patrick.net

If all you need to do is give health care over to a free market system then why hasn’t it happened anywhere on earth that I am aware of? Its live and kicking in countries like india, thailand...etc nobody uses insurance in these countries. People just go to a doctor's visit and pay them cash. if somebody has a cold, they go to a cheap doctor and pay him $2. if its some serious illness they would go to skilled and popular specialist and pay him $10. The pricing pressure keeps the system very efficient and there is little wastage.Both the patients and hospitals feel the pricing pressure and they work to keep prices low.patients shop around for cheap priced.The hospitals compete for good doctors and always try to keep thier pricing competitive to attract patients.Same with testing labs ( X-rays, blood testing ..etc). For the GDP and wealth of the country , india is much more efficient in providing health care compared to US. If US was that efficient, i can gurantee that just the free market health care system would be enough for everybody ( even the small guy). Health care is very very affordable and the prices i have quoted are real ($2 and $10).Why do you think medical tourism is flourishing in some of these countries.what is so special in these countries that we cannot do? they buy equipment from US and thier doctors read the same books.. its just that the system in US is f**ked up. If you can fix these problems in US , you will have free market in health care : demand side : Current Insurance System making patients price insensitive and thus killing the most important aspect of a free market - pricing pressure ! supply side : regulation/red tape/licensing..etc limiting supply of doctors, medical schools, drug lobby..etc If you have any ideas to fix these, you can make health care free market.

From Price Waterhouse Coopers 2007 report on health care in India: http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/healthcare/pdf/emerging-market-report-hc-in-india.pdf "When it comes to healthcare, there are two Indias: the country with that provides high-quality medical care to middle-class Indians and medical tourists, and the India in which the majority of the population lives—a country whose residents have limited or no access to quality care. Today only 25% of the Indian population has access to Western (allopathic) medicine, which is practiced mainly in urban areas, where two-thirds of India’s hospitals and health centers are located. Many of the rural poor must rely on alternative forms of treatment, such as ayurvedic medicine, unani and acupuncture." or "some communicable diseases once thought to be under control, such as dengue fever, viral hepatitis, tuberculosis, malaria, and pneumonia, have returned in force or have developed a stubborn resistance to drugs. This troubling trend can be attributed in part to substandard housing, inadequate water, sewage and waste management systems, a crumbling public health infrastructure, and increased air travel" or "While the rural poor are underserved, at least they can access the limited number of government-support medical facilities that are available to them. The urban poor fare even worse, because they cannot afford to visit the private facilities that thrive in India’s cities." or "Because so little insurance is available to the population of India, out of- pocket payments for medical care amounted to 98.4% of total health expenditures by households, as of the most recent (2001–02) census. Without insurance, the poor must resort to taking on debt or selling assets to meet the costs of hospital care. It is estimated that 20 million people in India fall below the poverty line each year because of indebtedness due to healthcare needs." Sorry to have to tell you this but Thailand has a public health care system. From Thailand Health Profile 2001 to 2004 published by the Thai government: "The MoPH is the core agency that implements the universal coverage of health care or 30-baht healthcare scheme, beginning on a pilot scale in six provinces in April 2001 and later expanded to another 15 provinces on 1 June 2001, finally to all provinces in January 2002. As a result, in FY 2003, 47.7 million Thai citizens or 74.7% of all 63.8 million people nationwide were covered by the universal healthcare scheme, leaving only 3.2 million people or 5% of total population without any health insurance coverage, while the rest had already been covered by other health insurance schemes" The Indian model certainly represents a bright future for America. After all India ranks 112th in health care according to the WHO. Since America ranks 37th (pretty bad since we rank #1 in costs) this is certainly something we should aspire to. Denying allopathic health care to 75% of the population would certainly cut costs in a big way. Good plan. No politician should have any trouble selling this to the American public. Want to take another stab at it?

Well, TPB, I have also noticed that your position is all over the map at different times. This is why I label you as being confused (and confusing).

interpretame says

nowhere but up from here says

BTW, another sign of our nation’s DWINDLING ability to garner RESPECT: after a FIFTEEN YEAR ABSENCE the Russkies have at least TWO “nucular” subs patrolling off our West Coast.

