bloomberg is an idiot - ban 44oz sodas

[VTA]

[VTA]

[a_minimalist]

Your last sentence is exactly what's at the core of the argument and the much better approach to the issue. The problem is philosophical and not economic and definitely not political. It would be better to discuss if it's moral to have a healthcare system that is a business first. Is it right that our health is commodity? If not what do we who have the most to lose do about it?


I'm hesitant to say what 'people need to do', because I know I don't have all the answers, but I do think if we have all of our moral ducks in a row all else would follow and I would dogmatically say where we should start is by not allowing bureaucracy to enter into it.

I think you're pretty spot on with this, well done. It makes a ton of sense and really gets at the heart of the problem. The only problem seems to be how big of an issue it is and how lengthy the conversation would have to be to get the problem solved. We need to act right now and if picking a couple of short term answers might help a bit I'm okay with it.

To address what you asked earlier though, I do think the healthcare system should be a business first. I say that because that's what has provided us with cutting edge medicines and technologies. It needs to be a business to fund R&D. If it wasn't a business billions of dollars would need to be subsidized by the government to pay for R&D. For all of the people who don't want the government in their life, how could they want government controlling R&D and deciding what is studied and what isn't studied. That to me is scary. I have no problem with a bit of government in our lives, I don't want a lot, but I think it has a place in everyones life; not a lot, but a bit.

[a_minimalist]

I guess to a certain extent, I'm a libertarian too... not enough to support that loon Ron Paul, though...

IMO, if you're consistently making bad choices that harm society you aren't a libertarian though, you're a detriment to society and holding progression back.

[a_minimalist]

we don't have one. : )

that's comforting because, no offense to the cz, but it's a bid prudish over there. the fact that pictures of women in bikinis isn't allowed is a little creepy.

this forum is the america of forums. cz is the china of forums.

[JBond]

We need to exhaust every possible non government solution to the health care issue before we turn over our health to a bureaucracy. Things like tort reform and selling insurance across state lines would be a good start. I never understood Obama'a argument for regulating interstate commerce when it is not interstate commerce.

[JBond]

Time to impeach him, no doubt about it... unless, of course, diet soft drinks are exempted (I'm a diabetic)...

I can't say I am shocked by your attitude....It is Ok for the government to create ridiculous bans as long as it does not affect you personally. I have heard that before somewhere....

We discussed this on the old CBZ, so I thought I would follow up. I knew you had some concerns, but were in favor of Obamacare. Do you still feel that way even though many employers are dumping coverage just as the crazy nuts on the right predicted?

[VTA]

I think you're pretty spot on with this, well done. It makes a ton of sense and really gets at the heart of the problem. The only problem seems to be how big of an issue it is and how lengthy the conversation would have to be to get the problem solved. We need to act right now and if picking a couple of short term answers might help a bit I'm okay with it.

You can probably tell by now I most likely wouldn't bend to giving government that authority. Even though in reality we probably don't have a choice. We've already seen that the voice of the people is not really as strong as the dollars of the lobbyists.

Regardless, the idea that it's that urgent is the danger: that we have to act impetuously. In all truth, this country was batting a pretty good average in terms of coverage. Even with the bloated numbers this Universal Healthcare idea rode in on (supposedly 50 million without coverage) a system that had a 75% success rate doesn't indicate a monumental failure that requires an entire overhaul of our system. Instead the 25% should have been scrutinized and their failure considered. Not crassly and judgmentally, but honestly.

There are far more dangerous issues facing the country and while we can focus on more than one issue at a time, I don't think this is one that is as urgent as say our entire economic waste and the foolishness with China. We don't need to run toward a solution to healthcare anxiously, because if those other issues implode in our face, healthcare will not matter one bit. I think this issue can survive a good thought out effort, with the people involved, involved. Mainly doctors and patients first.

To address what you asked earlier though, I do think the healthcare system should be a business first. I say that because that's what has provided us with cutting edge medicines and technologies. It needs to be a business to fund R&D. If it wasn't a business billions of dollars would need to be subsidized by the government to pay for R&D. For all of the people who don't want the government in their life, how could they want government controlling R&D and deciding what is studied and what isn't studied. That to me is scary. I have no problem with a bit of government in our lives, I don't want a lot, but I think it has a place in everyones life; not a lot, but a bit.

That's good reasoning and really I think it speaks more to the wisdom of leaving healthcare to the free market instead of allowing bureaucracy to come and foul it up. I don't mind regulation and checks and balances, we sort of had that but the run-arounds and loopholes have pretty much exhausted them. Again it becomes a moral issue of balance, weighing profit with honest assistance. That should be voiced more and not sold simply on an idea of dollars and cents.

[a_minimalist]

That's good reasoning and really I think it speaks more to the wisdom of leaving healthcare to the free market instead of allowing bureaucracy to come and foul it up. I don't mind regulation and checks and balances, we sort of had that but the run-arounds and loopholes have pretty much exhausted them. Again it becomes a moral issue of balance, weighing profit with honest assistance. That should be voiced more and not sold simply on an idea of dollars and cents.

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say. You've actually pointed out the bigger issue that I kept passing over, so thank you.