A US National Health Care System? Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : A US National Health Care System?

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (4999)	2/27/2008 12:03:43 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 42652

Now at least your arguing for your assertion, but it doesn't change the fact that your earlier statement was begging the question. We aren't starting from "universal health care" = "better", we are discussing whether or not its better (either in abstract, or more importantly in the real world where you have to actually implement such a system). And better doesn't just mean "produces some health care benefits" (which I wouldn't dispute), or even "on the net makes health care better (which is in dispute), but something more like "on the net makes health care sufficiently better to be worth the costs and problems, and produces a benefit that is larger than using the same resources for something else") Any other kind of health care system can not ever prevail. "Can not ever" is just false. And even if it was true, it would only mean that "universal health care" was an almost universally popular idea, not that it was really better. there ultimately has to be some kind of judgement by people in government as to who is "deserving" of health care. Only when the government is providing or paying for the health care. Otherwise the government doesn't have to make any such judgment.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next