Must have something to do with Putin taking his shirt off…..

No comrade, I think it’s most probably related to the fact that WE’RE BROKE, WEAK & STUPID.

Speak for yourself.

chrisborden says

I will never understand why some of you think that “owning” a house somehow makes you better than those of us who don’t play the debt game. Who cares what you think your house is worth? Does that make you somehow better or deserving of some kind of praise? I don’t care about your obsession with material “wealth.” You are spiritually bankrupt if you base your entire self worth on the supposed “value” of your home or you believe that somehow life is not worth living unless you can prove to everyone how “rich” you are, even if inside you know you are bankrupt. You are kidding yourself if you think that debt is good and that having a house is the ticket to pure happiness. It is far from it.

There are billions of poor people who are morally and spiritually bankrupt. The sum total of your net worth does not make any difference when it comes to spiritual or moral questions.

House is investment of lender not you house norminal owner who is debtor.

bob2356 says

While the rural poor are underserved, at least they can access the limited number of government-support medical facilities that are available to them. The urban poor fare even worse, because they cannot afford to visit the private facilities that thrive in India’s cities.

You sit here and read about India in Pricewaterhousepoopers and think you know everything. The above is blatantly false. What do you think India is run by some Bush kind of idiot who has outlawed government-support medical facilities in Cities ? Does it even make sense ? Govt run medical facilities exist at both rural and urban level. Search for AIMS new Delhi and then figure out if new delhi comes under urban or rural area ? I hope you can figure out at least that ? There must be at least 10 govt hospitals in a typical metro in India. Agreed quality of care will be far worse than a private run hospitals, but at least it is there. Some health care is better no health care ? Even a fool will not argue with it ? Would you ?

The Original Bankster says

bob2356 says

When it comes to healthcare, there are two Indias: the country with that provides high-quality medical care to middle-class Indians and medical tourists, and the India in which the majority of the population lives—a country whose residents have limited or no access to quality care.

thats true for more than just healthcare. For instance, the technology companies operate in what is called a SEZ ( Special Economic Zone ). They have a completely different tax schedule, basically a country within a country. Those who are not involved with the SEZ basically live in an entirely different political body, a much poorer, much more poverty stricken political body.

Again all lies...SEZ are there to give favorable tax treatment to some industries to promote them. It is not free market, but then India is a mixed economy. Some aspects are free market, while others are socialist. They did not have a banking system collapse that US just went through. There are 2 sides to every story. So yeah when you go to a typical nationalized bank in India you see the employees don't give much shit to the customer...that is wrong...In a private system you get at least fake smiles when the person behind the counter sees a customer with cash...Try arguing this lack of a good customer service to a bank employee in India, he or she will immediately point to bank failures in US...So what is better: losing your money entirely or just dealing with few rude bank employees ? :-) Go figure and then post your answer here. Regarding your comment regarding SEZs having a separate political structure ..it is so full of crap ...that it is not even worth commenting.... Also do not assume that every software company in India is in SEZ (special economic zone), some are outside of it too...Even china has SEZ....and they also have some red communist willing to shoot anyone who does not agree with their point of view...At least India has a functioning democracy...

Comparing Indian health care and US health care is a waste of time....India has a long way to go before it can catch up to the west in terms of per capita income etc..In India rich and the middle class just like USA can get the best care health care by going to private doctors, except that there is is no concept of health insurance. You pay from your pocket. And when your pocket is empty you go to the nearest govt hospital. For a rural patient that govt hospital may be very far away sometimes...In US that "govt hospital" does not exist....if you are a poor inner city ghetto patient you probably have to go to emergency room ...and ignore the bill when it is sent to you ? Is there any other way ? Also In India when people die in Hospitals and even when it may be because of some malpractice, people usually do not sue etc...Hindu society has been in general quite fatalistic...If you happened to die in a hospital it is probably because of your bad Karma...Hope for better luck in the next life rather that trying to find a medical malpractice lawyer :-) Bottom line India and USA are very different societies and cultures. Only commonality is democratic system. So don't waste your time here pointing India's bad health care. Better focus on fixing US health care.

