A majority of Americans would tolerate higher taxes to help pay for universal health

HM2VikingRN, RN · Nov 17, 2007

The data shows that most Americans believe that paying for healh insurance should be a shared responsibility. A tax based system spreads the responsibility across the widest spectrum of players with the greatest efficiency.

pickledpepperRN · Nov 17, 2007

When and where has the free market profit based healthcare provided safe, effective, therapeutic healthcare for all who need it?

I am NOT asking about elective procedures such as Lasic eye surgery and liposuction.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 17, 2007

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis.

This is EXACTLY how our framers saw the busy-body meddling in the lives of others envisioned here: tyranny. After all, the King had our best interests at heart. He was, a 'beneficial patrician'.

~faith,

Timothy.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 17, 2007

When and where has the free market profit based healthcare provided safe, effective, therapeutic healthcare for all who need it?
I am NOT asking about elective procedures such as Lasic eye surgery and liposuction.

No of course you're not asking about the areas of healthcare where the free market has been left to work. You don't want to hear about the REAL success stories of combining the best of quality and cost.

What you want to hear is that Uncle Daddy will save us all. Sure. It'll only cost you your freedom to choose.

No. Wait. My bad. It'll also cost you 2/3rds of your salary in taxation.

~faith,

Timothy.

pickledpepperRN · Nov 17, 2007

No of course you're not asking about the areas of healthcare where the free market has been left to work. You don't want to hear about the REAL success stories of combining the best of quality and cost.
What you want to hear is that Uncle Daddy will save us all. Sure. It'll only cost you your freedom to choose.
No. Wait. My bad. It'll also cost you 2/3rds of your salary in taxation.
~faith,
Timothy.

I am asking about needs rather than wants.

When and where has or is profit driven free market working?

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 18, 2007

I am asking about needs rather than wants.
When and where has or is profit driven free market working?

The free market provides you with pencils for a dime. Do you know how many materials go into making a pencil? Do you know how many hands are at work? And yet. Fine quality, excellent pricing.

It provides you with a dozen different components that went into making your dinner tonight - all for probably less than an hour of your wage. Do you know how much effort and energy and TIME went into providing such a meal, even a generation ago?

It has provided you this internet, the computer that accesses it, and the software that runs it SO affordable that it is just a routine household appliance.

And that cell phone? WOW. What technology! In your hands - for less than a good old gov't regulated MA Bell landline cost a generation ago. And then, you had no choice: black phone, rotary dial. And wait a minute - now that you have those cell phones, how many of worry anymore about the cost of long distance phone calls? Wow. What freedom.

The free market provides you a hundred different forms of transportation options. Wanna drive a Hummer? A Prius? Something in between? YOUR CHOICE.

The free market IS CHOICE. Free as in - free from government interference. (Only the gov't STILL interferes, with almost every mentioned product in this post. EVEN with such interference, because it is only relative, the free market still excels. Imagine! Imagine if you had unfettered access to the freedom to choose. Wow, I'm giddy, just thinking about the wonders of a world without gov't interference. Imagine . . . a world with no gov't coercion of its citizens - I'm getting all John Lennon here.) Gov't interference is the taking of choice. It makes things free - not free. That is what gov't has always been. It is the nature of gov't to take your rights 'for your own best good'.

When Milton Friedman made a TV show for PBS on the advantage of capitalism, he summed it up in his one phrase title for what the free market is: Freedom to Choose.

Gov't stifles that freedom. You are proposing a trade: gov't takes care of your needs, you get only what the gov't provides. You are proposing an exchange of freedom for a measure of safety.

Only, it's an illusion. The gov't will not make you more safe. It cannot. It is not designed to have your best interests at heart. It never was. Gov't only excels at tyranny. From the gov't's point of view, restricted care isn't about taking care of you; it's about a dangled carrot to control you. THAT is what gov't is about.

Our framers knew that. THAT is why they placed our gov't in the box of enumerated powers. Gov't equals tyranny.

