SI
SI
discoversearch

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? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2092)9/21/2007 11:35:47 AM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
The rich aren't favored by the system, the rich are in a better position because they are rich. If you had "free" national health care for the rich and not for everyone else that would be favoring the rich.

If you mean a system that allows the rich to have more than the poor harms the poor I would disagree quite strongly. If you try to bring the rich down you often end up hurting most non-rich.

Should I take your post to mean that there should be some national baseline of care and no one should be able to buy a higher level of care than that baseline? If not what does it mean in terms of the practical realities of health care.

You didn't get more specific you got more general and vague. What points about the program do you like, what do you think the results will be?



To: Mary Cluney who wrote (2092)9/21/2007 5:01:35 PM
From: Peter Dierks  Respond to of 42652
 
"Hillary is the only candidate in the field that has real experience in health care public policy."

Yes, and her destruction of the vaccine industry is a precedent that bodes ill for the future of medical care in the US.