I gave india just to illustrate one thing : efficiency in private health care system. If you just look at the private health care system in india, its much more "efficient" than US...period. Don't compare a poor developing country to a developed rich country in absolute terms. BTW, is this the same price water coopers which was involved in the biggest ponzi scheme in india ( satyam scandal) ?. I have stopped reading a while back, these fake reports that these yuppies write to impress thier bosses. Just because its in fine print in glossy paper from price water cooper does not make it true. These are the same guys who wrote reports for the derivative trading.anyway..i am from india and i know that health care is better than US for a common man. If US was as poor as india , with the current health care system, 90% of people would die outside the emergency rooms waiting.

interpretame says

“More Good News….” I think we’re quickly approaching the point where the only ‘Good News’ left would be to read that Air Force One went down in flames with the President, ViceP & Treasury Secretary aboard. Of course if it crashed & burned right onto Goldman Sach’s main corporate offices, then it would be GREAT NEWS!!

What is all with the presidential bashing. This problem started way before him. Although I do not agree with some of his plans, I am happy we actually have a person who is trying to fix things instead of pretending that nothing is wrong. I am against universal healthcare, but I like the fact that for once we have someone who has the guts to take on the problem.

wrong forum>?

Some Guy >Because there are die-hard republicans who are so bent on blaming the democrats for EVERYTHING, that >they completely ignore reality. They have already forgotten that the republicans had control of the White >House AND Congress, and far from solving any problems, they in fact CREATED the problems we are >currently stuck with. Their myopia is so complete that they can’t even remember that we had a housing >market crash and a failing economy before Obama even got into office. They forget that Goldman Sachs >was bailed out under Bush’s watch. So what exactly are you saying here? It is ok for Obama to make bigger mistakes than the previous guy? Our illegal president is pawned off to us like he is a genus. I can't make up my mind on who to laugh at, him or us? BTW, I can't find any die hard repulicans anymore. Here is reality some guy... BOTH republicans and democraps made this entire mess. The democraps happen to be the ones running the show right now. So hell yes, they get the blame.

Most politicians are crooks! Prostitution is illegal everywhere in Illinois, but for some reason every Chicago suburb has brothels running legally. The reason why is politicians & police officials are stuffing their pockets with cash from the Outfit while they look the other way. Same thing is happening with gambling when local bookies use the same local phone number for 10 years for giving odds & placing bets without any worry at all. It's one big corrupt clusterfuck & elitist morons like Nomo want to give these crooks even more power & control over us...

zetabeos1 says

” We don’t call it socialized Postal Service” Because there isnt one. What is DHL, UPS doing ? There will be no socialized postal service in the future, its obsolete. In socialist nations, progress at the price of job loss for workers would not be permitted.

The postal service is a pretty efficient enterprise. If you discount the pillaging of their retirement and benefit accounts (pretty much the same thing done to every other company unlucky enough not to go bankrupt) you start to see that their a pretty tight ship.

Funny how 'community organizers' hate it when communities organize against them.

justme says

When TPB says he is not a Republican and not a liberal, I think his heart is more or less in the right place and he is just confused because he just “knows” he is not liberal or progressive. When the Wanker says he despises W Bush, I do not believe him for a second. Wanker is full-blown neocon shill.

What a total moron and unrepentant idiot you are, justmoi. Just because someone is not in favor or in support of one thing they must, in your shit~for~brains world, be in favor and/or support of the other. WRONG. Yours is the logic of the simple~minded~baboon. But thanks for playing, retard.

Police and firemen and elementary school teachers are all "socialized" but they also all work reasonably well. And you still have the private option if you want extra. Even the military is "socialist" isn't it? Involuntary taxes pay for it. I like free markets in general, but you have to admit some socialized things work well enough via involuntary taxes, and would be only for the rich in a totally market-oriented system.

Here we go false left vs right paradigm again. Obama is simply a continuation of the previous administration's agenda - with a few tweaks to keep those on the D branch entertained. How pathetic. Neoturds and Libtards - you're being used wake the fuck up before it's too late. If the secret were to get out that 45 million ILLEGAL ALIENS were going to be covered by this I think it would fail instantly.