Freedom has choices. Choices come from the freedom to make such choices. You can't give that freedom to the gov't in exchange for safety and still expect to have freedom or choice. Oh, I know that is promised - anything to get you to gladly trade your freedom. Bread and Circuses.

Uncle Daddy will take care of you. Sure, he will. Uncle Daddy always has my best interest at heart. Socializing medicine has NOTHING to do with the gov't taking, for the elected class, the ability to dole out 1/7th of the economy to the highest lobbying bidder. The King and his Courtisans only want to control healthcare FOR YOU, so it will benefit you BETTER.

All the gov't wants to do is have a bunch of friendly, professional healthcare planners make better decisions for you than you could. They will be expert, and efficient at it. It will save you tons of money and provide you with better care. As a token of trust, all you need do is cede over more of your paycheck, as a down payment on this grand utopion system.

Really? Really!

Does anybody REALLY believe that the gov't of DMV waits and Social Security Administration disdain will step up to the plate and be spiffy, on the spot healthcare providers? Does anybody really believe that the monopoly of gov't can be on time and on budget with such a goal? What I would like for you to show me is a consistent example of that.

Medicare is more than 10 times overbudget from it's original cost estimate. This new system will save me 37% on administration costs? Wow. But. . . Is that before OR AFTER it runs 300% overbudget? That could never happen, right? The gov't never spends 900 bucks on a hammer? They don't just give powerchairs away to anybody, at no cost to you? Never happen . . .

Oh yes, I know the argument. The free market is FULL of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Well, maybe so. At least they have to compete in the marketplace and offer me a deal that I am willing to take. At least, I have the GOD GIVEN RIGHT to say no. The FREEdom to say no.

Will you be free to say no, under gov't restricted national care? Yeah, that's much, much better than that evil 'free' market.

Gov't? It's full of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Only, they don't really want to have to compete for your part of the bargain. They'd rather you sell it to them, in advance. It's much easier - for THEM - that way. Come hither Esau, a meal is ready for you. It'll only cost you your birthright.

Uncle Daddy is looking out for you.

~faith,

Timothy.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 18, 2007

I am asking about needs rather than wants.
When and where has or is profit driven free market working?

To answer your specific question, look at the relatively UNREGULATED drug market: look at OTC drugs. If you really need an ibuprofen, how much would it cost? Hundred bucks a month, you say? Of course not! IT has to compete in a market of competitive CHOICES. . . When it comes to OTC pain relievers, you have the FREEDOM TO CHOOSE. And, that choice impacts and informs both your decisions, and the decisions of marketers actually trying to gain YOUR free-willed choice. Both buyer and seller are FREE to say no. It's a free market (at least, relative to the fully regulated prescription market).

I could look to the fully gov't regulated prescription drug market for MY proton pump inhibitor. How much, exactly, DOES Nexium cost, per month? I bet some of you know. I don't. Why not? Because I CHOSE to turn to the relatively more free OTC market for MY PPI. My OTC Prilosec costs me 18 dollars a month, no copay; that's the total cost. I wonder how much it cost when it was still able to hide in the fully gov't regulated prescription market? I have no idea. THEN, I used OTC H2 blockers. Freedom to choose.

You want an example of the difference between full gov't regulation and partial gov't regulation (a more relative free market)? Look no further than the drug market. Look no further than the cost differential between your OTC and prescription drugs. They are made by the same companies. Why the huge differences in prices? One market is fully gov't regulated, and one isn't.

Do you know why you'll never see amoxicillin and keflex OTC? You're too stupid to be informed about the differences between microbials and viruses, right? Well, actually, no. IF the gov't were to allow such a thing, you wouldn't even CONSIDER paying a hundred bucks for some next gen cephalosporin. We can't have that now, can we? After all, YOU don't fund our campaigns; big phrama does. And THIS gov't is going to have your best interests at heart, when you have no freedom to choose anything? Forget my routine benediction below: to believe this, THAT'S FAITH.

