On 7 Mar, Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 08:55:56PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
>> Roberto C. Sanchez wrote:
>>
>> > Iraq also does not have a functioning economy. Now, you might
>> > argue that providing National healthcare is simply getting them
>> > addicted to it. Which I think is true. However, I think that in
>> > this case it is the right thing to do.
>>
>> Probably because, you know, nearly everyone in a society needs
>> healthcare and pays taxes, so national healthcare is the simplest
>> strategy to cover the maximum number of people, no?
>>
> Yes, because the government is a model of efficiency. Come on. The
> simplest stratedy is to not tax people so much and let them figure it
> out for themselves.
>
As far as health care goes, medicare is by far the most efficient
system in the US.
>> > It would be nice if there were a better way, but I doubt there is.
>>
>> So since we're in agreement that collectively paying for healthcare
>> is the way to go, why not introduce it here?
>>
> We are not in agreement. Collective, governmnet-run healthcare is a
> necessity in Iraq because they currently lack a functioning market
> economy. We have one of those. In fact, we have arguably one of the
> best in the world. It would be a colossal screw up to introduce
> socialized medicine here.
>
And virtually every other developed nation does have government
provided health care for all of its citizens, free market or no.
-Chris
------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Christopher Judd, Ph. D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