9 out of 10 of the protesters don't even know what they're protesting. Other than "whatever Obama wants, we disagree with", I haven't seen a single unified message. Do you people really think that the current status quo is good? Polling indicates that more than 85% of people think the current system is in need of reform. If not single payer, if not a public option, if not swiss or denmark-style insurance requirements, what do you propose to keep costs down? Be honest. Instead of yelling and looking like a bunch of raving idiots, have a plan and present it. Negative ideologies don't win arguments, well-reasoned opposition does. If the plan is to keep the status quo, then you're going to lose the debate no matter how loudly you yell. So what's the plan?

zetabeos1 says

You can say the same when Asian nations took much of the highly paid manufacturing jobs from Silicon Valley back in the 80-90s. For the past 5 years, highly paid R&D and tomorrow Doctors. The bottom line is global competition.

Well, no, not really. Talented skilled positions will always be in demand locally, particularly jobs that simply can not be done remotely, like physicians. "R&D" hasn't and won't "go" anywhere. Competent companies learned long ago that you hire the best designers, most brilliant researchers, and smartest engineers that you can afford to if you want to compete, and you hire them wherever you can find them. Of course, there aren't nearly as many of these skilled positions as the unskilled ones, which is why the apples and googles of the world have revenue per employee numbers in the millions while manufacturing industries are lucky if they can make $50k per employee. What we're seeing now is the end of the industrial era. Much like tractors, combines, and other farming equipment put an end to the agricultural era over 100 years ago, automation and robotics are putting an end to the factories. As margins were squeezed in agriculture, farmers were increasingly turning to practices like indentured servitude and slavery at the end. Today, industrialists are turning to cheap labor in china and the like. Manufacturing jobs will never return to the west. Manufacturing itself will, but the jobs will not, because factories are increasingly automated. The only human labor required for many products is machine maintenance. As soon as shipping costs exceed the labor cost of maintenance technicians, all those factories will relocate to the country where the products will be sold. As a society, we must accept another decrease in standard work weeks. When agriculture declined, we went from a standard 72-hour work week (12 hours a day, 6 days a week) to a 40-hour work week (8 hours a day, 5 days a week). It is inevitable that we move to a 20 to 30 hour week (5 or 6 hours a day, 4 days a week) to maintain employment levels as they are. This is not a bad thing. The primary benefit of human progress is to make our lives more enjoyable. Less working and more living is the entire reason why we have "growth" in the first place. This is what prosperity means.

The majority of idiots who voted for Hussein Osama didn't know what or whom they were voting for either. Most of them saw a mulatto and thought it would be 'cool' to vote for someone who was such an unlikely candidate: paper thin resume and with a checkered past ('Reverend Doctor' Jeremiah Wright Junior the Third, anyone?). It didn't matter to these nimrods, as long as he was not a republican. I despise what 'W' did to the country and I hate the morons who voted for him, but the asswipes who put Hussein in power are no better than the one's who gave 'W' his victory. The politics may be polar opposites, but the mentality of both groups is not very different: get someone into the White House you'd be comfortable sharing a beer with.

blah says

If the secret were to get out that 45 million ILLEGAL ALIENS were going to be covered by this I think it would fail instantly.

Well, there are only 11 million illegal immigrants in this country, so who are the other 34 million that we're going to cover? Are you really trying to claim that every uninsured person in this country is an illegal alien?

When does health care legislation really depend on town hall meetings? This is a total red herring made into a political-media football. Appealing to some high notion of civil discourse is laughable, especially by those who will eventually blame the failure of health care reform on some right wing conspiracy despite having control of both Congress and the Presidency. Sure, there is misinformation, but the problem and potential solution are complex and difficult--a rare, but more objective headline.

What is your explanation of Obama's behavior when it comes to hiding documents from his past: original birth certificate, school records, passport information (travelled to Pakistan while in college when it was not hospitable place for US passport holders)?
What is so special about his birth certifiacte that he would rather pay large sum of money to lawyers fighting for the dismissal of eligibility lawsuits rather than submit the evidence of being a natural-born citizen to the court?

