Just owning up to the humiliating spelling error.

I was reminded of this sentence from the current Economist:

Even though one dollar in every six generated by the world’s richest economy is spent on health—almost twice the average for rich countries—infant mortality, life expectancy and survival-rates for heart attacks are all worse than the OECD average.

If you hadn't noticed, the public police force is still rife with corruption and abuse. Being taxpayer-supported doesn't bring direct accountability to the system. In best-case scenarios, honest officers are compelled to enforce destructive laws, such as the Drug War. In worst-case scenarios, you get beatings and even murders. Enforcement can be tainted with racism. There is still profit to be had, too.

Now, imagine if the police were centrally administrated and funded at the Federal level. In effect you would have a street-level military presence, combined with the arbitrariness of TSA inspectors (and all the efficacy, too).

I sure as hell don't want a healthcare system that is beholden to whoever happens to be running the Federal government. What do you think would happen if/when right wingers find themselves at the helm? You think abortions, birth control, Plan B, stem cell therapies or AIDS medications wouldn't get restricted? Democrats always seem to assume that the "good guys" will be in power forever. War. In worst-case scenarios, you get beatings and even murders. Enforcement can be tainted with racism.

Now imagine if the police were centrally administrated and funded at the Federal level. In effect you would have a street-level military presence, combined with the arbitrariness of TSA inspectors (with all the efficacy).

I sure as hell don't want a healthcare system that is beholden to whoever happens to be running the Federal government. What do you think would happen if/when right wingers find themselves at the helm? You think abortions, birth control, Plan B, stem cell therapies or AIDS medications wouldn't get restricted? Democrats always seem to assume that the "good guys" will be in power forever.

If you hadn't noticed, the public police force is still rife with corruption and abuse. Being taxpayer-supported doesn't bring direct accountability to the system. In best-case scenarios, honest officers are compelled to enforce destructive laws, such as the Drug War. In worst-case scenarios, you get beatings and even murders. Enforcement can be tainted with racism. There is still profit to be had, too.

Now, imagine if the police were centrally administrated and funded at the Federal level. In effect you would have a street-level military presence, combined with the arbitrariness of TSA inspectors (and all the efficacy, too).

I sure as hell don't want a healthcare system that is beholden to whoever happens to be running the Federal government. What do you think would happen if/when right wingers find themselves at the helm? You think abortions, birth control, Plan B, stem cell therapies or AIDS medications wouldn't get restricted? Democrats always seem to assume that the "good guys" will be in power forever. War. In worst-case scenarios, you get beatings and even murders. Enforcement can be tainted with racism.

Now imagine if the police were centrally administrated and funded at the Federal level. In effect you would have a street-level military presence, combined with the arbitrariness of TSA inspectors (with all the efficacy).

I sure as hell don't want a healthcare system that is beholden to whoever happens to be running the Federal government. What do you think would happen if/when right wingers find themselves at the helm? You think abortions, birth control, Plan B, stem cell therapies or AIDS medications wouldn't get restricted? Democrats always seem to assume that the "good guys" will be in power forever.

If you hadn't noticed, the public police force is still rife with corruption and abuse. Being taxpayer-supported doesn't bring direct accountability to the system. In best-case scenarios, honest officers are compelled to enforce destructive laws, such as the Drug War. In worst-case scenarios, you get beatings and even murders. Enforcement can be tainted with racism. There is still profit to be had, too.

Now, imagine if the police were centrally administrated and funded at the Federal level. In effect you would have a street-level military presence, combined with the arbitrariness of TSA inspectors (and all the efficacy, too).

I sure as hell don't want a healthcare system that is beholden to whoever happens to be running the Federal government. What do you think would happen if/when right wingers find themselves at the helm? You think abortions, birth control, Plan B, stem cell therapies or AIDS medications wouldn't get restricted? Democrats always seem to assume that the "good guys" will be in power forever.

mynameisdan deploys the "freedom vs. security" argument for one side of the health

insurance argument but fails to see that it applies equally to the other side:

"The relationship between government and the people is kind of like the relationship between parents and teenagers, isn't it?

'As long as you live under MY roof, you will follow MY rules!'

Socialized programs are the government's roof, and the consequence of accepting them is following their rules: i.e. the act of giving up our freedom to run our lives as we see fit.

How much freedom do you want to give up in exchange for security?"

Well, gee, let's consider the alternatives:

You have no insurance and you acquire a catastrophic illness: You're free to go bankrupt treating it. You're free to beg someone to pay for your treatment pro bono. You're free to give up and die.

You have insurance and you acquire a catastrophic illness that your insurance company is determined not to cover: You're free to fight them in court until they run out of money to pay their lawyers or you run out of money to fight them or you run out of breath. You're free to beg and cajole them to live up to their "promise" of coverage sooner rather than later. You're free to give up and die.

How much better those options are than knowing that you'll get some care if you really need it and can't pay for it yourself.

There's no doubt that some private insurance works relatively well for its customers but to argue that simply because it's private, not public, the customers are not in thrall to someone for adequate coverage is just not valid.