tragedy. Massive! It’s so sad that the people who have worked hard to achieve wealth and security in their lives aren’t opening their arms to everybody else and taking care of them like a bunch of nannies. Shame on them.
My response
Worse yet, people who worked to acheive wealth and security open their wallets into the greedy insurance companies like a bunch of Enron execs.
You wrote:
Whoever thinks the UN isn’t just a big tool of global socialism needs to have their head examined.
Som say the UN is also a tool of American imperialism but that is off the subject. The issue is the declaration of humnan rights. The point STS was trying to make is that the UN declared health care for all a basic humnan right. Opposition to an insurance company deciding who lives and who dies based on some artificial possesion of insurance is not Socialism.
You wrote:
Who are these people? I didn’t realize doctors and lunatic activists could storm the capital and require the presence of state legislators. What planet are these people living on? The only thing they forgot to put in that statement is an “or else” at the end.
We (and these people) live on planet Earth and Citizens of The United States of America. America is a democracy where legislators represent the citizens. America is a government of the people by the people and for the people. The “or else at the end ” is that they don’t get re-elected.
arclightzero said,
August 19, 2007 at 8:11 pm
“Even one persopn denied health care because of insurance status is a crisis.”
Why? It’s unfortunate, but it is not a crisis. Why has this suddenly become a crisis? Never in our history have we alluded to health care as a right in this country. Why all of the sudden have people suddenly looked around and decided that they think they have the right to have something handed to them, and when they don’t it’s a “crisis?”
“Problem is: the victims ARE the working class — working two jobs to pay for diabetes meds.”
I have never had a problem finding a job with health benefits. Even McDonald’s has health benefits, albeit limited at the ground level. Point is, the only time somebody is a “victim” is when they choose to be so. And don’t think that I’m some special case. I don’t have a college education. I’ve just worked hard and made sure I find jobs that provide health benefits.
“Since when is health care a ‘benefit?’”
Since when is it a privilege? Since when should people get something for nothing? Is it right for some people to carry the burden so people can get something they didn’t earn? Simply existing is NOT reason enough deserve anything in this country.
“I don’t know what rock you are hiding under but the hard working class is the class without health insurance. It may just be a matter of time when some God forbid, illness or accident strikes and you may be denied coverage. Many hard working people are denied who believe they are “fully” covered. Those with insurance pay out more and more of their hard-earned paychecks into ever-increasing premiums and getting less and less in claims pay-outs.”
So your answer to this problem is socialism? No way, I don’t by it. If there is a problem that needs to be addressed it is the way medical insurance is handled. It is a system that is deeply troubled with corruption - both from within and from fraudulent claims and whatnot. In fact, the biggest problem with health insurance today is excessive government regulation and over-involvement… And yet people like you want MORE? How will that fix anything? The goal of socialized medicine isn’t to fix a problem like this, it is to designed to redistribute wealth a’la Soviet-style government.
“Som say the UN is also a tool of American imperialism but that is off the subject. The issue is the declaration of humnan rights. The point STS was trying to make is that the UN declared health care for all a basic humnan right. Opposition to an insurance company deciding who lives and who dies based on some artificial possesion of insurance is not Socialism.”
Who, besides the moonbats, think the UN is a tool of American imperialism? My god, man… The UN is the greatest socialist tool we’ve ever seen. Once again, you talk about rights, which is not something that the United States should be in the business of dealing out. Socialism guarantees rights and defines so-called basic human rights which is a bunch of crap! You might as well do away with money and start operating per Marx’s ideals if you really believe that “Basic Human Rights” means some people carry everybody else.
“We (and these people) live on planet Earth and Citizens of The United States of America. America is a democracy where legislators represent the citizens. America is a government of the people by the people and for the people. The ‘or else at the end’ is that they don’t get re-elected.”
No they don’t. They represent special interest groups and so-called “underprivileged” people. The majority population - people like me - get the short end of the stick all the time. Come to think of it, the dems aren’t even getting represented this time around. All of the people who voted to elect people into office who would end the war are now dealing with a congress who not only didn’t end the war but are now trying to tuen this country into a socialist hellhole. The only thing we can look forward to is that these boobs will be elected out of office next session, because the majority of the population does not support socialism (or socialized medicine).
micky2 said,
August 19, 2007 at 9:52 pm
Laurie said;
What is it about a country full of healthier people that is so frightening for you and your friend (who doesn’t believe in global warming?!?)? The only thing that would directly affect your lovely life is that less of those tax dollars you pay would go to war and more to take care of this country’s people.
This country has priorities Laurie. And it has seen to it that people like you have the opportunity and materials to go forward and live life. No where in our billof rights or constitution does it say you get to do the robin hood thing just because you cant figure out a way to make it.
