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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (8867)	8/30/2009 6:38:12 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

think the effect of insisting on calling insurers rationers is to give an argument to the socializers. See, insurers ration so its really okay and it would be fairer to let the government do it is an argument being made out there. I have been wondering if you'd ever acknowledge that. <g> Its obvious. Still the "rationing" thats involved in insurance policies is very different from the rationing governments and that is my opinion. The reasons I think it could go either way are a function of the variables. While we have much in common, I think that we are different from the Brits and Canadians in significant ways. We have somewhat different traditions and temperament. In terms of traditions, both of our cousins came to be where they are during a period of socialist momentum. We missed that window. Right now we're on the tail of the movement playing follow the leader so the movement is more resistible. The timing is more on our side. The Euros are modifying their systems somewhat in our direction just as we're looking to copy them so the momentum has been dissipated if not entirely lost. The river isn't flowing as fast. As for temperament, we're enough different, I think. They're more civilized, or more pliable, depending on what kind of spin you want to put on it. Their natures are somewhat more receptive to collectivism than ours, I think. We will continue to have resistance. That resistance may erode over time but it may not. It hasn't yet. Look at Medicare. Even Medicare is not fully single-payer. Part A, major medical, mostly is but not entirely. The rest is still pretty competitive and has moved more in that direction most recently. If we resisted in Medicare, which is inherently paternalistic due to the vulnerability of its clientele, there's a good chance we will rest elsewhere. I think that at very most we will "socialize" to the extent of Medicare but it's unlikely we will ever have the systems of Britain or Canada. At the very least, doing so is not as inevitable as you seem to think/fear it is. We won't likely retreat on our collectivism but stalemate is very possible. I don't have your faith in the tides of history and our cultural differences.