Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RON BL who wrote (116946)	12/16/2000 2:50:06 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

We already have a national health system, only a highly disorganized one. No public hospital may turn away a sick person for inability to pay, especially a sick child. In fact, the inability of some poorer people to access preventive and maintenance care costs us enormously when these people later show up at our county hospitals, bereft of funds, and needing diabetic amputations, heart by-passes, and other treatments for illnesses that grew chronic in the absence of regular care. Not to mention the fact that universal health care is essential to the health of everyone, as we saw in the early part of the last century when we had lovely epidemics of tuberculosis, typhus, influenza, and polio. Every child should get basic inoculations, if nothing else. So, no, I do not agree that national health care equals socialism. We provide it already one way or another, and we might as well do it in a comprehensive way, rather than the haphazard enormous costs that we pick up for the chronic sick that eventual show up at public hospitals, far past an easy cure.