1.   libhomo
     November 22nd, 2009 @ 2:11 am

   If you are against socialism, why do you have a communist symbol in your logo?

   Besides, the healthcare reform in the Senate is not socialism. Remember, every wealthy country except the US has government provided healthcare. People in those countries prefer it to what we have here, they spend less of their GDP on healthcare, and everyone gets care.

   Unless you think government fire departments are evil, there really is no reason to oppose government healthcare.

2.   Eileen
     November 22nd, 2009 @ 11:44 am

   Dear GodlessLiberalHomo,

   For starters, thanks for commenting. But, may I call you something for short? Maybe, Steve?

   Hi, Steve, I’m the Washington Bureau Chief. T.L. asked me to step in and backhand your leftist mishmash into submission as he’s off clubbing baby seals this fine morning.

   First, socialism and communism, though both wrong and both tied to Marxist thought, are not the same. You know better, Steve. Tsk, tsk, tsk. (You get three ‘tsks’ because I’m extra disappointed.) As for our little sign being a communist sign, commies don’t believe in private property, do they, Steve? To each according to their needs, and we needed a logo. Looks like we picked a good one. It sure got you all flustered.

   Now, on to the substance. The healthcare bill before the Senate is indeed very socialistic. Socialism is a system in which control of the means of production and distribution of goods and services rests with the government. This bill would do that, as well as giving the government control over a larger share of capital and allowing them, not individuals, to make core decisions about healthcare.

   Steve, why am I telling you this? It seems like you advocate some socialist tenets, so why do you feel the need to insist the healthcare bill isn’t socialist in spirit and intent? Please clarify.

   As for other countries, the easiest jab is that that’s them and we don’t have to do things the way they do any more than they have to do things the way we do. Not all states may necessarily thrive on the exact same programs.

   But the meat is graver, still. Nations with socialized medical systems hardly ‘care’ for everyone. The same people who caring leftists such as yourself are all atwitter over – say immigrants, the absolute poorest, the perpetually unemployed, and those with debilitating mental health problems – are left out in the worker’s paradise – often because of the nasty little problem of there not being enough money to give all things to all people.

   For those who do get care, wait times are so long as to make the treatment, when it comes, too little, too late. Numerous treatments are not even available, as they are just ‘too expensive’ for the citizens who are so well-cared for by their benevolent rulers. The overall attitude toward human life, the dignity, privacy, and autonomy of the patient, and the spirit of healing is abysmal, if not absent.

   C’mon, Steve, where’s your compassion? We’re talking about suffering human beings. They paid in 87% of their income in assorted taxes and gave up all their privacy like good little comrades. Oughtn’t they to get something back?

   Thus, these states that spend a smaller percentage of their GDP on health have nothing to boast about. They provide wretched medical care, so of course they get it cheaply. Them’s basic economics.

   On top of that, they aren’t putting money toward R&D, because the U.S. does it for them. How many discoveries have been missed out on when socialist states decide money for research isn’t warranted? That’s a staggering opportunity cost. But, if we go socialist, no one will be doing any research. Which is fine, as no one will be paying for new treatments anyway.

   We also love the polls where blissful, superbly healthy, socialists rain contempt on free-wheelin’ America. Specifically, we love picking apart the methodology, pointing out the people who have the biggest complaints against socialized medicine are unavailable to comment, and finishing up with a nod to the people who vote with their feet (actually, their saved up frequent flyer miles) by coming here for care.

   Lastly, the firemen. Steve…what are we going to do with you? Have you signed up for our re-education camp, yet? What you’re on here (besides the drugs) is called a ’slippery slope’. Why must it be that if I agree there is even one thing the government should administer, it must follow that the government ought to do everything?

   Putting out a fire, an infrequent situation that is a crisis when it happens, is very different from healthcare.

   And, hold onto your Che Guevera boxers, Steve, because this is really going to get you in the what-nots, there are some who make an argument that even emergency services could be effectively privatized and become more efficient. In fact, maybe you would like to check out some thinkers of this persuasion. We recommend you read some Murray Rothbard to prep yourself for our re-education camp. You are coming, right, Steve?

   In fact, we here at PPC are in favor of private sector firemen because it would make the firemen calendars even hotter.

   You didn’t think about that, Steve, did ya’?

   See you at re-education camp!

   Til, then, lots of capitalist warm-fuzzies from the Potomac shores,

   Yours, etc.

   E

Follow PPC

Search