Re: OT Atlas Shrugged.

[JoeRaisin <JoeRaisin@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

tourman wrote:
> On Aug 27, 9:04 am, "Robert L Bass" <Sa...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> "Jim" wrote:
>>
>>>> Hmm. Obama has been President of the United States for less than one school
>>>> year. When did this course take place?
>>> Yeah, I was wondering the same thing.
>> Apparently, Snopes has debunked the story though it was a good way to
>> illustrate your point, even if we disagree on the matter.
>>
>>> Also, if he's so much for the achiever being rewarded and the slackers not,
>>> how come he never failed anyone? Sounds socialistic to me.
>> I was not aware that he never failed anyone.  Is that something he said or
>> something someone else said about him?
>>
>>> But anyway, even if it's hypothetical .....  I thought it was a good example
>>> of how socialism affects the populace.
>> Maybe so, but we disagree about Obama being a socialist.  Our society is a mix
>> of capitalist and socialist systems.  We have Social Security, Medicare and
>> Medicaid, all of which are designed to keep people in need afloat at the
>> expense of the rest of the taxpayers.  We also have unemployment insurance,
>> which is borderline socialist but which no one denies is an important
>> government run system.  None of these systems are perfect but all are helpful
>> and IMO necessary.
>>
>> The idea of universal health care does not mean single payer / single
>> provider.  It means that those who are currently to obtain health care in the
>> private sector will have a public option.  I know you feel that it is unfair
>> for taxpayers to foot the bill for those who can't or (worse) won't pay for
>> their own coverage.  But there are two sides to every argument.  Due to
>> declining health very soon I will have to stop working.  My insurer is
>> anxiously waiting for the first day that I miss a payment so they can drop me.
>> I've worked all my life, paid taxes every year and dutifully paid for health
>> insurance.  Now, as the end of life draws near, I may be unable to get medical
>> treatment.  I don't think that is fair either.
>>
>> Somehow we have to come up with a compromise.  Obama is at least willing to
>> dialogue with Republicans and try to find common ground.  Rather than make him
>> out to be a socialist, terrorist or whatever other "ist," why not encourage
>> both sides to sit down and do some honest work to find a solution?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Regards,
>> Robert L Bass
>>
>> ==============================>
>> Bass Home Electronics
>> DIY Alarm and Home Automation Storehttp://www.bassburglaralarms.com
>> Sales & Service 941-870-2310
>> Fax 941-870-3252
>> ==============================>
>
> RHC: Bob, I don't normally jump in to any threads that are not about
> security in some manner; however, given what is going on in the media
> about health care, I have to say something. That something is that I
> am totally amazed at how the US coverage of Canadian health care has
> been almost totally incorrect. Clearly those with a bias either for or
> against have slanted their arguments in favour of what they believe
> with little or no regard for the truth.
>
> Living in Canada, we are a country which has good health care for
> anyone who needs it. No one is turned away for lack of coverage, and
> you can be absolutely sure you will be looked after well in any real
> emergency. But like any system, priorities have to be made and
> surgeries which are not vital can take longer (in some cases much
> longer) than in a private health care system. But my wife got her new
> knee; my father got his quadruple bypass operation, and we have no
> huge bills to contend with.  Both my brother in law and mother in law
> spent their last days in a hospital bed which we received no bill for.
> Sure the system has it's problems (like doctor shortages in some rural
> communities). But no one gets turned away from public clinics because
> of costs. It's far from perfect, but it works well.
>
> As much as I love the US, it has always amazed me how many people
> there are adamantly unwilling to contribute to any public system which
> in their eyes provides something for people who are generally seen as
> the "have nots" of society. If a society can't look after it's
> citizens to at least a certain degree, you have to wonder if there
> isn't something terribly wrong about that.
>
> Again, I'm going to get shot to hell here for saying this, but if the
> US would actually cut down on the gargantuan costs of their military,
> and stopped trying to be the "world's policeman", maybe there would be
> enough money left over to provide basic health care for all it's
> citizens....
>
If not the US, who?