Musicmystery
Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery So OK -- whose responsibility is it? Given that it's beyond the means of many Americans to do on their own without assistance from somewhere. And we have a safety net for those who are unable to provide for themselves, Muse. We also have an overwhelming majority of people who can, and do, provide for themselves in a market based system. Not really. For a couple decades, I went without health insurance, because I couldn't afford it and my two-three at a time jobs didn't pay for it. So I took a chance, but I'd have happily paid for health insurance within my means at the time. Sure, today, no problem, and I'm also on top of creating wealth if something changed. But it's not a skill set most people have entering the work force. You've left the key question unanswered -- unless you mean that no one should be solving this problem. If you do mean that (or for anyone who does), it's short-sighted. Preventative care is a good investment, socially and economically, and getting a larger pool helps manage the risk both individually and comprehensively. The alternative is the mess we have, which only works for those who have. I don't buy into the zero-sum game. The basic economic assumption mistakes a snap shot for the reality of a growth system. That's the fundamental premise of an investment. And in a society, government dollars spent is not the only metric. Even where we do provide, we do so inefficiently, leaving companies to face health care costs spiraling at double digit inflation. The current system we've been clinging to is unsustainable long-term. The question "So what's your solution?" is valid. I'm not a fan of the new system, just as I wasn't a fan of it when Gingrich Republicans thought it up. It's a messy and costly compromise. But I support it, primarily because, as Hup noted, it finally moves the conversation down the field from contemplating to doing. From here, the tweaking begins. But it's on *something,* instead of continual deferment. Yes, I already know you disagree with that point. But that's your answer.
|