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 (14891)	3/20/2010 11:20:21 AM
From: Maurice Winn	4 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

The invasion and conquest of Iraq did seem a dopey idea at the time because there were obviously no WMDs [and I ranted so at the time - it's not Monday morning quarterbacking]. Iran definitely has WMDs being prepared and even worse, they are seriously threatening obliteration of Israel. Saddam did sup[ort that but there wasn't much he could do about it. If it was a good idea to conquer Iraq, it's a better idea to defeat Iran. It's time for another war. But this one would be easier, There are lots of tanks and other equipment in Iraq. They could be transferred to Afghanistan via Iran with removal of WMDs en route, as well as setting up a new constitution as in Japan after WWII. The extra cost of fuel and what have you could come from the savings in medical costs by stopping medical insurance. Medical insurance ensures costs are not carefully considered. With people spending their own money instead of OPM, they would be more circumspect as to whether more medical treatment is needed. You are comparing apples and oranges: <What is more important, spending $1.7 trillion on Bush's tax cuts or spending $1 trillion to ensure universal health coverage? It's all a matter of priorities. > Once established, the medical costs will be permanent and get bigger. There's no limit to how much money can be spent on medical treatment if costs are ignored. But the military manoeuvres would be temporary. Anyway, spending money on tax cuts isn't actually spending money. It's not taking it from people in the first place. Governments are appallingly wastrel, self-dealing and even counter-productive in their handling of OPM. I spend my own money 100x more carefully and productively. <All the major studies say ACCESS to health care is the critical factor in increasing average lifespans. Every year lost due to inadequate access to health care means loss in economic output for those people. That costs our economy real money. I haven't done the math, but if you think about all the time lost to people being sick or dying because of lack of health care, then universal health care starts to make sense. > Since the main beneficiary of better health is the person with the medical problems to be fixed, or better still, prevented, they are the one with most incentive to get it right, get it cheap, and make the investment. If they won't invest in their own health, I don't see why I should do it for them. If they cared about health, they'd walk to the supermarket and buy vegetables, instead of driving a dirty great SUV to Burger King and the pub. The best thing to do is cancel medical insurance. People don't buy food insurance. They buy food. They could do the same for medical treatment. Rather than pay a lot of money to an insurance company to buy food for them, they can just take their money to the supermarket and buy the food they want. That way they get the food they want and also save the cost of the insurance company. People don't insure their shoes so that when they shoes need medical treatment they go to the insurer for shoe repairs or new shoes. They get their money out and buy the shoes they want. Of course, if the insurance company is paying, they want Manolo Blahnicks rather than Wal-Mart sandals so the costs go through the roof. Cut out all the middle men and the taxes on the middle men, and buy medical treatment directly from the suppliers, who should be deregulated so that Toyota and other large companies with excellent quality control can go into the business. Look at the mass hysteria because a few people can't drive their cars, and how seriously Toyota takes the problems. Look at the medical industry and how many people die and are maimed because of bad medical quality control, brand management and poor corporate practise in a competitive market. Mqurice