On the Issues - Healthcare

Greetings again! This blog series promises to be quite lenghty so please bear with me. I will create a seperate entry for each of the issues we will cover. The issues are The Economy, Energy Policy, National Security/Immigration, Foreign policy/Iraq, Healthcare, Education, Ethics/Civil Rights.The following information in bold is take directly from the candidates web pages. I have elected not to name the candidates until a seperate blog to be presented after all of the others, not that the enlightened among us won't be able to figure it out. All that said lets begin with the issues, Healthcare:

See my seperate post on healthcare for my personal stance.

Candidate 1: Federal health care programs, most notably Medicare and Medicaid, have become financially unsustainable. These programs need to be transformed to emphasize patient choice, focus on the truly needy, and add cost-saving incentives. Here, too, market principles should be applied to bring better quality health care at less cost.

In general, private charity should be the first resort for anyone in need. In 2007, for example, Americans gave more than $300 billion to charity, an increase over 2006 despite growing economic uncertainty. Government should eliminate regulatory barriers that inhibit private philanthropy, and expand tax deductions to encourage charitable giving.

Candidate 2: "I...believe that every American has the right to affordable health care. I believe that the millions of Americans who can't take their children to a doctor when they get sick have that right...We now face an opportunity - and an obligation - to turn the page on the failed politics of yesterday's health care debates. It's time to bring together businesses, the medical community, and members of both parties around a comprehensive solution to this crisis, and it's time to let the drug and insurance industries know that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair."

There are 37 million poor Americans. Most poor Americans are in the workforce, yet still cannot afford to make ends meet. And too many poor Americans are single mothers who are raising children. He has been a lifelong advocate for the poor -- as a young college graduate, he rejected the high salaries of corporate America and moved to work as a community organizer. As an organizer, he worked with churches, residents and local government to set up job training programs for the unemployed and after school programs for kids.

Candidate 3: He is willing to address the fundamental problem: the rapidly rising cost of U.S. health care. Bringing costs under control is the only way to stop the erosion of affordable health insurance, save Medicare and Medicaid, protect private health benefits for retirees, and allow our companies to effectively compete around the world.


My thoughts: First of all I decided to add this bit of poverty/gov't assistance as it seemed to fit. Candidate 3 had no additional information on this, this is becoming a trend.

Candidate 1 is the type of person that everyone thinks is hateful and evil yet he says here that we wants to adjust federal programs like medicare and medicaid to help the "truly needy". This means the people who actual have a NEED, not the silly ones who think to themselves "hey if I don't work and if I don't try, then I can go to the doctor for free!". I know though, thats mean and hateful right? Its not their fault that they're so damn lazy is it? Candidate 1 also makes a call to the free market to solve the cost issues. Of course free market economics don't work, right? No...we need gov't regulation to keep all the evil people from PROFITING!

Candidate 1 wins my vote with this line; "In general, private charity should be the first resort for anyone in need. In 2007, for example, Americans gave more than $300 billion to charity". People are so conviced that conservatives (oops gave that away huh) are hateful mean people because (we) they want to get rid of government assistance. This is the perfect rebuttal. Private charity should always be the first resort for people in need. Yes we have a moral responsibility to assist those in need, the point is the government has NO RIGHT to force that morality on citizens. Those who don't subscribe to that morality have the MORAL REQUIREMENT not to suppor those people. Americans are largely extremely charitable...with the exception of those crazy drunk driving left wing nutcase movies star types....

"I believe that every person has the right to affordable health care" begins candidate 2's speech here. I rebut with "I believe every doctor has the right to profit from their special skill and important service". By demanding affordable healthcare you demand lower prices and by demanding lower prices you demand services at LESS than their market value which is absurd. Candidate 2 lives on these types of speeches (oops gave that away too) he claims that tons of sick kids don't get to go to the doctor even though they easily qualify for gov't programs that are available right now! I dunno what else to say....

Candidate 2 continues his self lauding in his bit on poverty. First he talks about the millions of people who work part-time on less-than-high-school educations and less-than-full-minds that (somehow) can't find employment to pay for their "needs". Firstly the poor are the WORST spender/savers in the economy. Secondarily every occupation in America has a market price...supply and demand...yes there is high demand for McDonalds workers BUT with all the HS students AND the brain deads competeing for the jobs there is an even HIGHER supply. Candidate two then makes me sick by ignoring the fact that he married a woman in a high position (in healthcare - oops) so that he could work "the streets" and get all that first-hand experience. PUHLEASE!

(I think i'm having a bad morning, my apoliogies for letting my personal bias drip in here, if you hate it just read the bold...nobody but El Tom reads these anyway)

Candidate three basically says there's a problem and he's willing to solve it. What he doesn't say is he's just waiting for someone to tell him how.

The Bottom Line: I'm not even going to expand, candidate 1 wins by a mile...or a parsec ;-)....