"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 09:58:57 -0800, "Capt. JG"
said:

Ah, the old "ya gotta do it for the po' folks" argument. The politicians
have found that it's hard to get votes by handing out things just to the
po'
folks. The new game is to hand things out to everybody and then explain
that
somebody else (typically "the rich") is going to pay for it. That's how
we
got the infamous donut hole.


So, what you're saying is that society should do nothing for the poor...
just let them get sick, and cost the rest of us even more. Makes a lot of
sense.

Nope. What I'm saying is that if you want to give handouts to the po'
folks,
call them handouts, and be forthright about the fact that the rest of us
are
gonna pay for them. Then make those handouts more affordable for the rest
of
us to pay for by reducing the incentive of those who presently pay
virtually
nothing directly for those services to reduce the amount they demand. Make
them have to pony up a bit more each time they use those resources.
Convert
the present system of prepayment into a true system of insurance. Use the
demand curve to reduce the quantity demanded. It's insane when folks
making
in the hundreds of thousands pay $20 per visit to see the doctor.


Why do you believe it isn't obvious who's paying for the supposed handouts?
We've been doing "handouts" since FDR.

I would also like to know how you reduce incentives of those who pay
"virtually" nothing if those people have little or no money to pay more? The
only way I can think of is to make it extraordinarily difficult for them to
get healthcare, and that's certainly what the Bu****s and the other
right-wing nuts have attempted. How much more do you suggest a person of
limited means should pay and to whom should he or she pay it?

Where are you getting this about folks who make 100s of 1000s paying $20 to
see a doctor? The only way this happens is if you're covered by your
companies insurance policy, a policy that I guarantee is going to limit what
is or isn't a legitimate visit. Do you really believe that someone with a
company policy is going to go to the doctor because they have the sniffles?
Companies are paying more and more for coverage for their employees. They
have an incentive to keep people healthy if they can. That they can offer
coverage that's at all affordable to regular employees is many times a
factor of the company's size and thus bargaining ability with the insurance
companies.

Seems like you're changing the argument from don't help poor people to don't
help the rich. Which is it?


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com