There has been discussion on some cable news channels concerning the actual purpose of the Tax Day Tea Parties. The organizers and participants were criticized for protesting taxes but not wanting to give up anything in return.
There was a comment made that the protesters, of course, have the right to protest, but perhaps do not have a solid agenda.
I think these folks are missing the point. Perhaps these criticisms are brought about because these protesters are not as seasoned as the average activist. Perhaps they do not articulate the agenda as a memorized pamphlet. I will be so bold as to say, however, that these activist, these protesters, these regular citizens know exactly why they are there. They do not recognize their own country any longer. They feel that they can be silent no more. They believe that their elected officials should reflect their values and goals; not an agenda that was hidden until after being sworn in. I believe the agenda is very solid. They are mad, very mad, about many decisions being made for them in Washington. Perhaps not "taxation without representation", but "policy and lawmaking under FALSE representation"
Here is why I will be attending:
1. I do not believe that spending what we do not have will pull us out of a black-hole economy. I DO believe in capitalism. It may be a hard road back, but the road back is there and waiting.
2. I do not believe the government has the right to fire people, make policy, or dictate pay of any privately owned business, no matter how messed up they are. If they are so messed up, let them fail and help the unemployed. (Minus the upper echelon)
3. I believe Congress needs to take responsibility instead of trying to point the finger to everyone else. They make the laws and policies. Then hide when the consequences come calling.
4. I believe that nationalized health care is not the answer. The "investment" that was proposed was really a down payment to socialism.
5. I believe there is more to come if we do not stand up now.
I am probably forgetting something. There seems to be something new and unbelievable everyday. How can anyone with a normal life keep up? Perhaps that is what the far-left is hoping. I hope to disappoint.
Betsy
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well put. I agree with you. It's the Statists of both parties which have been adding to the growth of bad government for decades.
ReplyDeleteThank You very much anonymous.
ReplyDeleteBetsy
You should give more thought to the implications of what you propose.
ReplyDeleteLetting GM and Chrysler fail, for example, means hundreds of thousands of Americans will be added to the ranks of the unemployed, and a weak economy will become even weaker. Why do you think this is a good idea?
If letting a company fail would do great damage to the economy, a bailout seems indicated. But if government bails out a company, should government have no control over what the company does with government money? That seems to make no sense.
Regarding health care, every industrialized nation rations health care. In the US, with our privatized system, health care is rationed according to the individual's ability to pay. That will continue to be the case until we have a national health system in which everyone is covered regardless of ability to pay, as other developed nations do.
You will notice that in other countries, people often complain about the red tape and delays in dealing with their government-controlled health system. But one thing they never say is that they want to trade their system for our privatized system, and any politician who suggested that would never get elected again. They don't want a situation in which people can be bankrupted by health care bills, which is the situation we have now.
Medicare has been a huge success, and its principles need to be the basis of a system that covers everyone. Medicare was created because seniors had a very hard time getting private health insurance. We now face a situation in which people in other age groups are having the same problem, and the solution is the same.
I like your post and have linked it to my blog.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I do not think unemployment is a good thing. I think that GIVING companies money is the problem. How about awarding the company, like GM, a military contract for a fleet of hybrid cars. This would be a good way to use tax money. Employees keep their jobs and the environment is helped as well. I just think the spending is going in the wrong places and to the wrong folks. I think spending is good, but spend it on SOMETHING TANGIBLE, rather than pouring it down a black hole.
ReplyDeleteYou also talk within your comments, as does the current administration, that we have the authority to make decisions within the company that receives tax monies. This is, within all definitions, nationalization. You discuss the merits of health care and other "modern" nations, but these same nations give us a tremendous example of what nationalization does. It produces sub-standard products and production, descreases morale, and leads to a condition and feeling of mediocrity.
Having worked in the healthcare system for many years, myself, I care deeply about those that do not have healthcare. I have seen them in the ER everyday. I also see that Medicade is available and many charities, such as the Catholic Charities, help them everyday. Some do not take advantage of the help that is there and others abuse it altogether.
