Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: six scary little words  (Read 1799 times)

Offline iddee

  • Galactic Bee
  • ******
  • Posts: 9155
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2016, 09:38:05 pm »
If the feds are required to provide us medical care, shouldn't they also provide us with healthy foods? Prevent us from obtaining unhealthy foods? Shouldn't they also provide us with shelter, proper clothing, and tell us where and when we can go, and what activities we can join.

After all, those are the things that most influence what our medical needs will be. If they have to provide for the results, they should also control the means. RIGHT?

NO
"Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me . . . Anything can happen, child. Anything can be"

*Shel Silverstein*

Offline Psparr

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 607
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2016, 09:57:28 pm »
The insurance industry pretty much has a monopoly on care. Because of our brilliant politicians, It is not a true free market system.

Offline herbhome

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 663
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2016, 10:56:10 pm »
I would be totally opposed to government taking over health care. I do believe a public health care system is in the interest of the public welfare. If one is filthy rich and can afford it I think they should get whatever they want. One does not have to replace the other.

The way things are, working class people can't afford to get really sick. I went through this with my first wife and had our life's work wiped out and she had Blue Cross insurance. I lost my home and my farm.
Neill

Online gww

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 922
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #23 on: October 22, 2016, 11:58:11 pm »
With a single payer system we could get rid of the insurance system we have now.  The insurance system already does the same thing that medicare is accused of when dealing with what they pay.
Cheers
gww

Online gww

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 922
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #24 on: October 23, 2016, 12:10:44 am »
iddee
Quote
If the feds are required to provide us medical care, shouldn't they also provide us with healthy foods? Prevent us from obtaining unhealthy foods? Shouldn't they also provide us with shelter, proper clothing, and tell us where and when we can go, and what activities we can join.

After all, those are the things that most influence what our medical needs will be. If they have to provide for the results, they should also control the means. RIGHT?

They already try to do that.  They have made drugs illegal.  Stopped businesses from deciding on wether they want a smoke free environment or not, the FBI keeps track of most fringe groups, want to ban big gulps and yada yada yada.  They have said fat is bad than it is good, that jogging is good and then it is bad.  They don't want you talking on your cell phone while in a car.  They make you wear a seat belt and helmet.  Dare I go on.
Cheers
gww

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 16983
  • Gender: Female
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #25 on: October 23, 2016, 01:28:13 am »
Quote
With a single payer system we could get rid of the insurance system we have now.  The insurance system already does the same thing that medicare is accused of when dealing with what they pay.

you do, but then you get exactly the same thing with government care except with all the fraud, waste, and abuse that follows any big government program. 

Quote
ObamaCare is a misnomer for a system first proposed by Richard Nixon and implemented by Romney as governor. Its greatest fault is it rewards the very industry that is the problem in health care-the insurance industry. This industry is based on profit.

That's not entirely true.  Many of the largest insurance providers and hospital groups are non-profits.  They are allowed to keep a good buffer of money, largely to pay for the stable of lawyers and the daily lawsuits because we will not adopt tort reform.  But why not profit in health care?  profit is a motivator.  competition is a motivator.  The free market allows for both, while also allowing for punishment of those who do not provide what the people want. 

We already had a public system for covering the poor.  What we really needed was a way to help those who were in that gap between to rich and poor enough.  A number of things were proposed, but have been routinely shot down by the left because what the left wants is single-payer.
I'll be honest, I think Obamacare was designed to fail.  You would have had to be incredibly stupid to look at the program and think it was going to be a success...which I suspect is why much of it was not finished before the dems shoved it through.  No one knew what was in it, but we knew enough to know it was doomed

Quote
Let's privatize law enforcement, there are numerous security companies that would gladly bid for the contract. Then only communities that could afford to pay would get the service.
 How about all roads and highways? If you can afford to maintain the road through your property, you get to keep it. Since all roads and highways are owned by corporations, we'll simply pay a toll or subscription fee set by the owners to use them.

Law enforcement is done locally and by states.  The FBI is a national police/investigative force, but it is not supposed to interfere in state and local issues unless invited and in a very small number of other instances. 

I don't have a problem with privatizing roads.  It's a pretty good idea.  It's the way it used to be and it worked.  At the least, the states should be fully responsible for their own roads.  Private or not, it is not a federal issue.  The interstate highway system has some merit.  while not strictly something the Feds should have been involved in, it was a rational idea for both war and peace.  The Romans understood the need for good roads for both commerce and troop movement. 

As for states doing things like Romneycare, more power to them.  That's what states are supposed to do.  They experiment with ideas and the people accept or reject those ideas.  If it is a good thing, more states will adopt.  There is a distinct line in the constitution between what states can do and what the federal government can do....although the federal government more and more ignores it.

