I for one do not want to have choice presented to me at every turn. I am busy enough as it is without having to wade through competing options for provision of gas, electricity, and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Printable View
I for one do not want to have choice presented to me at every turn. I am busy enough as it is without having to wade through competing options for provision of gas, electricity, and so on.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
Then you have made your choice. Don't force that on me, and I won't force my choice on you. Simple, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Why should I pay taxes for the socialist government provided single military for? If there were several choices, I could choose which military I'd want to defend me.Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
I think I'd prefer to choose a far cheaper one than the one I currently have. Surely we don't need that many planes, bombs and troops. New Zealand has a cheaper military, and they've never really been invaded.
Then ammend the Constitution and you're on your way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
Many people, not just Americans would argue it is their large military presence that sorta mitigates anyone invading NZ, or CAnada for that matter. It is allowed some stupid people in this country to pretty much wipe out our military capabilities from what they were in the 50's and 60's. Still doesn't change the fact people need a military so they can at least assert some form of their sovreignty and participate as somewhat equal partners in UN based military actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo
So let me get this straight: You look for the best deal for your utilities, or the way you get your TV (cable or dish?),the best deal to buy a car or a mortgage; and THEN it is too much hassle to shop for the best deal on health insurance? You just let the government assume that right?Quote:
Originally Posted by BDunnell
Sorry Ben, I don't buy THAT for a second. You may be very left of center, but if you shop carefully for a tin of soup or anything else, you should be given the option of shopping for your insurance. I am not even given the option in my country....and that is my only wish. That I had a choice....
They wont say they want Canada's system in the bills before the Senate and Congress because they know they would lose half the "Blue Democrats" and not get the bill passed. They want to enter the free market with their version of health insurance, and use the private insurers to subsidize their scheme. When the private insurers find out they cannot compete because of this, they will mostly bail on the whole idea of providing health insurance and over time, you end up with a mainly private system. This is the theory I have heard, and it I do think there is some merit to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan H
I have no problem with private insurers existing with public system, but the government in question here is losing money hand over fist with the medicare/medicaid systems in existence now. Why should they regulate the game and participate in it ? I have no love for profiteering and HMO's not doing right by their patients, but a more unrestricted competitive enviroment would punish bad insurers. What the government of the US wants to do is play in the game and regulate it further. Right now, health insurers have to go state by state, which is a LOT more inefficient......
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090825/...bama_economy_5
They can't even get the deficit number right. Who still believes that this health care plan will "only" cost $1,000,000,000,000? Anyone?
Forget all the other arguments, how do we afford this?
Did you read the link you posted? I quote from it:Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck34
The new numbers come as he prods Congress to enact a major overhaul of the health care system — one that could cost $1 trillion or more over 10 years.
$1 trillion over 10 years = $100 million per year.
If you wish that's only 4% of the $2.26 trillion on health that the U.S. spent care in 2007.
http://www.cms.hhs.gov/NationalHealt...s/proj2007.pdf
4% of total outlays to overhaul a system that at the moment isn't working sounds like an absolute bargain. Simple mathematics tells us that.
That would be $100 billion a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rollo