I also know that when someone comes in the ER in the US, we do EVERYTHING within our power to care for their need. This is reguardless of their ability to pay. In fact, we were not allowed to ask about insurance or anything until we had assessed them. If I go to an ER in another country, I know that there are limitations on my care.
I am a military spouse and deal with a type of "rationed" medicine everytime my family goes to the doctor. The red tape is endless for things like my developmentally delayed son, and for specialized care, we are sent to civilian hospitals. What if they did not have that special doctor or procedure or machine either?
I am not as sure as you about the success of these other nations' health care. I would never trade my health care, military or civilian.
"Letting GM and Chrysler fail, for example, means hundreds of thousands of Americans will be added to the ranks of the unemployed ..."
ReplyDeleteActually bailing out GM and Chrysler means that tens of millions of Americans will be poorer, and the depression will last longer (if not forever). Why would you think skilled people motivated to work could not find other jobs? When we bail out poorly run companies we make if more difficult for well run companies to compete against them. We lost far more good jobs than we saved with the bailouts.
"But if government bails out a company, should government have no control over what the company does with government money? "
Look up the definition of economic fascism. Do you really think the buffoons running the government (who for the most part have never had a productive job in their lives) are capable of making the kinds of corporate decisions necessary to run a successful corporation.
"Regarding health care, every industrialized nation rations health care."
You do realize that there is no rationing of food, shoes, computers, furniture, or toys. These things are produced by private individuals with little government interference. Why do you want to settle for in inferior rationed medical system just so government can be in charge?
"...in other countries, people often complain about the red tape and delays in dealing with their government-controlled health system. But one thing they never say is that they want to trade their system for our privatized system..."
What Universe do you live in. Thousands of Canadians come to this country for medical care. Ask Natasha Richardson how the government-controlled health system worked out for her.
First, you have some of your facts wrong. Companies getting federal bailout money have not been GIVEN anything. Banks accepting money under the TARP program have been required to give the government warrants to acquire their stock.
ReplyDeleteIn the case of AIG, a company I am sure you have heard of, Treasury has acquired about 80% of AIG's stock. What happens to AIG's existing shareholders when the company must issue stock to Treasury equivalent to 80%? It means the shareholders who used to own 100% now own 20%. So the shareholders, the owners of AIG, have not been "given" anything.
In the case of the auto companies, they have given Treasury notes that must be repaid.
As for putting money in a "black hole," what do you think the auto companies have done with the federal money they've gotten already? They've used it to pay their employees and their suppliers. And those people have in turn taken that money and used it to buy food, clothing, shelter and medical care, all the expenses of daily life. Is that what you mean by a "black hole"?
I am not sure where you got the idea that countries with a national health system produce "sub-standard products" and "mediocrity." Japan is one such country. Are their products "sub-standard" and "mediocre"? One reason Japanese auto companies are so competitive is that unlike American auto companies, Japanese companies do not need to provide health care for their workers in Japan - their government does that. I've seen estimates that health care for workers and retirees costs American automakers more than $1,000.00 for every car they produce. See the problem?
As for paying the auto companies to produce hybrids, that would be a lot more expensive than the current auto bailout program. Aren't our deficits big enough already?
If you know anything about our current health care system, you must know that (i) Medicaid and charities don't come close to providing all the care needed by the uninsured and underinsured and (ii) ER's all over America are breaking down because they are swamped with patients who have nowhere else to turn for care. You know that these are NOT solving the problem. If you have another solution, rather than turning to government, let's hear it.
As for military health care, I am sure you are right and patients have to deal with the same sort of delays and red tape and scarce resources as in all government-run systems in all countries. The question is, would you like to trade that system for a system in which you are on your own and must find a way to pay for all the care yourself? Most of us would say "No." Military families are a tiny percentage of the American population. For the non-military middle class, who do not qualify for Medicaid or Medicare, they are on their own when it comes to getting health care. Again, if you have a solution to that problem that does NOT involve the government, let's hear it.
"The question is, would you like to trade that system for a system in which you are on your own and must find a way to pay for all the care yourself?"
ReplyDeleteSpeaking only for myself, Yes! Government does not solve problems, they only exacerbate them. The funny thing is, without government we would not be alone. We are social animals.
