Quote:
Originally Posted by ijusluvit
SteveZ,
Like others. I appreciate your deep research and neutral tone in the political forum. But you seem to be overly committed to two pillars of Republican (or call it what you will), philosophy.
Your response to the elements of Kahuna's proposed health plan was thoughtful and accurate, but also paradoxical. You lump those ideas together and rebut them because they suggest "the government is the only solution". But then you mention how things are here and in other nations and you recognize those very big things only governments have fixed, or can seem to fix. The health insurance plan itself, related tort reform, uncontrolled 'medical' research, immigration, tariffs, etc. You seem to agree that tight, comprehensive regulation sprinkled liberally over free enterprise is the solution. In some circles you'd be called a 'commie', like I've been.
In the same way that it's too simplistic to say "the less government we have the better off we are", the other traditional axiom of free enterprise, the 'trickle down' effect, is demonstrably superficial. You suggest that 'taxing the rich', the proposed means by which a part of the new health insurance plan will be paid for, will have serious negative affects on businesses, unemployment, etc., because the wealthy will be disinclined to invest. What greater proof do we need that the wealthy will do nothing outside of their self-interest than what has happened with the current economic crisis. Investors, corporate and individual, are sitting on their billions, not because of a new pesky little mosquito-like health care surtax, but because the markets were not properly regulated and those who raised greed to a whole new level were able to bring the whole house down. There we go with that 'r' word again. I guess you just have to get used to being called a 'commie' if you think government regulation needs to be sprinkled liberally over free enterprise. Why not join the club?
|
Then let me try to clarify:
1. In our quest to butt-kiss China and others, we have handed our manufacturing capacity on a silver platter to them by giving them free access to our markets while they pay slave wages to their people and ignore what we consider normal as OSHA and environment control, AND THEN keep raising the overheads of American businesses so they can't compete. The result is a depressed economy, wages going down, job loss and all the resultant harm from borrowing to eat with no chance of payback. THAT is what has made a mess of health care, because when the economy is cooking, there's jobs, health care for employees, and discretionary funds for research. ANY plan to change health care IN ISOLATION of repairing the damage to the economy is useless, expensive and just sending us deeper into a financial abyss.
2. It is too easy to hand problems over to elected officials who have no idea what any of it is about, or too lazy or ignorant of the subject matter to read the legislation (let alone intelligently vote on it). Just "passing the buck" to government to be mother, father, and boss never has solved anything. I don't see government as the omnipotent protector of all facets of life, and am afraid to death when government (meaning the people in office) see themselves in demi-god roles.
3. Germany, the U.K., France, Sweden, Spain, Italy, Greece, and all the rest of the European countries are no bigger than American states. So, if something works in Germany or the U.K., means maybe it would also work in New York or Illinois. It does not mean it will work across the entire USA. SIZE DOES MATTER in trying to implement anything, and the immense size of the USA and its internal diversity must indeed be considered before anything is conceptualized for national implementation. There's a reason why the European Union has not attempted to impose an EU Health Plan, and that is that each one of the countries have unique concerns and situations, just like each of the USA States do. So, what works in a country of 30-80 million in a land mass smaller than Montana may not indeed work in a country of 305 Million in a land mass the size of all of Europe.
4. Per you, "
You seem to agree that tight, comprehensive regulation sprinkled liberally over free enterprise is the solution. In some circles you'd be called a 'commie', like I've been." Far from it. In fact, the reverse. The problem with regulators is that they operate so divorced from the system they regulate, they just don't understand it. They may understand the regulations, but have no idea how they really impact the affected industries. I saw that first-hand when I went from private industry to spend five years within the government entity which regulated my industry. When changes in regulations are proposed, it's normally to help the regulators, not make the industry more efficient or safer or cleaner or better. It's government for government's sake.
The Founding Fathers were sharp dudes. They envisioned a federal government whose responsibility was to be the collective for defense of the member states, provide a unified voice when dealing with outsiders, and provide those inter-connective services (e.g., waterways, postal service, etc.) that were truly interstate in nature. They ALL warned about the dangers of too strong a federal presence, as that's what they revolted from. The goal was to let the states be the states, except for those limited and necessary items which crossed state lines.
We have gotten state-lazy and federal-dependent. That's probably an offshoot of having national radio and television networks and a national print media. It's too easy to see ourselves as only Americans at the expense of being Floridians, Illini, Nebraskans and the like. If we are going to seek social change in any manner - be that in how we receive health care or distribute bread - the place to do that is at the local (state) level first. If we want to emulate how the Brits or Germans do things, we must remember that those nations are at best no bigger than a State or two here.
Change is a wonderful thing - as long as the change is managed with logic and science to confirm that the change will do good rather than make things worse. WE HAVE NO DATA that says any facet of this health care bill will work - only guesses and promises BUT NO DATA. I spent too many years in a system management environment to rely on guesses and promises. I's skeptical of Santa Claus promises and won't accept blilnd faith which only rewards political grandstanders.