Ok. I know I will not change your stance probably in any significant way (as I'm sure you feel you will not change mind). With that said, I'll make my closing remarks:
a) The question was The alternative Republican Healthcare plan and your argument to that question you proposed was "nothing.". I have presented that there IS a alternative plan to health care reform. It reforms it in ways that you may or may not agree with philosophically, but nonetheless, a significant number of Americans do (and believe that it would increase the availability of healthcare to Americans). So i have counterargued your answer; but do not care to go on forever arguing with you about this; just as we would waste and exhaust our efforts trying to tell Fred Phelps to stop picketting funerals or to let prostitution be legalized... it just not going to happen.
b) Not all health insurance companies and insurance policies are the same. In analogizing it to restaurants, you have your rat-infest Taco Bells served by high school drop outs that put boogers in your food, your very taste though relatively fast Chipolte (mmmm Chipotle), your causal dining Olive Gardens (i'm gettting hungry), your high profile, over hyped Hooters (O.o mmm overpriced burgers served by ... well not as large of boobs as the ones I see at strip clubs), and your fancy high priced, neck-tie $500 plate Democratic fund raiser dinners. It does take a responsible consumer to look at the insurance that they buy IF they are empowered to buy their own. Currently, its businesses that try to say they are providing a benefit, but some purchase the Taco Bell for their employees and some buy the Olive Garden for their employees (why isn't there an Olive Garden served by women in v-neck shirts with REAL cleavage?). So maximizing profit is not always at the expense of giving the least to the consumer. But right now, the user of the insurance (the employee) is not the decider of the health insurance.
c) I felt it was wrong for Republicans and other critiques to complain and label a necessary 'evil' by the name of "Death Panels". Just as you point out that insurance companies do deny certain coverages (using their own 'death panels'), health insurance that would be provided by the government would have to decide what would and would not be covered by health insurance (the federal death panel). Which I already mentioned in my first round of argument that this would become a political football as to what would and would not be covered; it would be as political as deciding whether UR480 or whatever the name of that abortion pill was (despite abortion being legal) as to its actual healthy safety or how best it be provided prescribed.
d) We live in a capitalist society. Everytime you want a raise or seek a 'better' job you seek your own increasing of profit. Yet, the jobs that some people seek, though they be lesser pay than what they are 'worth', do it for alturistic reasons or self fulfillling reasons other than greed of the dollar. Not all insurance companies, not all banks, not all of corporate america, not all of the Global Corporate Conspiracy, is motivated solely on profit; that they are made of humans and human intentions of goodwill as some are of ill will and self-interest solely. While a marketplace with no laws or regulations or enforcement for the 'open fair and honest' would be quite detrimental, there is a balance that can be struck that maximizes the opportunity for people to access affordable healthcare if they choose to do so. I do not believe based on history that I will not expound on that providing universal healthcare will bring health to everyone; simply down the quality of healthcare to the standard that Cuba has in trying to provide for its entire population. If we did try to do universal healthcare and provide it at the standard of care that can be purchased in the United States, the nation would literally go bankrupt from the cost or need for a taxation rate that would drive people out of the country because businesses would find better countries to work out of, espeically when US would no longer be a strong economic power and have no military strength because of the need for resources to promised universal healthcare for anything any procedure.
Everyone gets sick. Everyone eats. Everyone needs shelter. Everyone shits. Shall we provide universal food care, universal housing, and universal tolietry? I'm going to stick with providing for those things through personal responsibility (which does NOT exclude banding together with others in a familial or communial or coop way). Again, I say, practical, realistic solutions are available under the alternative Republican and conservative plans that focus on empowering the individual (which goes hand-in-hand with taking personal responsibility), taking out the decision of others that would provide health care to the individual for profit (employer-based insurance) or for politics (federally-provided insurance and universal care).
I end here to give you the last words.
|