We naturally form communities. Neighbors and friends help each other. Government inhibits this wonderful natural society.
You no doubt believe (have been taught) that separation of Church and State is a good idea. Of course it is a good idea. But so is:
Separation of Education and State
Separation of Banking and State
Separation of Economy and State
Separation of Money Creation and State
Separation of Defense and State
Separation of Roads and State
In fact the government represents only power. Without government we would have no wars. Defending ourselves is a fairly simple matter. It is time to choose between the government Welfare/Warfare State and the Peace, Freedom and Prosperity that awaits us without government shackles.
"Why would you think skilled people motivated to work could not find other jobs?""
ReplyDeleteBecause the disappearance of jobs due to the destruction of demand for goods and services is one of the features of a recession, that's why. Where on earth did you get the idea that the economy automatically produces a job for everybody who wants one?
""Do you really think the buffoons running the government (who for the most part have never had a productive job in their lives) are capable of making the kinds of corporate decisions necessary to run a successful corporation.""
Buffoons? Obama was the President of the Harvard Law Review. I doubt you could get into Harvard with a battering ram. Dr. Chu, the Secretary of Energy, won the Nobel Prize in Physics. Treasury Secretary Geithner graduated from Dartmouth and Johns Hopkins. All of Obama's top appointments are among the most distinguished people in their fields.
When Bush became president we were told he would be the first "MBA president" and that his tremendous business expertise would make our government run so much better. How did that work out? I guess we found out what "running government like a business" really means.
""You do realize that there is no rationing of food, shoes, computers, furniture, or toys.""
Actually, there is. In our society, all goods and services, including health care, are rationed according to ability to pay. But most Americans believe health care should be an exception.
""What Universe do you live in. Thousands of Canadians come to this country for medical care. Ask Natasha Richardson how the government-controlled health system worked out for her.""
I live in the universe in which Canada has BOTH a lower infant mortality rate AND a higher life expectancy than the U.S. Whatever the problems with their health care system, it is clearly delivering better outcomes than ours -- unless you think having more children die before reaching adulthood is a good idea. Which universe do you live in?
As for Natasha Richardson, I haven't heard that anyone attributed her death to a lack of care by Canada's health system. If you have any FACTS supporting that accusation, post them - I'm sure her family would be very interested to know them. If you don't, then I think everyone reading this will realize that you simply make things up.
"Where on earth did you get the idea that the economy automatically produces a job for everybody who wants one?"
ReplyDeleteMy teachers (and I am sure yours) were ignorant of economics. Most people have no idea why some countries are wealthy and others are poor. I recommend the following to help dispel economic ignorance:
Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt
Economics for Real People by Gene Callhan
Both books are available as free pdf downloads. Google for the link.
"Buffoons? Obama was the President of the Harvard Law Review."
Obama was one of the few Harvard Law Review presidents who did not actually publish in the law review. Could the people who selected him as president of the law review have had a politically correct motive?
"All of Obama's top appointments are among the most distinguished people in their fields."
Substitute the word Socialist for distinguished and you will be more accurate. You are obviously very impressed by the Ivy League. George W went to both Yale and Harvard. So much for being impressed.
"Actually, there is. In our society, all goods and services, including health care, are rationed according to ability to pay."
Yes, all goods are scarce. Otherwise, like the air we breathe, they would not be goods. Consumers need to make choices based on their ability to pay. No person (Bill Gates included) can afford to buy everything. However, rationing is when the government (or some other group of thugs) forcefully make those decisions for you. There is a huge difference when people have the freedom to make their own economic choices.
"But most Americans believe health care should be an exception."
Most Americans think American Idol is high culture. Read:
Democracy the God that Failed by Hans Hoppe
Sorry, this is not available as a downloadable free pdf. Mayby your library has it.
"...Canada has BOTH a lower infant mortality rate AND a higher life expectancy than the U.S. ...it is clearly delivering better outcomes than ours..."
Infant mortality and life expectancy are determined by many variables. The conclusion that Canada's socialized medical system is responsible would not be warranted.
