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: RetiredNow who wrote (14261)	3/9/2010 8:44:01 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 42652

I wonder if it would have been a more emotional debate had the Dems accused the GOP of trying to pass the greatest expansion of a socialist program since Social Security and Medicare were created? There might have been. But too many Dems opposed it because they wanted a more generous expansion. So you only would have gotten such a debate if it was strongly attacked by Republicans, and by conservative or libertarian leaning independents. You got some of that, but not enough to make it the main debate, and certainly not enough to make it anything like the current debate.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (14261)	3/10/2010 8:51:32 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

The GOP calling today's bill socialism is working to stir up the mob. So if it works today, maybe it would have worked back then against Bush. The drug legislation, in concept, simply adding another benefit in a familiar paradigm. The health care reform proposals are a change of paradigm. What remains on the table after congressional negotiations, not so much as the original reform notions, but it is not simply an extension or expansion of the extant paradigm. Piling on more of the same doesn't exercise folks all that much. Change does.