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 : The Trump Presidency -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (224920)	2/4/2022 2:31:14 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 355050

You might want to try to figure out why the US has the overall best cancer survival rates in the world. Before you start mucking around with the system that produced those outcomes.

To: bentway who wrote (224920)	2/4/2022 3:30:29 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 355050

The data supports the arguments for universal health care, if cost is the metric. Is cost the metric? And, if so, how did cost get to be the metric? What I'm searching for is the metric and the reason for the metric. Even deeper, what "lane," if you will, this fits into in the structure of the US. People typically latch onto things that other people suggest that "sound good" to them and their cohort. Sometimes that's enough for them; sometimes they try to rationalize their choices. But hardly anybody ever asks why we are doing this with any seriousness. We need to do something and this is something. Sounded good at the time. Politically, people rarely start with identifying the problem and the requirements and then analyzing possible solutions. They rarely examine their assumptions let alone their value judgments. They reverse engineer if they engineer at all. Well, I'm one of those hardly anybodies. I want to know if it fits, where it fits. What category is it in? I start with asking whether it's right, or national interest, or consumer good or yet some other category. Does it fit in the constitution somewhere or do we just flop it on top of everything willy-nilly and work out the conflicts later. Please don't get the impression that I am opposed to universal health care. I'm just looking for more thought behind it. Been looking for nearly two decades and haven't unearthed it yet and frankly don't expect to find it. I'm discomfited by their seemingly not being one let alone one that will get national buy in. My take on the advocacy for this is it that it's mostly a value judgment, "backwards" being along the same line as "deplorable" only less so. Yes, all the cool countries do it. They have been doing it for a long time in Europe, since back when countries were tribal/ethnic groups with a lot of cohesiveness and trust. We are not that. We operate off a "proposition," which is a different animal, and which seemingly has less and less understanding and buy-in. Universal health care is ingrained in them now but, if they were starting from scratch at this time with all their immigration issues, I wonder if they would go down that road.