Thread: Go Ron ...
View Single Post
  #170  
Old 05-21-2008, 01:20 PM
ceestyle's Avatar
ceestyle ceestyle is offline
Mr.Ganja
Mr. Ganja
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 2,592
Gallery:
ceestyle is a glorious beacon of lightceestyle is a glorious beacon of lightceestyle is a glorious beacon of lightceestyle is a glorious beacon of lightceestyle is a glorious beacon of lightceestyle is a glorious beacon of light
Points: 6,856, Level: 12 Points: 6,856, Level: 12 Points: 6,856, Level: 12
Activity: 27% Activity: 27% Activity: 27%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by homerdog View Post
I agree that privatization would be best. Still don't see how publicly funded health care is the answer, it is a bottomless hole, especially when you are providing illegal immigrants with health care. Currently when Gov programs fail to meet budgets they are propped up with more tax dollars. If it was public health care and they were forced to meet budgets, where do you think those cuts will be made? On the education side, at least make public schools compete on a level playing group, determine exactly how much is spent per child (hold public schools accountable for this cost) and if the parent opts to they can use that amount of $ towards private schools and make it easy to do, I know in some places you can already do this.
Oh man there are so many problems with that education model. I'm sorry I brought it up, actually. If you withhold direct support for public schools by allowing families to pull their money out of it, you get privately funded schools for kids that can afford supplementary tuition and public schools that are even worse off then they were before. There are so many iterations of this scheme, but I've yet to see one that doesn't have a major flaw and result in spiraling inequality.

As far as public health care is concerned, google nader single-payer health care and read his proposal. I'm not saying it's the be-all end-all of health care models, but it's obvious at least that he's put a good deal of thought into it, and it's good food for thought. It turns out that it would be significantly cheaper to have the government run the whole show. Then you don't have any of the overhead of insurance, billing, etc. It's not just Nader that believes this ... Krugman, among others also support the figures.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.08681 seconds with 9 queries