| Viper1 said: Well considering once upon a time we had free market health care and it worked quite well i don't see why it won't know especially when all indicators towards antionalized health care suggest failure. Think about it. We had free market priot to the mid 70's and it worked. We have nationalized services right now like Medicare and it's failing. We already know one path works and the other doesn't. Also, I agree that some regulations may be necessary but regulations is hardly nationalizing something. A free market doesn't mean some regulations can't be in place either. 1 national monopoly vs competitive markets? We already know how well that works and it isn't pretty. Finally, America is the most giving in the world. More donations per capita than any other country. We give because we can and have a desire to do so. Not because our government forces us to do it. People love to think of us as self centered yet why do we give more of our own free volition per capita than anyone if we're so selfish?
|
It worked prior to the 70's, so the financial crashes before that didn't happen? Keep in mind the worst of them all, The GD, was fixed through regulation of the free market and many of the very same policies Bush started to do and Obama is currently doing.
The reason medicare has issues is due to costs. Fix the free market that has allowed tape to costs $100 in hospitals and medicare would be just fine.
Healthcare can't be like other markets. Its vital for survival and necessary for all. Not just those with plenty. Therefore a single system to pool everyone's contributions while reducing raw material cost would be successful, for everyone.
Yes, we are the most giving nation in the world. But, that has nothing to do with our discussion. I said those against universal healthcare and generally any social program are simply selfish. Not America as a whole or generic term.
