An occasional series by one guy who thinks he might know how the Democrats can win back Georgia.
Much hoo-hah lately over the President's veto of S-CHIP funding. Especially here in Georgia where conservative Democrat Jim Marshall voted against funding and looks like he will not switch to override the veto.
Short and sweet entry in the playbook.
If you want to convince a fiscal conservative the government should be involved in providing healthcare, do not talk to me about it being any sort of right. Talk to me about how we already have government healthcare, but do it badly, i.e. using emergency rooms as primary providers, but there is a way to make it work. I might put ideology aside and begin listening.
Short and sweet entry in the playbook.
If you want to convince a fiscal conservative the government should be involved in providing healthcare, do not talk to me about it being any sort of right. Talk to me about how we already have government healthcare, but do it badly, i.e. using emergency rooms as primary providers, but there is a way to make it work. I might put ideology aside and begin listening.
9 comments:
I'm always willing to concede the basic philosophical premise to conservatives that health care is not a right. I prefer to begin the conversation from the point of view that's it's an *ought*. That is, if we're really supposed to be the greatest nation on earth, we ought to be able to make sure that living or dying or losing everything you own to a sudden illness or accident isn't entirely based on whether you managed to hit the big bucks. We landed on the moon, for chrissakes, why can't we make sure that one's cancer treatment isn't a luxury item?
Not bad.
You are right that the disaster we call a health system is closer to socialized medicine than to a free market medical system.
You are wrong to believe that even more government is the answer. The only thing that government delivers more efficiently than the free market is corpses.
Ahhhhhh. A true free marketer! So in this utopian free market health care world, would we simply leave the injured with no insurance in the street to die? Simply step around them?
est
I swinging more Libertarian in my own beliefs lately and I do resent the fact that a great deal of people who dont want to take care of themselves may now want me to pay for their health care. However, I do think when you are talking about children a case can be made for some sort of coverage from the tax payer.
I am also honest enough to admit that anything Bush vetoes must be worth passing.
These sites are so interesting to me. As a business owner, my employees only pay a net of $30 per month for quality insurance. When everyone that complains about this turns off their cell phone and takes care of their health first, then I would be more open to the debate. Healthcare is not that expensive for Insurance. Our business insurance allows for any medical condition to be on the plan. The horor stories just don't happen here.
I really want an honest debate on the subject. We need an American solution, not European or Canadian solution.
By the way, children in this bill are considered to be in need of coverage to age 25, that is just not right.
America is great for our individualism, not for socialism.
wow. i want to work for anonymous' company. that's a way better deal than emory is giving.
Post a Comment