There are truly people in this country that cant help themselves, and I believe they should get the help possible from wherever. I’m talking about those that are seriously disabled people as a result of genetic errors or accidents that cripple them.
If people would stop the frivolous medical law suits {usually filed by entitlement freaks}the cost of insurance would go way down, and would be more accessable. If we didnt have millions of illegal aliens { which entitlement freaks want}soaking up free medical, it would be a lot easier for America to take of the entitlement freaks, even though I dont think you deserve it. If all these babies would stop going to the emergency room everytime they need a aspirin{and then not pay for it} the hospitals would be able to bring down their cost considerably.
I have been dead, broken both arms and a leg along with my foot and nose in one accident. I have been homeless and poor. I only took unemployment for 2 months out of my whole life. My bills are phenominal and now you want a chunk of my change ? I dont think so.
By the examples above, you and the others above with their hands out should go after these problems and not those that have worked all their life only to have a nice chunk of it taken away by a majority of people who are just too lazy to get off their ass’s.
As far as the global warming thing goes, I must rephrase my comment. It has not been proven “what” is responsable for global warming.
And untill we figure it out I would appreciate it if the left would keep their hands out of my pocket untill then. So far my grocery bill has gone up about 2000.00 a year just because of the ethanol thing. Then there’s gas taxes and the cost of ethanol alone.
Ontop of all this shit that liberals want, now I have to pay for your health care too ?
I do enough, and I mean plenty enough to help my fellow man and country.
From my experience,{ 50 years of it} most liberals are just either to young to know what its like to REALLY deserve something, or just lazy. This attitude and mindset fades in life as you realize that the more you put into your life the more it pays off.
And dont even get me started on the sociaslistic/communist applications that universal health care will come with. And go take a look at Europe while you’re at it. IT’S NOT WORKING TOO WELL !
And yes, the war is more important !
It involves the future and lives of millions of people that live all over the world, not just America.
So dont even start to say our country is not being charitable enough. We are taking a lot of heat to defend others that the enemy wants to kill. We are saving more lives that your simplistic vision of gimmee, gimmee, gimmee, could ever understand.
I would rather be in need of something and be alive without it.
Than to have it and be dead.
Resurrecting the Health Care issue: A matter of rights and privileges « A [sometimes] Logical View of the Illogical said,
August 20, 2007 at 9:00 am
[...] involved with it - write in a offer up their objections to my opinion. I would highly suggest you read the original post and the comments here, so at least you can get an idea as to what I had to say and what the “health care for [...]
David Ingold said,
August 20, 2007 at 9:17 am
Your point is well taken with the dems not doing anything to end the war.
I just hope that when my house catches fire and the fire dept won’t ask me what kind of insurance I have before they respond. We have no problem with government programs in some areas but other areas some call socialism. My kids went to public school. Is that socialism? I went to the police on a theft issue. Is that socialism?
On the other hand, the debate about privatizing social security would have led the federal govt into the stock market and government ownership of private corporations. This, to me was socialism, by definition. This was a conservative-led initiative.
Other countries who are democratic have universal health care and have an elected democratic government. I can cite Canada, off the top of my head.
These countries have people who live longer and are healthier than USA. USA has the more per capita spending in health care, too. This is because the insurance companies in the USA take our hard earned money into profits and not pay the doctors.
It’s sad when employees in a doctor’s office can’t afford health insurance.
Yes McDonnalds has health insurance but look at what comes out of pocket and then tell me it’s “insurance.” My wife works for a health care agency but has no health insurance. In Wisconsin, Wal-Mart (a very large employer) had no health insurance offered.
Given a choice between a goverment single payer system and a corporate-run profit-hungry buerocracy. I will choose the former.
arclightzero said,
August 20, 2007 at 10:48 am
Regarding fire, police, education… I am not happy with government involvement in schools. I look at the budget numbers and shake my head every time. The fact that people don’t have a choice is borderline socialism, yes. If a parent chooses to enroll their child in a private school, shouldn’t they get a tax refund to offset what they paid into public education? If not, why? Should the parents really have to double-pay for education? Police and fire are a matter of public safety and are legitimate uses of government.
I don’t rightly understand your comparison to the privatization of social security to socialism. The government subcontracts out all sorts of work, but that doesn’t mean they run it. The companies still make profits. They are not operating “for the state.”
It’s not a fair comparison to look at longevity and the type of health care a nation has. In fact, it’s actually sort of backwards, since every study done of countries with socialized medicine shows that people rarely get medical care for anything other than severely life-threatening illness or injury. Otherwise they have to wait for months to get routine procedures or examinations. It would be much more fair to look at lifestyles and longevity. Or obesity, which America takes top honors for.