It does not make any sense.
It should be a trivial issue, yet we still do not have a proof that Obama was indeed born in the USA.
There are rewards out there for anyone who can prove Obama's birthplace. Yet nobody is claiming them.

What happened to the transparency promise? Was it just another election campaign lie?

I think that he is not a natural-born citizen, and that is the reason he does not want courts to examine the evidence.

An interesting article on media coverage of recent presidential candidates:
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=106051

"You’re RIGHT of course. This problem started way before Obama. However Obankster has managed to do MORE DAMAGE to the U.S. economy in a mere 200 days of office than the moronic GW Bush was able to inflict in 2920 days. Obama’s promises of change and reform were all BS and he’s proven to be an even GREATER lackey of Wall St than his mentally-impaired predecessor." I would like to know specifically "how" he has caused more damage to the ecomomy? I would probably not have made all of the same choices he has, but I also do not have all of the information he has to make choices with. I personally think it is WAY too early to fully predict the impact of his politics on the nations long term economy. It is much easier to judge someones choices from a far then it is to be that person who has to make the choices.

Well, you can bet giraffe something's wrong.

As you can see from the above birth certificate, not only is Nomograph born in Kenya but he is also related to our president. And the most egregious: His mother's name is Stanley Ann. Why no "e" on the end of her name, Nomo? What was she hiding?

zetabeos1 says

we find realtors still silent on allowing transparency in the bidding process.

Was there any serious proposal for transparency in real estate bidding? Maybe I should try to push for it if no one else is really doing it. How about these as basic rules: 1. Sellers must accept their asking price. 2. Bids must be public: amount of bid, name of bidder, date and time of bid. 3. Actual sale price must be recorded and made easily searchable online. Currently none of that is true.

The Democrates don't need the Republican votes to pass any HealthCare bill. The Dems have the majority, this is a fruitless effort on there part to have townhalls. They can do it all, without much of a legislative battle. Call it what it is, a powergrab. Plain and simple.

Police and firemen and elementary school teachers are all “socialized” but they also all work reasonably well. And you still have the private option if you want extra. Even the military is “socialist” isn’t it? Involuntary taxes pay for it. I like free markets in general, but you have to admit some socialized things work well enough via involuntary taxes, and would be only for the rich in a totally market-oriented system.

Fire, police, and the military don't make money. Health care makes money. If the police department had $30,000,000 CEOs and stock prices and you could raise your "coverage" rates to the breaking point to whatever the market would bear, then we'd have people in town halls worried about the horrible hoards of "evil doers" who would rush in to rape my dog if we were to consider eliminating 25% of profit taking. The fire department is a relic of independent PROPERTY PROTECTION companies, a sterling example of how the rich get us ALL to pay for services that doesn't pay to privatize. The military protects industry's access to resources, sadly that access is being whored out to other countries. Iraq oil for Europe. The police will keep order if the serfs get uppity, and that would be a lot easier if we all voted to get rid of each other's guns. Look at how the push to privatize revenue streams (Jersey Turnpike anyone?) and socialize burdens (employer health care) has the two-fold benefit of taking the chains off corporations/very rich and squishing the remaining jelly out of the middle class.

I'm old enough to remember my parents fussing about "socialized medicine" during the 1965 Medicare debates. Turns out the system served my mother quite well for almost 20 years. The old folks on Medicare (and I am soon to be one) should realize that they are on a single payer system now, and that most of them have paid nowhere near enough throughout their lives to provide the kind of services and proceedures that are available today, and that some degree of "rationing" as distasteful as it sounds is inevitable. Too many people believe that they can spend thier lives eating & drinking to excess, avoiding any form of exercise and smoking and still have society spend unlimited amounts of money prolonging the inevitable in the last few years of thier lives. It is a model that just cannot continue.

