Teabagged at the Library
I noticed today Teabaggers are now jockeying for protest space with the anti-war crowd outside the Ferguson Library on Saturday mornings.
Dudes, The library? That's like the public option of books! Socialists.
Wouldn't the mall plaza outside Barnes & Noble be decidedly more free market.
Move the protest there next time and see how cool that is with Paul Blart.
9 comments :
First of all, nice job on the 'teabagger' sexual inuendo. Typical and classy. Secondly, did you whine when the anti-war gang was there? Speaking of socialism..... Get your leftist talking points straight at least.
some over the top humor - like a sign that says "health care reform will kill your parents"
Yeah BlogStamford, get a clue! If you give everybody access to healthcare, pretty soon they'll demand things like universal access to education (oh wait...) and free interstate highways (um...). Those are socialist programs and must be stopped!! Communism!! Death panels!! Leprosy!! Did I get my tea party talking points straight?
JT/Streets, if you want your healthcare micromanaged and cost-rationed like those profitable, swell and slickly run gov't enterprises such as the DMV, Post Office and Social Security, I applaud the freedom for you both to enjoy them. Just don't require me to be a part of it with a gun to my head by Washington or I'll be fined and jailed via the IRS.
Yes, socialized medicine just like the UK and Canada and all it's ratioined care for all is akin to interstate commerce via the highway system. Nice analogy. Ah, public eduction ain't it great, speaking of federal run education. Now we can't have performance measures on under-performing teachers like they drill these students to jump through hoops like trained seals to make good test scores to show the school is not 'failing' can we?. Love those federal teachers unions and the Dept. of Eductaion, what a great job they've done all these years. Pray to the alter of gov't entitlements, just leave me the freedom to stay out of it if I chooose.
First, enough with the idiotic Glenn Beck talking points about being "forced" into "goverment-run healthcare." Get a clue: THEY ARE NOT CREATING A SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM.
Second, I mentioned education and the highway systems because they are programs that everyone pays for, regardless of whether you use it or not. Doesn't that fit the tea party definition of socialism? How come you don't mind paying for other people to go to school, but - God forbid - not to go to the doctor?
Next, I never said that our education system (nor DMV, etc.) was perfect. You inferred that. In fact, the education system needs a massive overhaul and modernization.
Finally, if you're so against "government entitlements," then I hope you don't ever plan on collecting Medicare, Social Security, unemployment, or any other "entitlement." Put your money where your mouth is and forgo any so-called "entitlements."
I wasn't advocating a specific course on health care in the post or condemning their right to protest. (JT = BlogStamford, BTW) I think some are drawing a lot of conclusions from a rather basic post poking fun at the Tea Party's rather one sided view of Government = Bad! Free market = Orgasm!
I'm simply commenting on the childishness of the overall tenants of the Tea Party, which seem to frame government always as bad, and the answer always as less government and never better or smarter government. How can we have a serious discussion about scale, efficiencies, corruption, etc with Hitler Mustaches and Death Panels in the mix.
Government is a non profit. The Post Office doesn't have to make a profit, it just as to deliver my letter from CT to CA a few days for the price of a stamp and not decide that certain locations are not profitable sectors and eliminate the service. UPS & FedEx haven't put the post office out of business or vice versa. (although email might!)
I think the whole country would be better off if we could come to the consensus government should represent the collective will of the people to service the public good. The free market does not always lead to nirvana, especially when their are powerful, entrenched interests that can run counter to the public good operating in the world. Regulations need to be put on the free market that protect the public good while recognizing those regulations could have other unintended consequences and should be carefully considered and tested.
Can we all agree though it's dick for anyone to be disturbing the library by encouraging beeping car horns outside? Perhaps the thoughtful protester should go outside the Government Center.
This is actually a hoot. These comments I guess work off the notion that the federal government exists to 'give' things to the masses and there is a big money tree in the back of the capital building in Washington where they grow the stuff endlessly like cornfields or something. The U.S. Debt is somewhere between 47 and 54 trillion dollars as we speak with 6 percent of that owned by the Chinese right now. Not a good time to start handing 1/6th of the total economy over to the bureaucrats in Washington DC with 10% unemployment (really 17% if you include those who've given up looking for work).
