Comments on: Calling socialized medicine by another name doesn’t make it better

By: Sue

Sue — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 20:34:57 +0000

Hey all… take a little peek at this article in the Denver Post regarding health care in America.

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_%3ca%20class=’srNewsTitleLink’%20href=’http:/www.denverpost.com/ci_9019724′%20onclick=’s_objectID=’News_ResultPG1_ResultPos3′;self.getUserType?getUserType(’Buyer-News’):void(0);var%20s=s_gi(s_account);s.linkTrackVars=’events,products’;s.linkTrackEvents=’scView’;s.products=’Search;’+this.hostname;s.events=’scView’;s.tl(this,’o');if(self.tagSearchIADID)%20tagSearchIADID(this);’%3e

By: Willis_Leon_Johnson

Willis_Leon_Johnson — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:38:01 +0000

John, from post #2 in this thread;

“Government can initiate a universal program that has an independent board, operating at arms length fom the federal government, that operates exactly in the manner of any corporation with executives whose salaries are based on meeting objectives.”

So, it will be a government program under a series of dummy corporations?

It’s one of those details that causes devilish problems for you position that it will not be “government” running the show and forcing “mandatory” membership?

By: John B.

John B. — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:18:45 +0000

Willis, you gave an outline, not a plan. As to my plan, the devil, as always, is in the details. And there are numerous details. A plan like this requires hundreds of pages to set forth all of the things that have to be done. That can’t be done here as you ubdoubtedly know. As to free emergency treatment, when you make the obvious an issue, you’re obviously getting desperate to stay in the game–and that is what it has been for you. I said that you can have the “win” if that is what you so desperately need. Call it a win by default because I am tired of the back and forth. Your tactic of continual inane questions, assertions and shots just to stay in your little game of overblown ego is not worth anybodys time that can be used for more productive uses. Celebrate! High fives all around! You’re the man!

By: Willis_Leon_Johnson

Willis_Leon_Johnson — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 13:01:21 +0000

John, there has never been any “free services” at the emergency room. The costs were picked up by the people that actually paid their medical bills.

I did notice one minor little problem with your post, no details of how your plan would be accomplished.

You required details from me, but not yourself.

Is this because you expect more of me becaue you know I can handle the load, or because you expect less form yourself because you know you can’t perform to the same standards you set for others?

From your earlier post: “I think it is totally unworkable and a series of sound-bite doctrinaire statements with no details of how it could possibly be done”

By: Proteus

Proteus — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 00:49:34 +0000

Willis - your knowledge of medical and constitutional matters seems to be somewhat limited; and what you do know has obviously been polluted by Libertarian and John Birch Society ideology. So let’s move on to the really good stuff - what do you think you know about RELIGION?

By: John B.

John B. — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 22:50:46 +0000

Pay attention. I never said the PROVIDERS would be anything other than free market. This is insurance, not the dreaded totally socialist system that bothers you so. My guess is most Americans would embrace the system but there could be opportunities to pass when it would be introduced. There would, of course , be no more “free” services at the emergency room if you were down on your luck and unable to pay. You could opt out but you’d better have plenty of monetary reserves because providers would treat you on a cash basis. It is a single payer system. If you chose you could have a private insurance policy but providers would probably charge you extra for the additional hassle they’d have dealing with your isurance company. I realize you probably wouldn’t want insurance, though, since that involves the possibility of the danger of contributing to some one elses bill and, after all, you’re totally self reliant.No need for stinkin’ namby-pamby liberal crutches. Nevertheless, you can have the last word and a “win” with your admirers. I’m tired of wasting my time with your endless “yeah, buts”. Celebrate!

By: Willis_Leon_Johnson

Willis_Leon_Johnson — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:45:25 +0000

Now John, your “plan” would be to provide universal health care through forced membership at the point of a gun, or threat of imprisonment.

This has been covered many times and you have yet to refute that fact, nor explained how it will be “voluntary”.

You still have yet to explain how the medical system will be better with no “Free Market” incentives to draw highly skilled, intelligent providers into your system.

By: Proteus

Proteus — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:24:27 +0000

Mr. Johnson - As you seem to be a self-styled expert on the constitution, please define what the Founding Fathers meant by the term “promote the general welfare,” and as a constitutional “literalist,” please enumerate specific articles and sections within the constitution to support your definition.
Willis,it’s time to “show us the beef.”

By: toaaronuu

toaaronuu — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:23:48 +0000

Yep, he must be feeling better.

By: John B.

John B. — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 21:12:20 +0000

Ah, we’re back in gear! Thanks for the info. It’s a matter of opinion as to what is workable or not, isn’t it? You’ve expressed yours and I have expressed mine. I would say that “promote” is exactly what my proposal is, not “provide”. I will absolutey bow to your interpretation of the matter if you are a constitutional lawyer. Otherwise it’s just another opinion. If the issue of a better health provision system is not “political”, what is it? The people are involved and there are differences of opinion involved so the resolution is definitely of a political nature. If you are talking about my OPINION of what your solution of the problem is based on, I’ll remind you that every comment I’ve seen from you on any subject has been political, not to mention derogatory. But you just couldn’t resist the shots at the end, though, could you? Sad