The last thing I'm eager to do is wade into the middle of this... but the implied logic that because the government should take on as much as possible because the government has done some good things is just as faulty as the assertion that government should get completely out of the way.

 

Balance is needed... and balance is not what is being pursued by this administration or congress IMO.

 

This is just plain false - What restrictions has this administration placed on businesses outside of proposed changes to health insurance (which should not be a business anyway) and the banking industry? Obama's budget cuts taxes on small and large businesses that hire new folks and/or increase wages. That is not a restriction, it is an incentive which can be pursued by choice, or not pursued. We had this big scare that he would take aware our guns, and he hasn't.

Edited February 1, 201016 yr by rockmom

Oh I see, you only want the government to get out the way in certain areas, but not all. Because they have certainly done a bang up job of putting people back to work recently.

:ohbrother:

 

No, you don't see. Forget it, your contempt for me is in hyper-drive today, perhaps we can try tomorrow.

The last thing I'm eager to do is wade into the middle of this... but the implied logic that because the government should take on as much as possible because the government has done some good things is just as faulty as the assertion that government should get completely out of the way.

 

Balance is needed... and balance is not what is being pursued by this administration or congress IMO.

 

Or the corporate world, to be fair.

Or the corporate world, to be fair.

Quite frankly, Capitolism and balance do not belong together. Nor should they. Capitolism promotes growth, not the zero sum game libs like to play. As far as the Corporate World, small business is what drives Capitolism and the Free Markets and vice versa,, not large corporations. Not picking on you Jim, just joining the debate.

This is just plain false - What restrictions has this administration placed on businesses outside of proposed changes to health insurance (which should not be a business anyway) and the banking industry? Obama's budget cuts taxes on small and large businesses that hire new folks and/or increase wages. That is not a restriction, it is an incentive which can be pursued by choice, or not pursued. We had this big scare that he would take aware our guns, and he hasn't.

 

 

I fail to see why the medical industry should not be a business.

I fail to see why the medical industry should not be a business.

 

Because it should be more about helping people than getting rich.

Quite frankly, Capitolism and balance do not belong together. Nor should they. Capitolism promotes growth, not the zero sum game libs like to play. As far as the Corporate World, small business is what drives Capitolism and the Free Markets and vice versa,, not large corporations. Not picking on you Jim, just joining the debate.

 

Unchecked growth is not always a good thing, because, as we've seen time and time again, the depths that some business operators will sink to in order to squeeze every penny out of it invariably ends up causing suffering. And the bigger the operation, the greater the impact of the suffering.

Because it should be more about helping people than getting rich.

 

So why would anyone in their right mind get into the medical industry, if they aren't going to make money?

So why would anyone in their right mind get into the medical industry, if they aren't going to make money?

 

I didn't say doctors, pharmacists, nurses, dentists, etc., shouldn't make money. But it is an industry where the desire to help people should be the overriding factor in keeping costs in line.

 

I'd be fine with the medical insurance industry going away, and that would allow the aforementioned professionals to get costs in line.

This is just plain false - What restrictions has this administration placed on businesses outside of proposed changes to health insurance (which should not be a business anyway) and the banking industry? Obama's budget cuts taxes on small and large businesses that hire new folks and/or increase wages. That is not a restriction, it is an incentive which can be pursued by choice, or not pursued. We had this big scare that he would take aware our guns, and he hasn't.

 

I believe he is proposing cap and trade legislation that would put some strong restrictions in the form of costs on the coal industry.

 

While others will disagree, I believe that if the health industry was not a business with the associated profit abilities, many health improvements would not have occurred in this country or in the world. A large majority of health innovations have been generated by companies throughout the world because they were willing to invest the money in R&D so they could make a profit down the road.

 

I guess it's a possibility that if the entire health system was ran by the govt (all hospitals, all doctors, all drug manufacturers, all health equipment manufacturers, etc) that the innovations could have happened via strictly govt funded and ran research. But while others may have a lot of confidence in the govt to operate in an efficient manner, I do not have that confidence. Unfortunately, my experiences in life have led me to my belief that all govt is inefficient and the bigger the govt unit, the more inefficient it is.

Because it should be more about helping people than getting rich.

 

So those who go through the expensive process of getting medical training and experience should not be appropriately compensated for their efforts?

 

Those who develop new drugs should not be compensated for all the avenues of research they had to go down until they found a correct formulation?

 

It should be a business that operates at a loss? Exactly how does that improve care?

I didn't say doctors, pharmacists, nurses, dentists, etc., shouldn't make money. But it is an industry where the desire to help people should be the overriding factor in keeping costs in line.

 

I'd be fine with the medical insurance industry going away, and that would allow the aforementioned professionals to get costs in line.

 

 

Sorry didn't see this post first.

 

I honestly think that private and public insurance has been the biggest factor in driving up the cost of services. If doctors, pharmacies and other aspects of the medical field were in constant competition for patients then the quality would go up and the cost would go down and it would become more efficient because it would HAVE to.

 

I am all for forcing the industry to be competitive.

Sorry didn't see this post first.

 

I honestly think that private and public insurance has been the biggest factor in driving up the cost of services. If doctors, pharmacies and other aspects of the medical field were in constant competition for patients then the quality would go up and the cost would go down and it would become more efficient because it would HAVE to.

 

I am all for forcing the industry to be competitive.

 

I agree. Insurance sort of obfuscates the information necessary for competition in the medical industry.

Edited February 1, 201016 yr by Habib

IMHO, asking for examples of restrictions that the Obama administration has tried to put on economic activity and at the same time putting aside Obama's healthcare proposal(s) is a bit like asking Mrs Lincoln to critique the play.

Yep, get out of the way so that we can go back to the unhealthy meat packing industry employing children and overworking adults. We can have lead paint in our toys and on our window sills. We can have dirty restaurants and waste piling up everywhere.

 

Ah, the good ole days when there were actually jobs for both children and adults.:dancingpa.

 

Thank you big government for making my happy meal happier.