🚀 go-pugleaf

In article 4677@antigone.com, mross@antigone.com () writes:
> Ray (degennar@bmsrs.usc.edu) wrote:
 
> : 2) Do you really feel that the governmet is capable of effectively
> :    adminstrating a health care program without raising the cost or
> :    decreasing the quality of service?
> 
> Yes. The cost may rise over all but will decrease _per covered person_. Costs will
> rise regardless of who is administering the system. Government will impose control,
> since its motive is not profit (over human lives, I might add, in the case of
> private insurance).

Excuse me?  How in the world do you think overall costs can rise without the cost
to individuals (taxpayers, employers, etc) rising?  If you do believe such blatantly
illogical nonsense I have some very high grade Venusian resort properties to talk
to you about.

The government will impose control alright.  Because control, for good or ill, and
politics as usual is the function of government.  Personally I would much rather have
my health at the mercy of private companies I am free to choose between that have to
pay enough attention to make a profit instead of operating at the incredible deficits
we already see our government running.  The former have to make some effort to live in
the real world and be accountable.  Only the very tip of the government iceberg is
accountable to anyone at all.  Do you really want the same government that has run
the richest country in the world into the ground to the tune of being in debt for over
3 years of the total domestic product to expand into this area also?  I don't.
Do you really want the likes of Jesse Helms to determine what is and is not a legitimate medical need?  Do you want a beast as totally brain-dead as Congress to 
determine whether you live or die and at what level?  Seems to me they already do far
too much of that.


- Samantha