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.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (218757)	12/28/2025 9:53:58 PM
From: Maple MAGA	Respond to of 219612

I’m genuinely interested in hearing what you mean by a healthcare “utopia,” because slogans don’t substitute for workable systems. In every country on earth, public, private, or mixed, those with wealth, power, or influence receive faster and better access. That isn’t ideology; it’s reality. Politicians, senior officials, professional athletes, corporate executives, and those with inherited wealth all bypass queues, whether through private clinics, concierge medicine, or foreign care. That group is, as you note, a tiny minority of the global population. The real question isn’t whether elites receive preferential treatment, they always have and always will, but whether the broader system delivers competent, timely, and humane care to ordinary people. Outcomes, access, accountability, and sustainability matter far more than moral posturing. Higher standards are not a sin, nor is pointing out that systems should be judged by results rather than intentions. If that offends, perhaps it’s because uncomfortable truths tend to do so. So yes, “bully” not for privilege, but for honesty, realism, and systems that actually work for the many, not just the well-connected.