This kind of misses the point. We can't afford the out of control insurance system; however, history implies that we could afford private care. Why don't we at least attempt to fix the insurance industry instead of hiking taxes and spending even more money we don't have? That just seems irresponsible given that current programs are either underfunded or dying.Originally Posted by Kittens!
Last edited by coqauvin; 06-25-2009 at 09:42 PM.
This is the most sensible way to do things, but such clear thinking isn't what people want.
well i mean
Yeah, they would be in agreement with people like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Today their views are considered fringe.
I'm not sure exactly what views you are trying to attribute to Jefferson and Franklin here, but people who, for instance, hold public education in contempt are definitely not in agreement with Jefferson and Franklin. Both Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were outspoken proponents of public education. Just google their names and the words "public education" and you'll find out all about it. As for police, I'm not sure what their views were, but would be quite surprised if they had contempt for the idea of the government organizing a force to prevent crime.
You do realise that the original role has expanded exponentially because the people have voted for governments based on the expansionist policies they promoted (or opposed). It's not arbitrary at all.
Sure, but Benjamin Franklin and other framers also held any number of views which most people would consider fringe now. So what? Benjamin Franklin and other recognized that times change as does the opinions of the people; hence they created a Constitution which allowed laws to be created, modified and revoked, as well as which allowed itself to be modified.
Last edited by MrShrike; 05-31-2009 at 03:00 AM.
I didn't say the changes were arbitrary, I said their valuation as "good" or "bad" was arbitrary.
Again, you miss my point. Syme already explained it pretty well.Sure, but Benjamin Franklin and other framers also held any number of views which most people would consider fringe now. So what? Benjamin Franklin and other recognized that times change as does the opinions of the people; hence they created a Constitution which allowed laws to be created, modified and revoked, as well as which allowed itself to be modified.
Yes well they certainly did. Just like Jefferson said: "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." They realized that people would have to earn their liberty and be willing to fight to keep it. Though as Jefferson predicted, we are willing to make plenty of small compromises in liberty to let mommy government take care of us.
I did this, and found a quote that seems to sum up Jefferson's views quite nicely: "A wise and frugal government which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government."
This DOES include the use of a government-organized police force to ensure people don't harm one another, which is perfectly in line with libertarian views. But yeah it looks like I found out about it, they don't agree with using force to have people pay for the education of others.
"I... [proposed] three distinct grades of education, reaching all classes. 1. Elementary schools for all children generally, rich and poor. 2. Colleges for a middle degree of instruction, calculated for the common purposes of life and such as should be desirable for all who were in easy circumstances. And 3d. an ultimate grade for teaching the sciences generally and in their highest degree... The expenses of [the elementary] schools should be borne by the inhabitants of the county, every one in proportion to his general tax-rate. This would throw on wealth the education of the poor."
--Thomas Jefferson in his autobiography, 1821
"The less wealthy people,... by the bill for a general education, would be qualified to understand their rights, to maintain them, and to exercise with intelligence their parts in self-government; and all this would be effected without the violation of a single natural right of any one individual citizen."
--also from Thomas Jefferson's autobiography
"I think by far the most important bill in our whole code, is that for the diffusion of knowledge among the people. No other sure foundation can be devised for the preservation of freedom and happiness... The tax which will be paid for this purpose is not more than the thousandth part of what will be paid to kings, priests and nobles who will rise up among us if we leave the people in ignorance."
--Thomas Jefferson, 1786
"[No] tax can be called that which we give to our children in the most valuable of all forms, that of instruction... An addition to our contributions almost insensible... in fact, will not be felt as a burden, because applied immediately and visibly to the good of our children."
--Thomas Jefferson in a note to the Elementary School Act, 1817
"My bill proposes, 1. Elementary schools in every county, which shall place every householder within three miles of a school. 2. District colleges, which shall place every father within a day's ride of a college where he may dispose of his son. 3. An university in a healthy and central situation... To all of which is added a selection from the elementary schools of subjects of the most promising genius, whose parents are too poor to give them further education, to be carried at the public expense through the colleges and university."
--Thomas Jefferson writing to M. Correa de Serra, 1817
Libertarians like to try to paint Thomas Jefferson as a minarchist because of quotes like the one you gave, but the fact is that although he may have sometimes expressed minarchist philosophical sentiments, he was no minarchist in practice and clearly believed that government monies could be put to legitimate use in fields like public education. His conception of the proper role of government did not stop at the defense of the populace, it included other things beyond that. Next time, try to find out a little more about it.
Last edited by Syme; 05-31-2009 at 02:43 PM.
