Danny for President

> Impose heavy fines on companies that outsource labor to other countries

Funny, I just finished to argue about this on another board... my opinion is that this move will provide tactical advantage to the US workers, but will be very poor strategically. Not to start a political argument, just to mention that there are reasons not to be assertively negative on this issue - and this is coming from someone who has experienced the hurt of outsourcing.

Otherwise, I'd be behind you on all issues... oh, except "athletic" scholarships - simply because when it comes to private schools, it's an infringement into their business practices :D
 
Yep. Also, I've seen the results of a socialized-type medical system, and it ain't purty. Private enterprise and competition encourages medicos to take care of their patients.

John
 
Argh! Danny, we have to understand human nature- which is basically selfish- then use that knowledge to make a system that works. People naturally work hardest and best when they directly see the benefits. It has been true- and tested here in America- since Captain John Smith took over running what was left of the Pilgrims.

It does no good to rail that people "should" be any certain way, just to understand how they are. A medical system that does not force its providers to
compete for customers produces poor providers in short order. I have seen this
reported for years regarding other countries, and I have seen the same type of behavior in military health providers.

A better start would be to penalize those bringing absolutely frivolous lawsuits. If the spiraling costs of liability insurance could be contained, we would have a start to reasonably priced health care, just with a few simple refinements, and without a huge monolith governmental agency, and all the attendant waste and inefficiency.

Now, it's very late, and I have taken a powerful painkiller for my back, so I may think what I've just written makes no sense, when I read it in the morning, just as it may make no sense to you, now. If that's the case, maybe I can find better words to convey what I mean. :)

Best- and Happy Independence Day, y'all!

John
 
Spectre said:
I don't care if people are married to 14 other people, as long as they pay their bills, and it's consensual.
Click to expand...

That part I agree with.

Way back up there at the start of the thread...isolationism.

Back in the '60's, didn't the Birchers or somebody want to build a 10-mile high wall around the USA and tell the rest of the world to go **** themselves?

RB
 
I dont mean all hospitals have to be nationalized, but we do need a basic service across the board.
I waited to get my teeth fixed until I cam to japan.
Im getting four sets of bridges done here for 600$
In america it would have cost me 6000$

Yes, we need a basic nationalized health care system.
If it sux, then they can go to the more expensive private place. Perhaps that will provide the customer service focus we all want.

I dont know if the word isolationism is appropriate or even possible in the modern world.
I do know that the wars of the last 100 years all started in other f***ing countries over other f***ing peoples' problems with each other and yet, Americans died to finish it.

IF you disagree with that, then you might not be an American.
If you are, and thats ok with me, then you need not worry about the American presidential race as it has nothing to do with you.
 
Like I said it doesn't have to be socialized, just non-profit. The health care industry works best when it is goal oriented and not profit oriented...
 
Spectre said:
A better start would be to penalize those bringing absolutely frivolous lawsuits.
Click to expand...
Amen to that!

IMHO, what we need in this country is a "losers pay" legal system.

If I bring a bulls*** lawsuit against you, and lose, I should have to pay your legal bills. As it stands now, if I have enough money, I can bankrupt you due to the money you have to spend to defend yourself. I believe the UK has this "loser pays" system (someone correct me if I am wrong) and we need it here!
 
That would be so awesome, but the scumbag lawyers in this country would fight that to the death...
 
johntrout said:
...The health care industry works best when it is goal oriented and not profit oriented...
Click to expand...

Everything works better when it is goal oriented and not profit oriented--except greed.
 
There's a lot of other countries with a lot lower GDP than we have that have a much healthier population and a much lower infant mortality rate than the US has.

Here we try to put out the fire after it's already well ablaze, instead of cutting brush beforehand.

The problem with healthcare could be solved here if we put price caps on services. The problem is not frivolous lawsuits. It is that medical insurance companies took a bath when the stock marked dropped and now they are passing their losses on to the consumer.

Way more money going into medicaid and medicare actually provides services than money going into private health insurance where dividends to stockholders and administrative costs eat up a larger share of the money.

Old people have gov't sponsored health insurance. Even if they are millionaires they get medicare. If we means tested medicare it would free up a lot of gov't money to be used to treat other people.

Most people in poverty and even lower income working poor have medicaid and CHIPS(Childrens Health Insurance Program)

The problem is that for a lot of working people they are not old enough or poor enough. Also there is a sizeable chunk of people out there who could afford insurance, but since they aren't sick they don't get it. They spend the money on travel, luxury items etc. Then they get sick and of course don't have the money to pay the big bill so the hospital writes it off and raises the rates for the responsible people who have insurance, since medicare and medicaid will only pay so much.

If we could means test Medicaid and make people who can afford to have insurance but don't pay into some sort of a health insurance program that would free up a lot of money for additional coverage right there. Set a cap on the increase of fees for services and that would free up more.

Then they could take that money and if I was king I would offer free gov't smoking cessation to anyone who would take it. That's a big national health problem that costs us a lot of money.

Then I would screen every man, woman, and child for diabetes and hypertension and offer free medication and treatment for these 2 conditions. By making these a national priority hundreds of thousands of cases of heart disease, COPD, Kidney Failure, Blindness and other complications could be forestalled or eliminated. Freeing up tons of money we spend on treating these people when they have advanced to the point of expensive medical care.

I don't think a fully socialized plan would fly, but we could do stuff like the above just by making a few common sense changes that would result in a more fully insured, healthier population.
 
Nationalize health system... hmm, missed this one. I'd have to disagree here as well. "Goal oriented, not profit oriented" -- good one for a slogan. Unfortunately, on the large scale there is no better way to make something goal oriented than to make it that through profit, competition, and consumer choice - we, humans, are just made this way.

Lawsuits and overregulation brought US healthcare to the sore state where it is now, with hordes of bureaucratic parasites feeding of the backs of productive members of the industry and inventing new, more expensive barriers for potential players to enter the game. Regulating it even more will only make things worse, and as always, the workers will pay through taxation.

P.S. By the way, do you know how much is professional insurance for a neurosurgeon in California? It's $300,000
 
Spectre said:
...People naturally work hardest and best when they directly see the benefits. It has been true- and tested here in America- since Captain John Smith took over running what was left of the Pilgrims.l ...
Click to expand...

I think people work hardest when their life is at stake, but that had nothing to do with John Smith and the Pilgrims.

When Captain John Smith made his last visit to New England in 1616, the Pilgrims hadn't even set sail from England. They didn't arrive in Plymouth until 1620. John Smith went back to England in 1617, never to return to America. He never even met a Pilgrim.
 
I'd vote for Danny, Yvsa, and Spec if they ran. Id ask that they consider these other ideas as well:

Make gov't spending transparent, and allow taxpayers to decide how their taxes are spent. That may allow the populace to determine which programs need funding, and which are undesirable programs (like the Crusader weapon platform, which got/may get scrapped AFTER burning 10bil.)

Limit Fed govt, and give more power to local govt's (good luck on this one, since the Fed gov't is used to voting themselves raises instead of 'cost cuttin' measures, and election stuff seems to take place in the Fed side of things.)

"The system is set, ya can't change it with a ballot pull"--Z. DeLaRocha, Rage Against the Machine.

Keith
 
I would propose a law that all professional sports teams must be made up of players who were born and raised in the town where the team is. Or in the immediate vicinity at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top