You do have seome good points
[QUOTE=PeterSideburn;437944]I completely disagree. I do not expect a handout or an advantage. I expect and opportunity. If America stopped giving handouts and got back to expecting its citizens to earn their own keep and to strive for excellence and not mediocrity then the same elements that propelled America to greatness would keep it in good stead. When you have the left preaching doom, gloom, race, and a million reasons why people are picked on, less advantaged, etc. Etc. It only drives them down thinking they have to accept their current position, status, finances etc. If instead we rewarded hard work, intellectual thought, excellence etc. And stopped with all the excuses we would remain exceptional on the World stage. If we instead behave like the mediocre handout striving don't leave me behind masses then we will become more and more similar by regression toward the social mean we have chosen to emulate. When there are true winners and losers in any sport or life, the losers or initially less successful get better. In all cases they improve faster than in sports where there is not "score." In many cases the initial underdogs over take the "obvious winners." Not thinking of ourselves as too this or too that but rather as works in progress heading toward an individual defined goal would a great start to a wonderful American future.
Your comment about mongering is interesting. It is only the supply that is adapting and setting the stage for their own success. I applaud them for it. The consumers can choose the threshold at which they stop supporting the activity. In Obama's World we would need to offset the increase in "ask" with subsidies to mongers with incomes less than X and we would need to open free schools for the supply side so the poorest performers could be elevated while we apply a tax to the highest performers so that we can spread the wealth evenly.
Pete.[/QUOTE]I whole-heartedly agree on individual responsibility & work ethics. Where we disagree is what is the role of government in all this. Your take on mongering miss what I was trying to imply, that is, nothing stays the same forever. Yes, greatness has not quite left the shores of America, talent is still coming from all over the world every day. But the rest of the world has caught up with America in the last few decades in most areas, and America is now on a slippery slope in terms of excess, self indulgence and discipline. Yes, I do believe in a role of government in correcting & recovering competitiveness & work ethics.
Co-pays Should be Meaningful
[QUOTE=Jackson;437970]I think Don B's link illustrates a fundamental misunderstanding in the difference between health care and health insurance.
relatively meaningless co-pays have eliminated the market constraints on the price of these services.
[/QUOTE]Meaningless co-pays fit the something-for-nothing model to a T. I was a participant in a medical plan that originally had NO co-pays, and that plan almost went broke. When the plan instituted a modest $250 deductible per year together with a $50.00 co-pay for doctor's office visits, it became solvent almost overnight. These were not poor people. Almost every participant who wanted to made an inflation adjusted upper five figure income, and many had six figure incomes.
Tres3.
Your attack is mis-directed, nothing in life is free.
[QUOTE=Jackson;437970]Up until the mid-60's, routine health care was largely paid by individuals out-of-pocket as services were needed, and health insurance was purchased to protect individuals from catastrophic health maladies should they arise.
However, over time, health insurance was expanded to include more and more basic health care services, thus expanding the overuse of these services.[ / I].
Flame on!
Thanks,
Jax / QUOTE].
So what happened over-night in American healthcare? Who benefited the most? Ever heard of HMOs? Today, any doctor will give up to 80 per cent discount if you pay them cash and hug you with joy. But will the hospitals? Yes, but can you afford it even after a 50% discount? Do Americans have cash? No, not for a long time.
O'Silly wanted Obama to confess?
Have not been able to catch the full interview yet, but the snippets that Fox is so proudly ensnaring its viewers of the Obama interview leads one to conclude that Obama is the "Saviour" of Fox's ratings. In the so-call 10 minute pre-SuperBowl introductory interview, I see a "Righteous but Desperate" O'Reilly leaning forward to make his points about Obama's lies and failings. His role, as the leader of the "tired angry old white men", a heavy burden on his shoulders.
But like Ali's "float like a butterly, sting like a bee", a very relaxed Obama just lean back into his armchair, the accusations disappearing like jabs into the air. Obama has disappointed almost everyone, but I think our expectations for change too high and I for one, was naive enough to underestimate the hate and opposition that his presidency would generate. With nothing worthwhile to say but needing publicity, Donald Trump has chimed in to say that Obama did not show presidential character by not wearing a tie to do the interview. Him and his front hair patch that must have come from his former's wife Ivana's pubic bush.
Obama gave Fox publicity & ratings that they never could have fantasize. Just watch Fox News now, and you will see every anchor & show host just oozing with outrage that they could be bias and unfair. A good laugh, but a sad state of American affairs. Meanwhile, O'Silly's coffers are brimming. Who actually goes and watch his shows on the road? And his books? Maybe I'll write one myself. How about, The Pitfalls of Mongering & Friendship or the 12 Steps of a Good Cum.