NASA might be a better example of the difference between private enterprise and government enterprise.  NASA did a good job with its original missions.  Government kept control mostly because the rocket science was highly classified.  As private companies entered the space market, NASA was unable to keep up in cost, efficiency, or tech.  Bureaucracy bogged it down, and it is largely an anachronism now..and a Muslim outreach program. 
We have made leaps forward in the last decade that we have not seen for over 1/2 a century because private, profit driven, industry is doing its thing.

Profit is not the problem in any industry.  It is the lack of free market that is the problem.  In a free market, which we do not have here in most things anymore, profit depends not only on selling stuff, but on meeting the needs of the customer.  The market does away with the greed factor because unhappy customers do not make for profit.  If there are two Italian restaurants next to each other, you go to the one with the best food for the best price.  Eventually one will probably cease to exist if it can't compete. 

They are so divorced from their own interests that even when their own security and that of their children is finally compromised, they do not seek to avert the danger themselves but cross their arms and wait for the nation as a whole to come to their aid. Yet as utterly as they sacrifice their own free will, they are no fonder of obedience than anyone else. They submit, it is true, to the whims of a clerk, but no sooner is force removed than they are glad to defy the law as a defeated enemy. Thus one finds them ever wavering between servitude and license.
Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline Michael Bush

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 17085
  • Gender: Male
    • bushfarms.com
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #26 on: October 24, 2016, 10:29:29 am »
I suspect that the people who want socialized medicine have insured the mess we currently face with insurance so we will accept government health care as the only solution to the problem they have created...
My website:  bushfarms.com/bees.htm en espanol: bushfarms.com/es_bees.htm  auf deutsche: bushfarms.com/de_bees.htm  em portugues:  bushfarms.com/pt_bees.htm
My book:  ThePracticalBeekeeper.com
-------------------
"Everything works if you let it."--James "Big Boy" Medlin

Offline Joe D

  • Super Bee
  • *****
  • Posts: 2239
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #27 on: October 25, 2016, 01:05:07 am »
When you retire you will be in a single payer plan, unless you work for the gov. or something like than.  It will cost more for you to keep your company ins.  The reason that medicare is going up only 2 % which I'm not sure it is that high is because SS raise for 2017 is .03%.  I had a good paying job for down here, and my SS is 2000+ a month and the raise is $6.00 a month.
Back when I was still working I had to go out of network to see a specialist, which the ins. company would supposedly to pay 60%.  The bill was 15,000 the ins company paid $5,000, I got the rest.

I have had a couple of stents put in I told my heart doctor to be sure he got the right codes  of the procedure.  And he did, the stents and overnight stay was $50.00.

Enough rambling,

Joe D

Offline herbhome

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 663
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #28 on: October 25, 2016, 03:58:53 pm »
KathyP,

One would have to go back a very long time to find a time when private roads were the norm. It is a basic doctrine of common law that landowners have a right to access to there property. This predates the Revolution back to England.
Its as simple as the golden rule: If you want access to your property you allow access to others.

As to whether the federal government belongs in this, it is the old discussion of state's rights. The Republican Party was formed as a progressive party with the intention of strengthening federal government and forcing states to accept progressive changes. Examples: Abolition of slavery, National Forest service, National Park service, Anti-trust legislation, EPA and so on- all Republican programs. It became such a powerful party after the Civil war that it became the party of the uber rich. The democratic party in the south became the party of Jim Crow laws and systemic racism. Roosevelt changed all that with the New Deal and Johnson finished it off.

Now the parties have switched, but the issue remains. In a democratic nation, how do we treat our least powerful and influential citizens or is this a nation where you get the government representation you can pay for?
Neill

Online gww

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 922
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #29 on: October 25, 2016, 04:32:52 pm »
Herbhome
Good post.  I have my answer to your question.  I am not big enough, strong enough, rich enough to hire somebody strong enough and can't shoot well enough to live in a "only the strong survive" sociaty and so my view is.  Good fair laws are good fair laws no matter who makes them and bad laws are bad even if they are done by your town or state.  Any law that guarantees fairness for the least powerful of our sociaty also guarantees it for the most powerful.
Cheers
gww

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 16983
  • Gender: Female
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #30 on: October 27, 2016, 01:06:54 pm »
Quote
The Republican Party was formed as a progressive party with the intention of strengthening federal government and forcing states to accept progressive changes. Examples: Abolition of slavery, National Forest service, National Park service, Anti-trust legislation, EPA and so on- all Republican programs. It became such a powerful party after the Civil war that it became the party of the uber rich. The democratic party in the south became the party of Jim Crow laws and systemic racism. Roosevelt changed all that with the New Deal and Johnson finished it off.

