Replies to post #96126 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[GEO928]

wbmw....your assestment of my feeling/perception is quite accurate in the larger sense....and, you did cover a decent bit of ground....

allow me to respond to one part in particular as it is the basis of my discontent with the HC package.....

Because health care reform did not close the loopholes, you seem to be against it. However, I don't think that's entirely consistent. While it would have made you happy to close the loopholes, the main goal of the bill was to provide better access to affordable health care to actual taxpayers, and it succeeded in doing that. It would be one thing to oppose the bill if it expanded care to non-taxpayers, but it did not do that. It merely maintained the status quo, while expanding the coverage to more legitimate people. So for that reason, you should not be opposing it.

It's more than just closing loopholes.....it's a matter of the way in which business is conducted in congress and the "agendas"....right now the Dems are "in" lead by the progressives....when the Repubs are in, they, too, are guilty of a lot of wrong-doing (agendas)....

my main objection is twofold:

1) how could fixing the health care system possibly take 2000+ pages to repair? how do student loans figure into health care? and we can trade stories back and forth about the myriad of provisions in the bill....

2) I firmly believe this HC bill is no more than an an instrument of "social justice" and a framework for some type of socialist structure.....

as an aside, I actually downloaded and scanned/read HR 3200 {which is not the # of the bill passed, but, was the fore-runner}....it was outrageous to put it mildly.

If we wish to "give better access" to HC for all (and, I don't really believe that's necessary....but, let's go with it)....here's a way to fix it and probably be palatable to most Americans (it actually fixes two problems....access & catastrophic): have the US government insure the "extremes" of health care....that is, at the basic level (and there are levels of care) have the government pay for those who truly cannot afford HC ins.......and at the other end, have the gov. participate with private insurers in catastrophic ocurrences.

let the rest of the population use the private sector....and, yes there are some other things which must be done to make insurance transferrable thru periods of unemployment and the pre-existing conditions must be addressed.....etc.

does that take over 2000 pages.... involvement of the IRS....establishment of over 150 new agencies....and a host of preferential treatment given to minorities? I find the present approach to fixing health care totally unreasonable and excessive....THAT'S MY OPINION

most importantly....I do not consider health care a right because it is a state of technology which improves and developss over time....if it was a right....it would be a "constant" which has always existed.....IMO

and, along with that thinking....HC is not a "system"....that's the "dupe"....we've turned it into a "sytem" in the last 30 years with all the government intervention and deal making by both sides of the isle over time....

HC is a business....and, if we approached it as such, everyone: patients, doctors, and the entire medical community would be better off.....IMO

it was a business in the 1950's and 60's....a doctor set up a private practice or was hired by a public hospital/facility....and,IMO, the care was far, far better than today....