Comments on: Do you REALLY Want To Defeat Socialized Medicine? Then You’d Better “Change The Argument”

By: Toni C

Toni C — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:44:20 +0000

This makes perfect sence to me. When Gov artifically changes things to fit in their box their are unentended consequences. They never think of the UC. This has ocured with every thing they do Example Medicare,Welfare,postoffice,Amtrac,VA,,Economy,Afermative action, you name it thats why they should stay within their boundries they have stayed way out side of the lines. Hey you should send this to Newt G. and every Senator you can. This is just too much common sence. I love it

By: pete

pete — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 04:17:17 +0000

I would prefer a free market solution, but even among the socialist proposals I am really surprised that there hasn't been discussion about the health care plans in other countries besides Canada and Britain. Maybe some Asian or European countries have really good plans, etc. It's seems so basic to study other plans and see which ones work best, and how low their costs are, etc. before proposing massive changes to our current (broken) health system.

By: Scott Bieser

Scott Bieser — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:25:26 +0000

Well, I read the series and the best point it makes is that our current system really is half-socialized already. The second-best point made is that Canada's system has a serious problem with waiting list delays. But aside from some simple assertions it doesn't really make the case that a truly free-market system is better, or explain why government interventions have made our system so expensive. I wish it were stronger on these points, backing up the assertions with some verifiable data.