My Points
You must be logged in to use your points
Recent Comments
- This is Awesome
on The End of History
by jsuggs - Ok, now I'm intrigued
on Trent Reznor To Score Facebook Movie. "It's Really F*cking Good. And Dark!"
by jsuggs - Great Read
on Warren Buffett - 99% of fortune to charity
by jsuggs - Re: Interesting
on Display Myths Shattered: How Monitor & HDTV Companies Cook Their Specs
by jsuggs - Interesting
on Display Myths Shattered: How Monitor & HDTV Companies Cook Their Specs
by E-Man - Re: Re: Wow
on No Parent Should Ever Have To Bury His Child Alive
by E-Man - Re: Wow
on No Parent Should Ever Have To Bury His Child Alive
by borahmarie - Wow
on No Parent Should Ever Have To Bury His Child Alive
by E-Man - Everything was fine...
on YouTube - Middle Tennessee Tornado Penis
by jsuggs - National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
on Automakers agree on common "plug"
by JosephH
Re: Re: Enjoyable Read
Score: 0Your are making it a completely "us vs them" situation. I would argue that both sides have some decent ideas, so I think the whole "my way or the highway" from either side is a little irresponsible.
If politicians create problems, then who fixes them and how?
Re: Re: Re: Enjoyable Read
Score: 0People fix the problems by electing officials that will not abuse their office. See the Tea Party movement. At least until it is corrupted down the road.
Politicians want healthcare "reform" because they think it will buy them votes. Next on the list is the new social security - they want to seize over 3 trillion dollars that private citizens have in retirement accounts in exchange for a "guaranteed" lifetime retirement income. They think THAT will buy them votes. In both cases politicians are seizing private funds, i.e. income through taxes and private savings, respectively, in order to create trillion dollar slush funds for their spending sprees and wealth redistribution. So they dangle the carrot of security in healthcare and security in retirement in front of the electorate and then think the electorate will obediently pull the lever with their name next to it, ensuring they will be in office to take advantage of said slush fund.
Thanks, but no thanks. I will take care of my family's healthcare and retirement and kindly ask the "politicians" to GTFO.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Enjoyable Read
Score: 0Although I see your point, and quite valid as it is, Healthcare in this country is horrible (not that it is necessarily better elsewhere, every country has their own respective problems). To be fair, in large part healthcare is where it is today because of politicians and laws (see HMO Act of 1973, fee for service transition, healthcare state regulations, etc etc). Howevah, because of those and many other corruptions in the system, the private sector has ZERO incentive to change...and consequently, because of our insurance structure, the public has little incentive to demand change (though they don't realize it yet). Unfortunately the private sector doesn't care unless they are rich, and the public is reactionary. So if we don't want to be too so far down this spiral that it becomes irreversible, we have to do something sooner rather than later. The reality is, it will be OUR generation, and our kids, that will be seriously paying for any "non-action"
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Enjoyable Read
Score: 0Your argument is premised on healthcare being awful in this country. I disagree. Healthcare in this country is outstanding. Health insurance companies enjoy monopoly-like benefits thanks to government. This allows them to screw people sometimes. If true competition were allowed in the health insurance business most of that would go away as people flock to those companies that offer the best benefits. Yes, it will still be expensive. Insurance is protection against catastrophe, like hedging a bet. It is not a payment plan.