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.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (260082)	9/11/2003 10:08:29 PM
From: GraceZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Hehehehe....I've had this argument with my ex-running partner, Terese, over about a thousand miles of runs. She writes Medicare/Medicaid policy for HCFA. You see there's this little problem with the Feds telling the states what to do, people in the states don't like it when the strong arm of the Federal government tells them what and how far. It's one of the reasons my car warranty comes in a small paperback book with 52 different warranties, one for every freakin state.

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (260082)	9/12/2003 7:31:15 AM
From: orkrious	Respond to of 436258

Now if you'll excuse me, I've gotta go get my asbestos jump suit on for the libertarian torch fest about to come my way!< I think you make a lot of sense.

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (260082)	9/12/2003 7:43:15 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

www.costofwar.com Compare the cost of Bush's Iraq Middle Eastern wet dream with costs of public housing, pre-shool, kids' health, public education, and college scholarships, against individual cities or the entire US.

To: patron_anejo_por_favor who wrote (260082)	9/12/2003 9:48:59 AM
From: Oblomov	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

Patron, I agree that tobacco, high fat food, etc. correlates with higher utilization, but it is just that, a correlation. Environment is just one factor, genetics is another. The people who utilize the system more, whether due to environmental factors or genetics, should pay more. Otherwise we are just creating a new regulatory regime that gets enforced by a new police state (whether the left calls it that or not doesn't matter, they don't have a copyright on the phrase). Why should the government decide that, say, a 63 year-old entrepreneur has less value to society than a 25 year-old thug, both of whom need dialysis? Why not let "tough love" be administered to the thug by Mr. Market? Inevitably, the result would be a soft, "compassionate" form of fascism. The distribution of rewards and benefits of our society would be subjected to the mindless leveling impulse of the administrative state. It would be no less needlessly coercive than conscription or property searches without warrants. Do you think this is just libertarian hogwash? LOL, I am hardly a libertarian in the Randian sense of the term. There are no simple solutions to social problems, but simply because one is in need of a more complex solution does not mean that the government needs to get involved just to make it more complex. Have you ever read Updike's The Poorhouse Fair? Updike is no conservative. But, the novel is a subtle, beautiful critique of liberal humanism, of the impulse of do-gooders to intervene on the behalf of everyone, whether they are welcome or not. I strongly suggest it. "The nation became one of pleasure-seekers; the people continued to live as cells of a body do in the coffin, for the conception 'America' had died in their skulls."