Gee, this is all so Sudan.
Is Nomo a giraffe dodger? A paper tiger? A horn dog? Did he earn his stripes in Tarzana? And why does he visit Chad rooms?
Rhino these are tough questions but I guess it's irrelevant and irrelevant never forgets. Tusk tusk.
But does he still work for Stanley Tools to make a Livingston? Or is he feeding us a lion? Well, what's good for your goose is good for Uganda.
Mercy, I Congo any more since I feel endangered so I don't Rwanda continue. Actually. I just want to gorilla steak, then monkey around for a while. Maybe even have a Reese's.
Let's face it. It's a jungle out there and things aren't exactly divine. Or maybe I'm out of my tree acting like a sap.

Okay, while I agree with your arguement, please don't use such language as 'You pricks!'. It makes those who do use it appear ignorant. Leave that to the opposition. As for the concern about poor lifestyles, it's a valid issue, but the Obama plan works on it, by keeping health insurance private, yet creating a public option to prevent health insurance companies from colluding in the market place as an 'industry'. If these companies know that they can't discriminate anymore against the unhealthy, they will look for every way possible to cut expenses. The public option will prevent those methods from including watering down policies, and will steer the insurance companies towards preventative care. Imagine if each major health insurance provider had its own little league team in nearly every American community, to encourage children to exercise and play team sports, as those that do are less likely to become obese both as kids and adults and have the expensive health problems that go with obesity and lack of physical activity. They could set up the teams as non-profits, and schedule games against other healthcare companies teams, so they might even write off the expenses as charitable donations, and kids across the country, including the inner cities, would finally get to play outdoors again. Anti-smoking, anti-drinking, and drug prevention groups would likely get assistance from health insurance companies, in the short term for the tax write offs, but the end result would be less health care used by smokers, alcoholics, and drug addicts. This would also pit the health insurance lobby against the agribusiness and food manufacturing lobbies, so that healthier foods get the subsidies, not processed garbage, as it stands now. When healthy foods get cheaper than fattening foods, the poor and middle class will choose them over the unhealthy products, and eat better, saving insurance companies money. This could also extend to any lobby whose product or service causes significant levels of ill health in the peope the health insurance industry would be covering in a nondisciminatory system. Obama's plan uses the strenths of the capitolist system to tackle the health ills of our country. This plan is very free market. Republicans are just mad a Democrat is the one proposing it, and has a shot at getting it implimented, winning the glory for his party. Demint said it best, if Obama's plan fails, it will be his Waterloo. If Obama wins, it's the Rebublican party that will be sent off into obscurity for 30-40 years. That is why they are so desperate and pulling out all the stops. Tenpoundbass says

To hear you guys tell it, everyone in the hospital are Booze swigging, pot toking, junk shooting, bacon eating gluttons. What about people that are health conscious but they have defective organs, no matter what they eat, they need major medical care. Where does the Emperors thumb fall for those folks. Do you guys give a thumbs up or down. … You Pricks!

>>So by nature I will be all over the map, I lean one way or another depending on where the issue pendulum swings, not the party axe. But the problem is that your leanings often are mutually inconsistent, in the sense that you want to have it both ways, although that just is not possible. What I'm trying to tell you is that you need to look into the logic and consistency of your statements. If there is a lot of inconsistency, how do you write laws to cover all the special inconsistent cases that you want? If the law is not or cannot be made detailed enough, then which of the two mutually exclusive principles should apply? There just does not appear to be any logic to many of your positions. I'm not saying this as a put-down, I just wonder how this is supposed to work and how you reconcile it all.

"Asshole republicans don’t even know what they’re protesting against" I'd say the Democrats don't even know what they're rallying FOR. Obama does even seem to know whats in the plan. I know this: the goverment makes an inefficient mess out of everything it touches. While our heath care system may need some reform, it doesn't need to be run by the government.

Take a break and listen to Obama's Town Hall meeting on Health Care Reform.

Police and firemen and elementary school teachers are all “socialized” but they also all work reasonably well. And you still have the private option if you want extra. Even the military is “socialist” isn’t it? Involuntary taxes pay for it. I like free markets in general, but you have to admit some socialized things work well enough via involuntary taxes, and would be only for the rich in a totally market-oriented system.