"As for Natasha Richardson, I haven't heard that anyone attributed her death to a lack of care by Canada's health system."
Well, CNN isn't going to point out the problems with socialized medicine. Epidural hemorrhage is of course a devastating injury. Not everyone survives. However, there is a window of opportunity for survival which may last several hours. In order to have a chance you need to get to a hospital with a CAT scan and neurosurgical facilities on call. Most people in Canada wait 6 months for a CAT scan; Natasha couldn't wait.
""My teachers (and I am sure yours) were ignorant of economics.""
ReplyDeleteThe college I went to had 3 Nobel Prize winners on its Economics faculty when I was a student there. I'm sorry to hear yours was so deficient, but that doesn't answer the question I asked you.
""Obama was one of the few Harvard Law Review presidents who did not actually publish in the law review. Could the people who selected him as president of the law review have had a politically correct motive?""
Could it be that those who always try to cast doubt on the achievements of African-Americans are motivated by race hatred? It certainly could.
""Substitute the word Socialist for distinguished and you will be more accurate. You are obviously very impressed by the Ivy League. George W went to both Yale and Harvard. So much for being impressed.""
Socialists don't usually make millions working for hedge funds, the way Larry Summers did, nor do they work for outfits like Kissinger Associates, as Tim Geithner did. Your accusations are laughable.
Do I think people who got into and graduated with honors from the top educational institutions in the country are more likely to be well educated than people who didn't? You bet I do. Of course there are always exceptions, such as people like Bush who only managed to get in as a "legacy."
""Most Americans think American Idol is high culture.""
I haven't seen that poll. But I have seen several showing that a large majority of Americans want government to guarantee health care for all.
""Infant mortality and life expectancy are determined by many variables. The conclusion that Canada's socialized medical system is responsible would not be warranted.""
And what other variables do you assert are responsible for the fact that "socialist" Canada (among other countries) does far better on major health metrics than America?
Among countries where infant mortality and life expectancy are both better than in the U.S., how many have "socialized medicine"? Would the correct answer be: "ALL of them"?
""Most people in Canada wait 6 months for a CAT scan; Natasha couldn't wait.""
Obviously she didn't wait six months. I am still waiting for you to post facts to back up your accusation that her death had something to do with problems in Canada's health system. Do you have such facts, or were you simply making it up?
"In the US, with our privatized system, health care is rationed according to the individual's ability to pay."
ReplyDeleteHorseshit. Under federal law, everyone that presents to an ER MUST be treated and can't be turned away if they "can't" pay. Further, I personally know several surgeons that will work for free if their patients can't afford it. Pull your head out of your ass.
"You will notice that in other countries, people often complain about the red tape and delays in dealing with their government-controlled health system. But one thing they never say is that they want to trade their system for our privatized system, and any politician who suggested that would never get elected again."
Yet again, horseshit. Talk to Canadians (I have family living there). They HATE the system. They'd LOVE to have a privatized system. In fact, some MDs have tried it...and the government shut them down. People have tried to pay for their own care..in some instances cancer treatment...only to have the wonderful government shut them down. Talk to any cardiothoracic surgeon (that's a heart surgeon, moron) in Florida. Snowbirds (Canadians that winter in FL) make up a HUGE portion of their practice. Why? B/c the wonderful government rationed system wouldn't allow them to have their bypass surgery, so they had to come here to have their lives saved. Wow! What a great system they have!
I've lived through "rationed healthcare" in one of those utopias you talk about. It was horrible. You would be appauled at the "treatment" I saw. I highly recommend you move to Canada, England, France, Russia, etc where you can experience the wonderful care you seem to hold in such high regard. You'll either change your tune or die of some preventable infection. Either way, it's a win for the rational among us.
You are an asshat.
"...are motivated by race hatred?"
ReplyDelete"I doubt you could get into Harvard with a battering ram."
Insulting people makes you look bad.
"The college I went to had 3 Nobel Prize winners on its Economics faculty when I was a student there."