The Republican party did not start to abolish slavery.  It started to keep slavery from spreading to the new states. 

It is true that Republicans stated some of the federal programs that I dislike, but those programs became the monsters they are under democrat policy.  The national forest service became the national keep people off the land service.  The national park service went from protecting some unique lands to sucking up vast lands that were not unique and were not really parks.  The EPA is now the control all industry agency. Same with the agencies that came into being under democrats,  The NEA, BLM, BIA,.....
 All these things are cautionary tales of what government does with a little power.

Roosevelt and Johson did not change things.  They figured out how to use things.  Roosevelts "new deal" is blamed for extending the depression, and it was the most massive growth of government ever.  If you look at FDRs record, it's pretty safe to say that he was a racist.    Johson needed the black vote and so he embarked on a massive giveaway program that again expanded the government and enslaved generations of people into dependency.  Both Johson and Kennedy were opposed to civil rights legislation before they discovered blacks vote. 

The Republican party is not the party of the uber rich.  In fact, most of the richest people in the country are democrats.  Also more rich people in politics and in the democrat party. I'm not sure wealth is relevant.  There is nothing wrong with being rich. 

   This idea of the parties switching is a false narrative that is put forth by the left.  In fact, very few of the so called dixie-crats changed parties.  The south was controlled by democrats into the 2000s.  When the south began to see that democrat policy was not working, and they figured that free market/lower taxes could bring in industry, they began to change their votes.  Government expansion has historically been greatest under democrats. 

There's a reason that every place under long term control of the democrats is an economic crap hole. 



They are so divorced from their own interests that even when their own security and that of their children is finally compromised, they do not seek to avert the danger themselves but cross their arms and wait for the nation as a whole to come to their aid. Yet as utterly as they sacrifice their own free will, they are no fonder of obedience than anyone else. They submit, it is true, to the whims of a clerk, but no sooner is force removed than they are glad to defy the law as a defeated enemy. Thus one finds them ever wavering between servitude and license.
Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline herbhome

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 663
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #31 on: October 27, 2016, 04:14:06 pm »
KathyP,

 I agree that government programs have a way of having a life of their own and struggle to grow and survive long after the need for them is gone. Pretty much everything else, we have to agree to disagree.
 
Neill

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 16983
  • Gender: Female
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #32 on: October 27, 2016, 04:54:31 pm »
Quote
Pretty much everything else, we have to agree to disagree.

Only if you don't know history   :wink:
They are so divorced from their own interests that even when their own security and that of their children is finally compromised, they do not seek to avert the danger themselves but cross their arms and wait for the nation as a whole to come to their aid. Yet as utterly as they sacrifice their own free will, they are no fonder of obedience than anyone else. They submit, it is true, to the whims of a clerk, but no sooner is force removed than they are glad to defy the law as a defeated enemy. Thus one finds them ever wavering between servitude and license.
Alexis de Tocqueville

Offline herbhome

  • Field Bee
  • ***
  • Posts: 663
  • Gender: Male
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #33 on: October 27, 2016, 08:29:41 pm »
Quote
Pretty much everything else, we have to agree to disagree.

Only if you don't know history   :wink:
Ouch, that hurts!
 I wouldn't think to question your knowledge. I only offer my opinion based upon my knowledge and experience.
 I was born and raised in Louisiana during a time when we rarely had a general election. We had the Democratic Primary and that was it. I watched as conservative democrats changed party one by one. My granma said "Well, they always voted like Republicans anyway" :smile:
Neill

Online kathyp

  • Universal Bee
  • *******
  • Posts: 16983
  • Gender: Female
Re: six scary little words
« Reply #34 on: October 27, 2016, 10:31:29 pm »
Quote
I watched as conservative democrats changed party one by one. My granma said "Well, they always voted like Republicans anyway" :smile:

I can't speak to local elections.  Only 3 Dixiecrats changed and those were Thurmond, Helms, and Godwin. It was not until the early 2000s that the south started to go republican and that had more to do with economics.  People began to realize that the policies of the left were leaving the south out. 

I'm not sure what "acting like republicans" is.   :wink:  Being conservative is a good thing.  A lot of people come to their senses somewhere along the line!!
They are so divorced from their own interests that even when their own security and that of their children is finally compromised, they do not seek to avert the danger themselves but cross their arms and wait for the nation as a whole to come to their aid. Yet as utterly as they sacrifice their own free will, they are no fonder of obedience than anyone else. They submit, it is true, to the whims of a clerk, but no sooner is force removed than they are glad to defy the law as a defeated enemy. Thus one finds them ever wavering between servitude and license.
Alexis de Tocqueville