Your political ideologies Vs. What is appropriate now

I typically only post a thread when I feel there is a lot to be said.. However, I feel like this is a fairly simple, easily digestible notion....

In times like these, when the nation is at a crossroads, we must dispose of our own political ideologies and accept what is best for the country, in the NOW.

Democrats, republicans, socialists, libertarians, etc, etc, etc... You must accept the fact that our country's government is too bastardized to fit any of your ideas of utopian society.

I identify pretty strongly with libertarian ideals, but I also believe in the healthcare bill. It would never pass in my perfect america, but america is certainly not perfect. What I do recognize is that americans need healthcare NOW.

It is too late to go back and start from scratch. You will never get the america you want. That's a fact. If any of you have read into Freakonomics, you'll understand what I am saying. In terms of all the world's problems, it is not fathomable to flip everything around and change the state of humanity. We need to place bandages on the broken parts and come back to fix them later. Otherwise, all the cracks will eventually give way to bigger problems.

So I ask you this... What good is your opinion if, in terms of a contemporary society, it is completely unreasonable? Partisanship is dead, and if you continue to argue in terms of specific political ideologies, then this world will continue to devour itself, both societally and environmentally.

Bickering about what you think the world should be is futile. Don't expect anything to change without working together to fix common sense and right what is already wrong with the world.

reply to post by SantaClaus


I am all for lowering the cost of healthcare, but there is nothing that is in this healthcare bill that does anything but raise the cost of healthcare.

In order to lower the cost you MUST lower the cost of doctors, nurses, hospitals, and/or prescription drugs. You cannot lower the cost by forcing everyone to pay more taxes so more people can pay the higher prices.

In fact, the basic economics of supply and demand means that costs will increase as more people are insured and thus use more healthcare services.

So my question to you is what does anyone gain by hurrying up to implement something that is not a solution to the problem at hand? So why must we do it NOW?

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Mr Sunchine]

Originally posted by Mr Sunchine
reply to post by SantaClaus

 

So my question to you is what does anyone gain by hurrying up to implement something that is not a solution to the problem at hand? So why must we do it NOW?

[edit on 1-3-2010 by Mr Sunchine]

I kind of figured people would hone in on that specific subject if I included it in the thread.

What do we gain? A system that can be regulated. While certainly not perfect, at least it is a system. Once the system is in place it can be fine tuned. No one said anything was in stone.

Why must we do it now? People are dying. I hope you have great insurance and I hope for you sake so does everyone in your family.. But I am a well-educated 25 year old man who is uninsured because blue cross dropped me for taking an over-the-counter antacid for an upset stomach during my college years. God forbid I develop some disease that leaves me and my family in ruins financially. I'd rather just die than be such a burden.

Again, it is not about fixing the problem NOW.. it is about working towards a fix and getting things done.

reply to post by SantaClaus


Well you know in my entire life I have never met anyone who died because they didn't have health insurance. They might have gotten a bunch of bills, but they didn't die.

reply to post by Mr Sunchine


In the sad state we find ourselves in.. Which is worse? Death or creditors?

No organization should have a monopoly over the creation of their own bank note system. Douglas Jackson and Barry Downey made e-Gold, an online central brokerage that distributes a currency backed 1:1 by gold bullion. The secret service responded by raiding them and taking all their gold. If I don't like how the government runs its monetary policy, I should have the freedom of choice to opt-out. The society that is created after the collapse of this empire should write monetary freedoms into its constitution.

I wondered why my e-gold account no longer worked.

Seriously folks, it's "Amalgamation and Capital" - a systemic defect in the concept of a capitalist society. Meaningful leverage to the problem of increasing costs escalating into excessive charges requires a complete rethink of the problem space.

Whatever the mechanics are included in any bill on healthcare, they will be insufficient to address the basic problem which is IMO:
It is not in the best interest of a society to allow health care profiteering.

Okay I am ready to endure the flames of wrath for that remark. It is simply a rejection of an exclusive socio-economic ideological view in favor of a more workable approach - like one that would remove the profit incentive from the health insurance industry and redirect those efforts to providing more effective service of claims on the basis that more claims processed means more profit. The operative verb is "processed" not "settled", settlement, "risk analysis", "policy review" etc. would be beyond the insurance provider's control.

Just an idea - unless the parameters of the problem change there can be no effective solution.

gj

[edit on 1-3-2010 by ganjoa]

Originally posted by ganjoa

It is not in the best interest of a society to allow health care profiteering.

[edit on 1-3-2010 by ganjoa]

Absolutely... Even given my ideology that a government should be as small as possible, I can definitely back up that sentiment. Why? Because while it may be against my political ideals, it sounds like common sense.

This is what we need... People who are willing to allow common sense back into the world.