While there is some minimal interest in what you write, your status does not increase because you went to an exclusive college. The Nobel prize in economics is actually awarded by the Swedish Central Bank, not by one of the Nobel committees. Two very distinguished recipients of that prize, Myron Scholes and Robert C. Merton, almost wrecked the world's economy when their Long-Term Capital Management fund went broke. Not to worry, they were stupidly bailed out, thus postponing the reckoning until now.
"... a large majority of Americans want government to guarantee health care for all."
Why is this relevant? Many slaves did not want to be freed. Some hostages do not want to be rescued (Stockholm syndrome). Many (probably a majority) of Germans during World War II had no problem with confiscation of Jewish property.
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. I do not want to live in your socialist hell simply because the majority of people have been brain washed into believing they need the government to take care of them. My unalienable right to keep my property is not dependent on the permission of the majority.
"And what other variables do you assert are responsible for the fact that "socialist" Canada (among other countries) does far better on major health metrics than America?"
Far more important than the medical system are variables such as socio-economic status, nutrition, sanitation, drug and alcohol use, education, religion, marital rates, venereal disease rates, and teenage pregnancy. That only scratches the surface. Didn't they teach critical thinking in that Ivy League college of yours?
All right everyone! Thank you for your comments. There is an obvious divide here as it is in the country right now.
ReplyDeleteThe way I see it, you are either for MORE government control or for LESS. Personally, I am for less control. Many arguements can be made, especially in health care. I do not believe that they are legitimate, but some others are sure that it would be great.
My advice would be to go and try it out for themselves. Nothing could be scarier that being told that you can not get a treatment that you need. Not because you can not pay, but because you are not allowed.
The Anonymous comments of opposition keep coming back to big government solutions. I do not want that and neither do thousands of Americans(See tea party coverage). I, for one, will not let that happen as long as I have a voice. Other nations are sometimes nice places to visit, but I will ALWAYS be homesick for the United States of America.
Betsy
"I will ALWAYS be homesick for the United States of America."
ReplyDeleteSome people don't understand you can love your country while at the same time disliking your government. The government is not country. The people, communities, traditions, and society in general are what make our country unique (and home).
Betsy,
ReplyDeleteWell said. You always have support in the people. I attended the Miami protest for the same reasons.
What many of these spending politicians do not understand is the attachment of economic liberty to personal liberty. One's labor is a direct extension of one's liberty.
Keep it up, and fight the good fight.
--
Leonard O Goenaga
LeonardOoh.com
""Insulting people makes you look bad.""
ReplyDelete""While there is some minimal interest in what you write, your status does not increase because you went to an exclusive college.""
Insulting people makes you look bad. Being a hypocrite makes you look worse.
You stated that neither your teachers nor mine knew anything about economics. You may be right about yours, but you know nothing of mine - you just like to make things up. Bad habit.
""Two very distinguished recipients of that prize, Myron Scholes and Robert C. Merton, almost wrecked the world's economy when their Long-Term Capital Management fund went broke.""
That's the biggest exaggeration I've heard since the story about the fisherman who hooked the Equator.
""... a large majority of Americans want government to guarantee health care for all.""
""Why is this relevant?""
Uh, how about because the government belongs to them?
""Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. I do not want to live in your socialist hell simply because the majority of people have been brain washed into believing they need the government to take care of them. My unalienable right to keep my property is not dependent on the permission of the majority.""
I'm sorry (but not surprised) that you don't believe in democracy. Have you thought about moving to North Korea? You're not likely to be troubled by democracy there.
And yes, your right to keep your property is dependent on the permission of the majority. The concurrence of the majority of your fellow citizens in the laws that protect your property is the only thing keeping anyone who wants your property from taking it away from you whenever he pleases. Unless of course you want to sit awake in front of your house with a loaded gun twenty-four hours a day. Is that alternative appealing to you?
""Far more important than the medical system are variables such as socio-economic status, nutrition, sanitation, drug and alcohol use, education, religion, marital rates, venereal disease rates, and teenage pregnancy. That only scratches the surface. Didn't they teach critical thinking in that Ivy League college of yours?""
Insulting people makes you look bad. Where have I heard that before?
Still waiting for you to post FACTS to justify your statement that Richardson's death had something to do with problems in Canada's health system. You weren't just making that up - right? You're not the sort of person who would make up lies because you don't have any facts, right?