~FAITH,

Timothy.

teeituptom, BSN, RN · Nov 18, 2007

No of course you're not asking about the areas of healthcare where the free market has been left to work. You don't want to hear about the REAL success stories of combining the best of quality and cost.
What you want to hear is that Uncle Daddy will save us all. Sure. It'll only cost you your freedom to choose.
No. Wait. My bad. It'll also cost you 2/3rds of your salary in taxation.
~faith,
Timothy.

No where do I see the loss of freedom to choose, unless you are talking about the freedoms already being taken from us.

The freedom to bear arms

The freedom to the pursuit of happiness

the freedom of the right to privacy

the freedom from illegal search and seizure

the freedom of choice is already limited to our choice of flavors at Braums Ice cream store.

What are taxes already, State Tax, Federal Tax, Social Security, property tax, sales tax. Just lump them together and you have almost 2/3s as is

teeituptom, BSN, RN · Nov 18, 2007

The free market provides you with pencils for a dime. Do you know how many materials go into making a pencil? Do you know how many hands are at work? And yet. Fine quality, excellent pricing.
It provides you with a dozen different components that went into making your dinner tonight - all for probably less than an hour of your wage. Do you know how much effort and energy and TIME went into providing such a meal, even a generation ago?
It has provided you this internet, the computer that accesses it, and the software that runs it SO affordable that it is just a routine household appliance.
And that cell phone? WOW. What technology! In your hands - for less than a good old gov't regulated MA Bell landline cost a generation ago. And then, you had no choice: black phone, rotary dial. And wait a minute - now that you have those cell phones, how many of worry anymore about the cost of long distance phone calls? Wow. What freedom.
The free market provides you a hundred different forms of transportation options. Wanna drive a Hummer? A Prius? Something in between? YOUR CHOICE.
The free market IS CHOICE. Free as in - free from government interference. (Only the gov't STILL interferes, with almost every mentioned product in this post. EVEN with such interference, because it is only relative, the free market still excels. Imagine! Imagine if you had unfettered access to the freedom to choose. Wow, I'm giddy, just thinking about the wonders of a world without gov't interference. Imagine . . . a world with no gov't coercion of its citizens - I'm getting all John Lennon here.) Gov't interference is the taking of choice. It makes things free - not free. That is what gov't has always been. It is the nature of gov't to take your rights 'for your own best good'.
When Milton Friedman made a TV show for PBS on the advantage of capitalism, he summed it up in his one phrase title for what the free market is: Freedom to Choose.
Gov't stifles that freedom. You are proposing a trade: gov't takes care of your needs, you get only what the gov't provides. You are proposing an exchange of freedom for a measure of safety.
Only, it's an illusion. The gov't will not make you more safe. It cannot. It is not designed to have your best interests at heart. It never was. Gov't only excels at tyranny. From the gov't's point of view, restricted care isn't about taking care of you; it's about a dangled carrot to control you. THAT is what gov't is about.
Our framers knew that. THAT is why they placed our gov't in the box of enumerated powers. Gov't equals tyranny.
Freedom has choices. Choices come from the freedom to make such choices. You can't give that freedom to the gov't in exchange for safety and still expect to have freedom or choice. Oh, I know that is promised - anything to get you to gladly trade your freedom. Bread and Circuses.
Uncle Daddy will take care of you. Sure, he will. Uncle Daddy always has my best interest at heart. Socializing medicine has NOTHING to do with the gov't taking, for the elected class, the ability to dole out 1/7th of the economy to the highest lobbying bidder. The King and his Courtisans only want to control healthcare FOR YOU, so it will benefit you BETTER.
All the gov't wants to do is have a bunch of friendly, professional healthcare planners make better decisions for you than you could. They will be expert, and efficient at it. It will save you tons of money and provide you with better care. As a token of trust, all you need do is cede over more of your paycheck, as a down payment on this grand utopion system.
Really? Really!
Does anybody REALLY believe that the gov't of DMV waits and Social Security Administration disdain will step up to the plate and be spiffy, on the spot healthcare providers? Does anybody really believe that the monopoly of gov't can be on time and on budget with such a goal? What I would like for you to show me is a consistent example of that.
Medicare is more than 10 times overbudget from it's original cost estimate. This new system will save me 37% on administration costs? Wow. But. . . Is that before OR AFTER it runs 300% overbudget? That could never happen, right? The gov't never spends 900 bucks on a hammer? They don't just give powerchairs away to anybody, at no cost to you? Never happen . . .
Oh yes, I know the argument. The free market is FULL of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Well, maybe so. At least they have to compete in the marketplace and offer me a deal that I am willing to take. At least, I have the GOD GIVEN RIGHT to say no. The FREEdom to say no.
Will you be free to say no, under gov't restricted national care? Yeah, that's much, much better than that evil 'free' market.
Gov't? It's full of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Only, they don't really want to have to compete for your part of the bargain. They'd rather you sell it to them, in advance. It's much easier - for THEM - that way. Come hither Esau, a meal is ready for you. It'll only cost you your birthright.
Uncle Daddy is looking out for you.
~faith,
Timothy.