What sort of doctor’s office can’t afford health insurance? It sounds fishy to me.
What’s even more interesting is that people think that the health insurance companies are the ones screwing everybody, yet I would argue that they keep prices down. When I get a bill from my medical center here, they have a price quoted, and the “discount” price that is to be paid thanks to Medica negotiating price caps on services. This is capitalism. Medica gives them business, so those of us who use Medica get cheaper prices for things (which means that my co-pay and deductibles are less than they would ordinarily be). Is that bad? Should the government step in and impose controls and tell everybody what they must pay and how they pay it? I wouldn’t think so.
David said,
August 21, 2007 at 12:47 am
I’m not sure what you call socialism. I’m not sure whre single payer health care fits in.
Mirriam Webster
(http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/socialism)defines socialism as:
so·cial·ism
noun
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
I fail to see where our medical care is “production and distribution of goods,” “private property,” “a means of production,” nor a “distribution of goods and pay according to work done.”
The way I see it all insurance (health care, too) is just making a bet with you. They bet you won’t get sick and you bet you will.
Only thing is this: you pay the ante, they control who plays, they control the stakes, they can (and often do) welch and they can fold.
You are part of what they call a risk pool. If your pool average out to a healthy group, they let you play. They compete for your ante. If you are less healthy, you join a pool where the stakes are higher. So your hard-earned money pays for your helthy heart and also the fat guy smoking those Cuban cigars working in the next cubie. It also pays for the well tanned, anorexic girl on the sales floor.
It stands to reason that the smaller the pool, the less the risk is shared among you all and the more you pay in premiums. Conversly, the larger the pool, the risk is shared more with others and the less premiums. I would think that you, who seem to oppose spending your hard-earned $$ to “carry the burden for everybody else so that everybody can enjoy the same ‘benefits.’” can see this. If the pool were say, 4 million citizens of Wisconsin, we now have a pool of Yourself, Carlos (the smoker), Nicole (the anorexic), John the health nut, employees of Kohler, Johnsonville brats, Midwest Airlines, Farmer Sam, Miller Brewing, Home Depot, Aurora, well, you get the idea.
Say malpractice suits are what drives health care costs up ? Thats less than 1% of total health care expendetures!
It’s just wrong for anyone who works hard and play by the rules to go without affordable health care.
It’s time you and your doctor decide what is the right treatment for you and not some insurance company who bets on your life and may decide at any time to drop you out of the plan. Why should your doctor call someone miles away in a posh insurance building in some cubicle on the 15th floor to find out if it’s okay to do an x-ray on you? The person on the 15th floor reports to someone else on the 16th floor who does a cost-benefit analysis and decides they won’t make a profit to do your x-ray.
Wisconsin alone has 700 insurance companies with 1000 plans. Each plan has what’s covered and not covered and how much for this & that. Providers need to have a full time staff to deal with these plans and forms etc. Talk about overhead expense!
A single payer plan has only one bill. Socialized medicine (Great Britan,Sweden, Netherlands) is where all doctors, hospitals and providers are goverment employees.
A single payer plan (Canada, France, Japan) still has providers as private entities. Yes you can go to your own doctor. It’s just that there’s only one place to send the bill (government). The government won’t decide your treatment, you and your doctor do.
As it is now, in the USA insurance companies decide that. Don’t believe me? Ask your doctor. They are in your network because they obey orders from the insurance company.
A 10 day supply of Depakote (anti seizure med) in Wisconsin costs average $58. A 33 day supply in Canada costs $54USD. Same drug. Canada averages the price of 7 industrialized nations (including USA which drives the average up) and offers to pay that price. period. No negotiating. No drug company has EVER refused to sell any drugs to Canada. This implies that it’s still profitable to do so. In the USA, the drug compoanies set a retail price and we pay it — somehow (either insurance co, or medicaid or out of pocket).
HMO’s say they are driving down the cost of health care. Have they? Since 1971 the average price to see a doc has outpaced the cost of living index. Pick any procedure, compare the cost. Adjust it for inflation, then compare it with any other industruialized nation (pick one, try one the in the G8).
arclightzero said,
August 21, 2007 at 8:06 am
“3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done”
There you have it. Do you not recognize it? Or do you not want to recognize it. It’s forced economic inequality. Those who have more provide for those who don’t have as much. If you have 10 people in a society, and of those 10 you have 5 people who provide for all 10 people, is it fair to those 5 five people that they should have to suffer so that others can enjoy the same privileges?