So you're saying it's just a strange coincidence that ALL the countries where major health metrics are better than in the US ALSO have what you would call "socialized medicine"? What next - you going to try to sell us GM stock at $100 a share?
""Horseshit. Under federal law, everyone that presents to an ER MUST be treated and can't be turned away if they "can't" pay.""
ReplyDeleteThe law you're referring to requires that a patient be treated ONLY until his condition is stable - NOT that he receives all treatment his condition requires. Why did you lie?
""Further, I personally know several surgeons that will work for free if their patients can't afford it. Pull your head out of your ass.""
Is there something wrong with your brain that prevents you from understanding that the costs of surgery (and recovery) entail much more than a surgeon's fees? Or are you just lying again as you did in your earlier comment?
""Yet again, horseshit. Talk to Canadians (I have family living there). They HATE the system.""
Instead of the anecdotal evidence that you're presenting about the views of a tiny handful of Canadians, I'm sure you can cite some opinion polls showing that a majority of the people there want to trade their health system for ours. Right? Go ahead. Let's see it.
""I've lived through "rationed healthcare" in one of those utopias you talk about. It was horrible. You would be appauled at the "treatment" I saw. I highly recommend you move to Canada, England, France, Russia, etc where you can experience the wonderful care you seem to hold in such high regard. You'll either change your tune or die of some preventable infection. Either way, it's a win for the rational among us. You are an asshat.""
Leaving aside the undeniable fact that you are a vicious hatemonger, as your words above clearly show, I'll just mention that I have lived in three of the four countries you list above, and I am not posting this comment from the afterlife. Those of us whose sources of information include others besides the Sean Hannity Show are aware that Russia's health system has been in crisis since the end of the Soviet Union (if not before). The others seem to be doing fine.
"Uh, how about because the government belongs to them?"
ReplyDeleteYou don't get it at all. The government does not belong to the people; it belongs to the elite few. The people are slaves to the government. You have to use government money (legal tender laws), government is involved in every contract and economic transaction, you can't even flush your toilet unless it is government approved.
"I'm sorry ... that you don't believe in democracy."
How interesting that you use the word believe. Democracy is indeed the state religion. People vote in sham elections. Yes, there are choices. Would you like fascism with socialism on the side? Perhaps Socialism with a second helping of fascism. I previously recommended "Democracy The God That Failed" by Hans Hoppe. Unfortunately, it is not free. I know you won't spend money on my recommendation. The book discusses the failings of democracy in depth. At least read the reviews on Amazon.
"...your right to keep your property is dependent on the permission of the majority."
You wrote this. Do you really believe that? Respect for private property is the real only difference between freedom and slavery. You seem to believe that Ivy League elites will always be in control, and that hence you will always be safe. What happens when it becomes apparent that the majority would prefer Ivy Leaguers to be sent to concentration camps?
Don't take my comment about critical thinking as an insult. Take it as constructive criticism. You spout the propaganda you have been taught, but you really have not been exposed to the literature of freedom. Google Austrian Economics. Read something by Murray Rothbard.
"Unless of course you want to sit awake in front of your house with a loaded gun twenty-four hours a day."
I could hire a private protection agency to do a better job at a far lower cost (than the portion of my taxes used to support the police). I wouldn't have to be concerned with being harassed by the police. My property would be secure. I don't like living in a police state.
"Have you thought about moving to North Korea? You're not likely to be troubled by democracy there."
And yet, North Korea is officially called Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). They have elections. What is your definition of a democracy?
In North Korea there is only one party, the Korean Workers Party. Do we really have more than one party. This was supposed to be an election of change. Goldman-Sachs is still stealing money at an alarming rate; No Change. We are still in Iraq; don't believe the timetable; Afghanistan to be escalated; No Change. How about social programs. Repubs gave us Medicare Prescription Plan which is a gold mine for big Pharma and insurance industry; Dems want to expand nanny state; No Change. Repubs and Dems are really two factions of the same government party that wants to control every aspect of your life.
"you going to try to sell us GM stock at $100 a share?"
