What Kind Of Health Care Do Lawmakers Get?
There is certainly a valid debate to be had as to how we transform health care in this country. Although I would argue there is no ground to stand on to simply let the system continue to operate as it does today.
Handing the administration over to the government probably isn't the best plan longer term. But I cringe at these ideological statements of ignorance as it pertains to health care being run by the government as being a disaster. I know many people from other countries and I haven't heard anyone with national health care state that they want anything like the U.S. system. A dog eat dog system where survival of the cruelest exists.
I definitely don't want a government run administration when corporations, doctors and lawyers are defining what it will look like. That's a little like the fox guarding the hen house. Trust us. Yeah, I've heard that before. That is the very reason we have such a broken health care system in the first place. These special interests have defined its structure. Fix corporate personhood and the associated lobbying will disappear. Then we would likely get a decent debate on health care transformation. But the largest health care insurer in the U.S. today is the government. Be that state, local or federal workers or Medicare and Medicaid. So, would all of these people rather ditch their government plans and fend for themselves with private plans? Hardly. And, as far as this generalized argument that the government can't run anything, I guess state universities are worthless too then? Or national research labs? And maybe our military? And our police and fire departments? And the roads you drive on? And the water you drink? The fear mongering and marginalization tactics of the status quo are endless.
Let's take the flip side. How do you like your banking sector run by private firms? Is that working for you? In my estimation today's private sector health care firms are very similar to our banking system - that would be predatory. Predatory courtesy of our government that allows or even legislated this predation. We can have a vibrant private health care system but not when corporations are paying our public officials to architect a system of corruption at the expense of the people they are supposed to be serving.
We'll talk more about our health care system and some very general parameters for its potential overhaul, none of which are being talked about, but I wanted to pass along this link comparing the plan Washington politicians get to the ones many of us in the private sector have. I pay for my own health insurance. My health care plan sucks. And so does the company that administers it. It seems ironic that public servants live like kings and queens while those who pay their salaries and benefits and whom they serve get the shaft.
Are they really servants? Or is it us that are the servants?
Handing the administration over to the government probably isn't the best plan longer term. But I cringe at these ideological statements of ignorance as it pertains to health care being run by the government as being a disaster. I know many people from other countries and I haven't heard anyone with national health care state that they want anything like the U.S. system. A dog eat dog system where survival of the cruelest exists.
I definitely don't want a government run administration when corporations, doctors and lawyers are defining what it will look like. That's a little like the fox guarding the hen house. Trust us. Yeah, I've heard that before. That is the very reason we have such a broken health care system in the first place. These special interests have defined its structure. Fix corporate personhood and the associated lobbying will disappear. Then we would likely get a decent debate on health care transformation. But the largest health care insurer in the U.S. today is the government. Be that state, local or federal workers or Medicare and Medicaid. So, would all of these people rather ditch their government plans and fend for themselves with private plans? Hardly. And, as far as this generalized argument that the government can't run anything, I guess state universities are worthless too then? Or national research labs? And maybe our military? And our police and fire departments? And the roads you drive on? And the water you drink? The fear mongering and marginalization tactics of the status quo are endless.
Let's take the flip side. How do you like your banking sector run by private firms? Is that working for you? In my estimation today's private sector health care firms are very similar to our banking system - that would be predatory. Predatory courtesy of our government that allows or even legislated this predation. We can have a vibrant private health care system but not when corporations are paying our public officials to architect a system of corruption at the expense of the people they are supposed to be serving.
We'll talk more about our health care system and some very general parameters for its potential overhaul, none of which are being talked about, but I wanted to pass along this link comparing the plan Washington politicians get to the ones many of us in the private sector have. I pay for my own health insurance. My health care plan sucks. And so does the company that administers it. It seems ironic that public servants live like kings and queens while those who pay their salaries and benefits and whom they serve get the shaft.
Are they really servants? Or is it us that are the servants?
<< Home