You dangle the “single payer plan” out there like it’s so much different than socialized medicine. There are differences, sure, but the fact of the matter is that it’s still funded the same way, and it still allows all citizens to receive equal benefits. My argument has never been that the American medical system is screwed up with pricing, insurance and scams… I agree that needs to be cleaned up. Where I disagree with you is when you think that the have’s should be providing for the have not’s. I will never think that it is ok to get something for nothing on the backs of other people. That is never ok, and that is the very heart of socialism. True communism assumes that people are good enough to simply do things for one another and provide/take as necessary. Hell, in true communism there really isn’t any need for money at all. But we all know that doesn’t work, which is where socialism comes from. Socialism is a forced redistribution of wealth. It is a system where the government takes from the people with the “most” and distributes that to people with less so that everybody can enjoy the same privileges.
But I will also give you this food for thought. According to a Price Waterhouse Cooper report on rising health care costs, 30% (30 cents of every dollar I pay in) of health care costs go into poor quality. They further break it down that 2% goes into litigation, 20% goes into poor quality and 8% goes into “defensive” medicine. And that’s just health care. Insurance quality problems is even worse, so it’s just a compound effect. And then there is fraud. According to the government accounting office, fraud accounts for 10% of health care expenditures. Medicare alone lost $11.9 billion to fraud and waste.
Check out this report: http://www.ahip.org/redirect/PwCCostOfHC2006.pdf
Page 19, exhibit 10
Also check out:
http://www.insurancefraud.org/stats.htm
Go to the Health Care states section
So before we take the usual liberal route of throwing money at things without fixing them, maybe we should address and try to fix the internal issues and then see where we stand.
The answer to the problem is not for you to reach into my pocket to pay for your health care. I’d sooner slap your hand than let you get near my pocket. Fix the problems. Repair the hemorrhages. Fix the current system…
David said,
August 21, 2007 at 2:17 pm
” … If you have 10 people in a society, and of those 10 you have 5 people who provide for all 10 people, is it fair to those 5 five people that they should have to suffer so that others can enjoy the same privileges?”
Again, I ask you to look at the Fire dept. Maybe your jurisdiction had a few house fires and all taxpayers in the city paid. We can agree to disagree if health care is a basic civil protection. All citizens receive equal benifits with fire fighting and rescue and paramedic services.
“Where I disagree with you is when you think that the have’s should be providing for the have not’s. I will never think that it is ok to get something for nothing on the backs of other people. That is never ok, and that is the very heart of socialism.”
After what I was saying about risk pools: It seems to me that you would rather pay higher premiums for yourself (and others in your smaller pool) than to spread the risk pool among all Wisonsonites in a larger pool. Okay, I get it. It’s a matter of principle for you.
More food for thought:
dll.umaine.edu/ble/U.S.%20HCweb.pdf
contains a paper from University of Maine:
The US health care system: best in the world or just the most expensive.
It cites GAO and Congressional Budget office reports than conclude that a single payer system (like Canada) will more than pay for itself.
“So before we take the usual liberal route of throwing money at things without fixing them, maybe we should address and try to fix the internal issues and then see where we stand.”
You and I seem to agree that more money does not equal more quality. I just think that if the existing money went into real care rather than corporate profits, we may be on the road to fixing the issues.
“The answer to the problem is not for you to reach into my pocket to pay for your health care. ”
Once again, I see it’s a matter of principle for you. If _you_ had better health care at less expense, your principles forbid you from accepting another system that violates your sense of right and wrong.
arclightzero said,
August 21, 2007 at 3:08 pm
Ok, we can agree to disagree on health care as a basic civil provision. But you have to remember that Fire and Police services generally are funded through property taxes. I consider it a user fee. It is not a redistribution of wealth because everybody who owns property has to pay property taxes, and it’s acceptable for taxes to be based on property value, home size etc. You’re kind of talking apples and oranges here.
As far as spreading the “risk pool” out among all Wisconsinites, the problem is that it isn’t an even distribution. If you said that everybody pays the same across the board and then receives the same care I might be willing to listen, but it’s not like that. it’s income based. Those who make more pay more, which is completely unacceptable. You can’t force people into “charitable giving” and expect them to be ok with it. That’s the biggest fundamental flaw in your proposed system. Forced charity breeds resentment. Every person who pays out the ass so that people who don’t even work or contribute to society can have the same health care that they do is going to be pretty damned resentful and you will see a mass exodus of producers from Wisconsin. As the pool of money dries up, who will pay? Will the burden be shifted from the upper class to the middle class? The lower classes? What happens when the takers exceed the givers? Who picks up the slack?
“I just think that if the existing money went into real care rather than corporate profits, we may be on the road to fixing the issues.”
But that’s not capitalism, and we’re a capitalist society. You start running into some real problems when you start allowing the government to interfere with a company or an industry’s ability to make a profit. Once the government starts doing that, where do you draw the line? I hate to take the all or nothing approach, but I would be more apt to err on the side of private business ownership than government control.