We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
As Larry Summers put it during one of our interviews, 50 years from now people will remember that Obama gave us health care, not how long the recession lasted. The problem is that, in 2012, voters are still a lot more concerned about the recovery.
Note to Larry Summers ... If folks fifty years from now are "remembering" that Obama "gave us health care" they're remembering wrong. Like many Democrats frequently do, they created a crisis where there wasn't any and then proceeded to force a solution on the overburdened tax-paying public. This technique is how Democrats frequently try to convince us that they're relevant. If they don't do this constantly, the tax paying public might figure out that we don't need them any more.\
God knows, I don't.
Don't disagree but I view it slightly differently. I think the previous health care system was unstainable and thus heading towards crisis, so they trumped it up into an immediate crisis to justify a complete government takeover.
What most career legislators apparently don't undeerstand is that you can't manage a complex business through legislation and departments of regulators.
What is the/your evidence that "the previous health care system was un[sus]tainable and thus heading towards crisis"?
True, health care costs have been rising, but how does that constitute a crisis? People are living much longer today as a result of advances in medicine and getting value for their dollars spent. With more discretionary income available to devote to health care, some people are willing to spend it on their personal health care instead of tickets to the NFL's Superbowl. That's a problem? I'd say it's a good sign, not a bad sign, when people have enough money to spend on prolonging their lives and choose to do so.
Health care is not a commodity good. If you want a Blue Light Special, go to Kmart, or to Walmart. But if you want to live to the age of 100 or more---after years of treating your body with disdain---you will probably have to pay. The choice is yours: a new BMW and courtside seats at the Thunder-Heat basketball game, or a triple bypass operation that saves your life. What will it be? Think of it not as a crisis but as a lifestyle choice.
BThe crisis occurs when the consumer becomes totally disengaged from the cost and agrees to one medical proceedure after another, one presciption on top of another, without a thought to the price since "insurance is paying for it." Heck no, the entire population of working stiffs suffers when poor choices overextend the system. Bring competition back into the industry.
Medical savings accounts coupled with a major medical policy seem the best combo for those who value the future of our economy. Both should be tax-deductible and the MSAs carry over from year to year as a safety net for long-term care or disability.
I have two friends -- one 40 years old, one 63 -- who are facing choices about how to handle their stage 4 cancer. Do they drag out treatment for another three-to-six months of life? Do they spend that energy enjoying family and friends for a shorter time? Do they drain their resources and exhaust family and friends in the process? Our medical resources can't promise a better quality of life beyond a certain point. Such choices demand paying attention to your values, Obamacare is an endless sinkhole for fraud with no benefit to the patient.
I think what they were doing was try to cover up the fact that it is the parts of the healthcare system the government is already in charge of--Medicare and Medicaid--that are failing and dragging the healthcare system down. So you create a "brand new system," and then you can use the new system to bail out the government failures without the America public realizing that's what's really going on.
Our State legislature does it all the time, in terms of creating "new and improved programs" that just bail out old failing ones.
“The problem is that when you over-rely on the Predator, you miss out on the intelligence,”
This is a great example of the liberal no logic logic that just baffles me. So it is better to simply kill a suspected enemy and risk associated collateral deaths with a drone strike than capture and apply tough psychological pressure that causes no permenant physical harm to extract valuable intelligence because the methods to get that intelligence is mean and therefore invalidates the results.
My head started to swim just writing that.
So by constantly killing sources of new intelligence instead of capturing and harvesting that intelligence, when will we run out of the intelligence required to do more kills?