Timmy I love all those big words you so dramatically throw out.And phrases.

I'm getting all John Lennon here

for your own best good

Its an illusion,,,,,,Maybe we should elect Chriss Cross or Uri Gellar to run things

Government equals Tyranny, boy thats an old slogan to, I remember that from the 60s

Bread and Circuses I found this very illuminating

Down payment on this grand utopian system. Dont we all want Utopia for all

are you saying you want a power chair, I prefer a golf cart myself

Gov't. Its full of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Is this any differrent than what the War mongering Republicans and Halliburton are doing to us already. is that what your saying

Enquiring minds want to know

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 18, 2007

Gov't. Its full of people with schemes on how to get rich off the backs of you. Is this any differrent than what the War mongering Republicans and Halliburton are doing to us already. is that what your saying

It's very difficult for me to imagine (humming Johnny) how you are SO distrustful of the current Administration, however, you have so much FAITH in that same gov't to be any kind of fair or any less kind of scheming.

I'm in awe that you can so readily dissociate your current feelings for the current Administration with your otherwise good feelings for gov't, in general. It's amazing to me that a Woodstock child could ever turn to the gov't for anything that requires trust.

Yet, here you are. You don't fool me with your 'let's play golf' dismissiveness. When it comes to gov't, you are a man of FAITH.

Me? I'm an athiest when it comes to gov't. If only everybody inside the Beltway could learn to play golf and forget about thinking up new ways to coerce the people that actually make America work.

Gov't = tyranny, btw, has a much longer track record than the '60's. "Don't tread on me." Your generation wasn't the only ones that had that right. So did your father's. And his father. And his. And his.

~faith,

Timothy.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 18, 2007

No where do I see the loss of freedom to choose

But that IS the proposal: let the gov't be the owner. If Uncle Daddy pays; Uncle Daddy decides.

The customer isn't the end user; the customer is the buyer.

Under gov't restricted healthcare, your choices will only be from among those the gov't CHOOSES to make available to you. You no longer exercise any choice but to accept the choices MADE FOR YOU.

By the gov't. By the next Republican Administration.

~faith,

Timothy.

ZASHAGALKA, RN · Nov 18, 2007

On the bright side, it doesn't really matter what kind of single payor system could get passed.

The consequence of bypassing the enumerated powers is that gov't HAS INDEED sold out its checks and balances.

Does it really matter what kind of legislation you could get passed?

5 members of the Cabal is all it would take to toss it all out. . . That die has been cast. (3 of those 5 are already sitting and only in their 50's.)

In this case, there would actually be Constitutional merit for tossing it aside. A President's signature is no longer game/set/match. That's just the first round.

That's the road we've chosen to go down.

The only real power anymore is the power to choose the Cabal.

~faith,

Timothy.