Weird, I wasn't able to find any of those quotes. Well I guess I misjudged the man.
Society's imperative is to ensure that it's members are as well equipped to integrate into that society as possible. Ignorance begets violence, poverty and ultimately over reliance on the government. Your knee-jerk idealism greatly misses the point (as is often the case with big-L Libertarians).
And, of course, you are factually incorrect.
Last edited by ephekt; 05-31-2009 at 03:53 PM.
If you have a point then state it.
I think his point is exactly what he said: "Society's imperative is to ensure that it's members are as well equipped to integrate into that society as possible. Ignorance begets violence, poverty and ultimately over reliance on the government." He is defending the idea of public education, in response to your suggestion that public education is not a valid role for government.
Who said that's society's imperative?
well i mean
I do not understand how someone can philosophically supports the concepts of free market capitalism in the form of companies, but in the next breath decry workers unions as evil.
Particularly given that a significant portion of the working conditions they almost undoubtedly enjoy can be directly attributed to the historical activities of workers unions.
If this is AI then I don't need to read the thread to realize that it's probably devolved away from the original argument into something more philosophical.
My points are this:
- In a single-payer system there is actually more choice and freedom for patients
- While efficiency does not equal low overhead, the government has indeed had some success managing medicaid.
- An income-tax-like bracket system for health-care?
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." -Anne Frank
“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.” -Buddha
Identity
I don't understand how this is different from saying: "I don't see how someone philosophically can be a democrat, but in the next breath state their support for Barack Obama."
I don't at all understand your first point, please explain how that makes sense.
For your second point, what successes are you referring to?
I think I'd rather stay away from your third point for now.
1. In a private network you are referred to a doctor this doctor is connected with certain hospitals you must visit. Each doctor refers you to his network of specialists and physicians regardless of quality. With the other choice you have many more options based on your personal preference and seek your own quality of care without being subjected to the limitations of the private network.
2. Medicaid has actually reduced their overhead and some consider it a fairly efficient system..run by the government.
"In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." -Anne Frank
“We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts, we make the world.” -Buddha
Identity
In a broad sense, sure, but certain HMOs have more freedom. For example, Oschner in my area gives you pretty much free reign, even outside of their facilities.
In my experience, referrals were generally done between doctors with at least working relationships. I won't say that 'blind' referrals don't happen, but you're making a pretty big assumption here.Each doctor refers you to his network of specialists and physicians regardless of quality.
I've actually been on Tricare. Dependents definitely do not get much say in where they go etc. And any govt-employed doctor is immune to malpractice suits.With the other choice you have many more options based on your personal preference and seek your own quality of care without being subjected to the limitations of the private network.
Some meaning proponents of UHC... ? I'd have to look at the numbers again, but I'm pretty sure Medicaid is slated to run out of funding somewhere around 2015.2. Medicaid has actually reduced their overhead and some consider it a fairly efficient system..run by the government.
Who?
well i mean
I think we can all agree that UHC in the US, whatever form it eventually takes, will not simply be a bigger version of Medicaid.
Well gismo's post was basically an appeal to tradition and an appeal to emotion. Can't see anything insightful for anyone to reply to.
well i mean
Yet if anyone made the same comment in response to a right-oriented post you wouldn't be the first to jump down said offender's throat?
Hypocrisy is urprisingly easy to live with, isn't it?
Ok...
???
well i mean
Relax. I'm fiddling with ya.
I think the most hardline libertarians believe in the private provision of security, but y'know
well i mean
http://www.nationalhealthexecutive.c...-know-best.htm
Here's some hilarious reading
well i mean
So of course there is more of this health care debate in the news recently...especially about people fearing that the big bad government will come and kill you if this bill is passed. Are mudslingers today the greatest spin doctors ever, or are people just getting dumber?
Mouth-breathing idiots are so convinced of the evils of universal health care that they will eagerly and unquestioningly accept whatever lies they are told about it, no matter how ridiculous. E.g., people who fervently believe that Medicare coverage for end-of-life counseling (which is purely voluntary, for fucks sake, and which people already get all the time) means mandatory euthanasia for grandma. I don't think people are actually getting dumber; they're no dumber than they've always been. I just think that this issue is pulling all the dumb ones out of the woodwork and giving them lots of great opportunities to demonstrate how dumb they really are by parroting nonsense that Rush Limbaugh fed them.
EDIT: So yeah, the mudslingers who make up ridiculous shit about UHC are good at what they do.
Last edited by Syme; 08-11-2009 at 06:31 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks