Forums | MacLife

isaly wrote:

How much worse is our lousy government than our lousy insurance companies who have been granted license to rape us by that same lousy government?

How many people in our lousy government have vested interest in our system as it is. . . Bill Frist come to mind?

How many people in our lousy government have significant investment in insurance companies?

How many people in our lousy government take money from insurance lobbyists?

That lousy government thing seems like a lousy red herring to me and what amazes me is that you seem to be smart enough to understand but, for some reason, hang onto this lousy government sacred cow like a drowning man who doesn't realize that clinging to his rescuer will kill you both.

Once again, this thread is about the Pew survey and those results.
You want to fight with them go for it.

My point was I don't know how Obama intends to navigate this without stepping on the third rail as I mention in the first post.

Which I feel is why so many moneyed interests in the US are so hostile to it. Because once it becomes established, there's no getting rid of it.

Right - once it's here, it is here to stay, no matter how crappy the government is at running it.
Given how crappy they run VA hospitals it's no wonder people don't want it.

resedit wrote:

Which I feel is why so many moneyed interests in the US are so hostile to it. Because once it becomes established, there's no getting rid of it.

Right - once it's here, it is here to stay, no matter how crappy the government is at running it.
Given how crappy they run VA hospitals it's no wonder people don't want it.

With a government option competing against private insurance, the consumer will always have the option of going to private insurance.

I really cannot see how anybody could see fault with that.

Farmerkev wrote:

bedstuy wrote:

... yet there's never any serious attempt by conservative parties in the UK or Canada to get rid of their health care system.  Now I wonder why that is?

Perhaps for the reason Shicky is always telling us, there aren't any conservatives in Canada in the fashion we know.

... or the UK, or any sane industrial country in the world.  Indeed, the conservative movement in the US is unique and extremist.

Please answer the question.
If it's not run by the government, who is it run by?

The health care system.
Please answer the smurfing question - if it isn't run by the government, who is it run by?

Who "it" by should be clear as my post was a direct question to your post.

resedit wrote:

The health care system.
Please answer the smurfing question - if it isn't run by the government, who is it run by?

Who "it" by should be clear as my post was a direct question to your post.

Personally I'm not sure what you mean by the "system."

As has been pointed out the government's main role is as the health insurer. It doesn't decide treatment. In fact most people have zero contact with that aspect of the system; they only deal with health care people (doctors, nurses, etc.).

Chickenhawk wrote:

Resedit: Do you believe that a legally mandated minimum wage is necessary?

Yes.
It needs to be state level, maybe even county, as different areas have vastly different cost of living factors.

Last edited by resedit (2009-06-20 12:16 am)

resedit wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

Resedit: Do you believe that a legally mandated minimum wage is necessary?

Yes.
It needs to be state level, maybe even county, as different areas have vastly different cost of living factors.

However, you still agree that there needs to be some mandated minimum level of pay.

Why should health care be different?

Last edited by Chickenhawk (2009-06-20 12:18 am)

In fact, I myself get my coverage through such programs (Shasta Regional Health) because no one will insure me.

I'm personally afraid that if we go universal, my care won't be provided by Shasta Regional anymore but will be federal and decline in quality.

Last edited by resedit (2009-06-20 12:30 am)

Chickenhawk wrote:

resedit wrote:

In fact, I myself get my coverage through such programs (Shasta Regional Health) because no one will insure me.

And of course, what happens in Shasta county applies for the rest of the country.

I never made that claim.
I don't have a problem with federal aid to cities and counties that can't do what Shasta County does because the budget isn't there.

Chickenhawk wrote:

And... you're ... against government waste???

Of course I'm against government waste.
Aren't you?

ok, I said it before. I'll repeat it since you have trouble reading.

With a government option competing against private insurance, the consumer will always have the option of going to private insurance.

I really cannot see how anybody could see fault with that.