Consider, that if the government had not artificially lowered interest rates to prop up the economy, no one would have paid $100 for GM stock since it was overpriced. See "Meltdown" by Thomas Woods (presently on NYT best seller list) for an explanation of why Obama's brain trust is destroying the economy.
Now that your Ivy League friends are trashing the dollar, I suggest getting assets out of the dollar. Think Zimbabwe.
Well first off, I love the fact that everytime someone states an opinion differing from a liberal's, they are a hatemonger. My personal favorite is when a person voices opposition to illegal immigration. Listen to my words, ILLEGAL. There is nothing wrong with immigration. That's how my ancestors came here. But again, I stress the word illegal, as in wrong and unlawful. But if you oppose it, you are a hatemonger.
ReplyDeleteFinally, in the last year, as shown with this conversation, there is no middle ground. If you are in favor of small government, and capitolism, there is no discourse space to discuss with socialists. This probably worries me the most, that we have become this polarized.
Betsy
I don't think it's inappropriate to call someone a hatemonger whose reaction to a comment he disagrees with is to call the author names like "asshat" and to express the hope that the author will die of an infection. That sounds pretty darn hateful to me.
ReplyDeleteI also don't think it's appropriate for someone who engages in name-calling like "buffoons" to complain about insults. If you don't like insults, don't use them. If you are going to insult others yourself, don't complain when others behave the same way toward you.
I have some sympathy for people who think government often screws things up. That is why I was so surprised when self-styled conservatives supported Bush's huge nation-building project in Iraq. They think our government can't run our own public school system, but at the same time they think our government can turn a tribal society like Iraq into a Western-style democracy. Amazing!
As for Obama and the bailouts, I am not comfortable with the idea that the federal government ought to be running the nation's biggest corporations. On the other hand, if the executives chosen by the private sector have done such a lousy job that our entire financial system could come crashing to the ground as a result, it's hard to see how government could do any worse. Those who believe in capitalism should be furious with our country's leading capitalists, who have done such a poor job in recent years that they have discredited capitalism in the eyes of many.
By the way, I think the question of how people in countries with national health insurance systems feel about their system is a really interesting one. Here are some poll results from Gallup.
ReplyDelete"How do Americans, Canadians, and Britons compare in their views of the availability and quality of healthcare in their respective countries? In surveys conducted in January* and February 2003**, Gallup asked residents of these three nations identical questions regarding the availability of affordable healthcare and the quality of medical care."
"One-fourth of American respondents are either "very" or "somewhat" satisfied with "the availability of affordable healthcare in the nation," (6% very satisfied and 19% somewhat satisfied)."
"This level of satisfaction is significantly lower than in Canada, where 57% are satisfied with the availability of affordable healthcare, including 16% who are very satisfied. Roughly 4 in 10 Britons are satisfied (43%), but only 7% say they are very satisfied (similar to the percentage very satisfied in the United States)."
"Looking at the other side of the coin, 44% of Americans are very dissatisfied with the availability of affordable healthcare, and nearly three-fourths (72%) are either somewhat or very dissatisfied. The 44% in the United States who are very dissatisfied with healthcare availability is significantly higher than corresponding figures in either Canada (17%) or Great Britain (25%)."
I agree that our politics have become very polarized. From my observations, the cause is that too many people are ignorant of the facts behind the issues and prefer to remain ignorant even when the facts are put before them. They just refuse to accept any fact that contradicts what they want to believe.
ReplyDeletePeople who insist there is no problem for those without health insurance are a good example. They insist anyone can get all the treatment he wants in an emergency room, but the fact is that emergency rooms all over the country are already in crisis because of the flood of uninsured patients who have nowhere else to go for care. When you point this out to them they have no answer, they just keep repeating that 'socialized medicine' is bad. That doesn't solve anything.
I think it would be great if we could all find some 'middle ground,' but I don't know what the middle ground is for someone who is sick or injured and has no insurance and can't get care except by going to an emergency room where he may have to wait five or six hours before a doctor sees him because the place is full of uninsured people just like him. How is this problem going to be solved by 'smaller government' and 'lower taxes?' It isn't.