Those are all public goods though. They can't be provided by markets. Health care can be provided by markets as long as it's not distorted by certain regulations and tax advantages. http://www.reason.com/news/show/132018.html

I was just trying to show the potential societal benefits of the Obama healthcare plan that might come from incentivizing health insurance companies to do things that will make Americans healthier, not personally attack you or your family. However, since you brought it up, I have a serious caffine addiction, and do like sweets and fast food on occasion. I still believe in taxing vices that have economic costs for society, even if it means I'll be paying a dollar or two extra for an order of Dominos pizza or a can of Chock Full of Nuts at the supermarket. I believe in freedom to put whatever you enjoy into your body, so long as nobody else gets hurt, but nothing comes for free. Too often, the producers of unhealthy products reap the financial rewards while the government picks up the cost in the emergency room. That's socialism for the corporation. Tenpoundbass says

futuresmc says

Imagine if each major health insurance provider had its own little league team in nearly every American community, to encourage children to exercise and play team sports, as those that do are less likely to become obese both as kids and adults and have the expensive health problems that go with obesity and lack of physical activity. They could set up the teams as non-profits, and schedule games against other healthcare companies teams, so they might even write off the expenses as charitable donations, and kids across the country, including the inner cities, would finally get to play outdoors again. Anti-smoking, anti-drinking, and drug prevention groups would likely get assistance from health insurance companies, in the short term for the tax write offs, but the end result would be less health care used by smokers, alcoholics, and drug addicts.

Sounds like I hit home. Where’s the list of shit’s that’s bad for you. Do you itemize, I bet you scratch off the items you enjoy. What about folks that over do it when they exercise, do you have a mechanism to tell those folks how their overly active life style is a detriment to the economy. Or do they get a pass be cause at least rolls of fat doesn’t protrude from the back of their Hospital gown and they aren’t coughing and hacking up chunks of Lungs? My dad drank a bottle of V.O. daily, on top of the Schlitz malt liquor he kept in the fridge smoked 2 packs of cigs a day. And died of Alzheimer at the ripe age of 72. Alzheimer he probably got from years of my mom cooking in cheap aluminum pots. Other than that he was fit as a fiddle up to the very end. My Grandmom died at 62 of cancer and heart disease and didn’t drink a drop or smoke a puff in her life. She was T-Totaller. To anyone proposing a “HAPPYNESS” tax I say unleash a Tampa Rally rabble mob down on you like a rat running from an angry nest of African Honey bees. That or… There’s not a lot to be happy about these days, and I suspect it will get worse, despite what the Media would have you believe. Vices will always be in greater demand when times are the hardest. Tax those items and you’ll just hurt the economy worse, because we’ll just black market those goods and cut business and the taxation of it. Black Market bacon, smokes and cookies and soda, it’s not that hard to imagine. But none the less we don’t need some Snot nosed Liberal prick Permission to consumer vices. Even if that Prick thinks he knows what’s best.

It is amusing to watch this debate as someone with actual experience of different systems. I have had the best health insurance possible in the US and also experienced both the private and public options in New Zealand and Australia. The public systems in New Zealand and Australia are excellent. The only complete breakdown in medical care I have ever received was at one of the best hospitals in the US with great insurance. The doctors were pleasant and the hospital was nice but the medical staff didn't have the very basic knowledge required to fix a simple problem. People screaming against public health care tend to be poor and uneducated - in other words the same people who will pay almost nothing into a public option and receive all the benefits. The evidence for this is the semi-literate rants on this and many other sites. I am aggressively pro free market but I'm sorry to tell you health care in the US is not good. The poor in the rest of the first world are healthier than the richest Americans. That should be some kind of clue that not everything is OK.

This is out of hand. Government is not the answer. Please open your eyes and see the truth. Break the monopolies of big corps, but do not give it to the most corrupt monopoly of all. Big Government. Concentration of power and decision making IS THE problem, not the lack of. This will only make things worse, at least the corrupt health insurance giants have to compete with each other. The government doesn't have that inconvenience and will forever raise taxes and steal from the general health care fund to pay for other "needs" LOL that they have in their head at the time. I can't believe that anyone could look at the government and their behavior and say hey, we can trust them! Let's give them the power. What a joke!