Reasonable people could deduce that if health care entitlements for the masses is so utopian and wonderful, then you would figure the similar attempts at this would be the great test cases at the state level. Well, in 2006 Massachusetts tried this right? Well, they achieved 97% coverage in a plan that closely mirrors the recent congressional bill drafted. Utopia, Shangri-La, Pandora right?
It had an "individual mandate" that made health insurance compulsory (sound familiar?). Well, it showed that the mandate would boot millions from their low-cost health plans and force them to pay higher premiums. That 'mandate' ended up with Mass. requiring over 80 different types of coverage no matter what. Think that's free? Think it will lower costs? Well, it actually started off increasing premiums by over 14 percent. Later, premiums grew 20 to 40 percent faster than the national average, partly because Massachusetts' individual mandate pretty much outlawed affordable health plans. Gee, that doesn't sound so good. No choice there.
Then, to deal with the cost of wonderful system, Massachusetts created a new commission that has recommended moving the entire market to a single, Canadian-style payment system that would encourage doctors and hospitals to 'ration' care. Oops.
The new commission also planned to use its power under the individual mandate to require "evidence-based purchasing strategies," which you know is another way of saying government bureaucrats may soon be deciding who gets medical care and who does not. Nah, too nutty to say death panels are around the corner, those nice elected officials really have a heart of gold, we can trust them. They can play referee between me and the doctor better than having a choice between all those mean insurance companies.
Forget the cost increase, you may also like the waiting lines up there as well to see the doctor at twice the national average. But oh you say, Massachusetts, after Washington, D.C., has the highest number of doctors per capita as any other state. Sheesh, how could that be?
Med school grads don't want to be primary docs as it is 'cause the hassle is not worth it now with all the federal mandates and health company red tape as it is, never mind the feds cutting Medicare reimbursement back to docs more and more over time. They're becoming specialists so they can pay off their loans quicker.
How are we going to accommodate 30+ million new federally health insurance covered people? Where are the docs going to come from, that same money tree in the back of the capital?
You're right. You've convinced me. We definitely have it better here with for-profit healthcare companies - and their 39% premium increases and legions of underwriters - than those idiots in France who are healthier than we are, spend less on healthcare per capita and as a percentage of GDP, and enjoy universal coverage that allows them to see any doctor, public or private. Now pass me some processed "food" so I can watch the Kardashians! Woo!
Yes, let's ignore the state experiments that are heavy in debt here and go over to Europe. That'll work. Just because the United Nations/World Health Organization loves the French plan more than the UK or Canadian plans, does not make it something that we can just swap out here in the U.S.
65 million citizens is different than 300 million.
The French plan was installed right after WWII when France was in tatters and eventually it became a right to all citizens and, true, it is cherished by the French as they have become accustomed to 'the system' paying for everything. It works for them and they are happy, good for them! Vive la France!!!
I will concede that their plan is better than the UK or Canadian plans as it is more of a blend of gov't and private plans. Having said that, the reality is that the costs are catching up to the French. They are now starting down the 'copay' route and service cuts to get a handle on prescription drug costs and hospital expenses.
That means, the maternity ward is just a little farther away to drive to, instead of closer. Hey, could it be that 'rationing' is taking place to keep from drowning in expenses? The program has been in the red for 20 years and currently to the tune of 10 to 15 billion Euros.
Hey, I think it would be great to do the kind of public/private plan here like France, but the evidence is in that the feds are like addicts when it comes to programs like Medicare and Medicaid as they're in the hole for 'bout 50 billion each.
The trouble is, once costs rise for a certain demographic of patient care, such as end of life (where the most costs are), you're not going to tell me that the feds won't try to trim costs. They tried it in France trimming coverage not related to a patient's illness, and there was a public revolt. "How can you take our coverage away, how heartless!" was the cry. It's not easy for elected officials to control these things once you open up the gates all the way.
Hate to say it, but high quality equals high cost. I don't want DMV healthcare. Let 'em send mail and print license plates, but I don't want a federal board between me and my doc deciding which surgery I can have. At least with the private carrier of my choice, I can appeal multiple times and litigate. Who do you complain to when the feds say no. Uh, nobody .....
My overall point is this. Try something like allowing companies to compete interstate and across the country and start with some sort of limit for tort reform before swapping out a high quality system with a euro style welfare system, mandate system. Find me a state version that works halfway decent and I'll think about it, but not now.
Processed food and Kardashians, sheesh man, what's that all about. You seem to have a self loathing about your country dude.
Post a Comment