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: John Koligman who wrote (9181)	9/8/2009 1:11:02 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Was your post intended for someone else?

To: John Koligman who wrote (9181)	9/8/2009 7:18:34 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Respond to of 42652

At least healthcare is something worth raising taxes for if necessary... Its not like we won't have health care without extra spending which might cause higher taxes, and that we will if spend extra money and then maybe raise taxes. Either way "health care" will be provided. Even if one assumes that more or health care will be provided with "reform" (a questionable assumption), it still would be a change at the margin, not a "we have health care, or we don't have health care" thing. And we might have less or worse health care after "reform". Also in terms of comparing the costs, the taxes cuts aren't a cost, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are temporary (hopefully the bailouts are also temporary), while new government health care payment programs and laws can go on indefinitely.