I haven’t seen it yet – but intend to (I’ve been a little slow on movie-going lately).

But here’s the thing – since when is it the government’s job to provide national health care?  What will Michael Moore want next – government provided donuts?

This all stems from FDR trying to fix the Great Depression (which he didn’t – the war did that) – and making us all dependent on WELFARE!

Sure there are some people that maybe the government should HELP – but you don’t need free health care for life because you decided to skip college and go run off and party for 10 years, only after that realizing that you’ve wasted your life away – it’s not the government’s job to fix it.

And look at the nations with national health care – Canada, France, Cuba – all their systems are TERRIBLE.  You wait way too long for something not even well done.  Luckily here in America, we will always have greedy doctors, who even if we get national health care, would be willing to privatize their practice for a somewhat more expensive price – where people could actually get real medical help.

Done Ranting,

Ranting Republican


8 Responses to “Sicko”

  1. mycowardice Says:

    Ranting Republican,

    Could you list the other government services that we should cancel? Michael Moore mentions a few, like the police and the fire dept… Should we cancel those? Public schools? Any infrastructure? Unemployment insurance? Social security?

    Today health care can become a government concern. Tomorrow it might be supplying donut. Who knows? Who cares? We need to address our problems as they arrive.

    The system can’t be fixed by itself… We need to fix our broken system.

  2. inkslwc Says:

    Whoa! I never said that whatever Michael Moore supports, I’m against, but nice use of a straw man argument.

    Public schools – that IS a government’s job – it has been from the beginning.

    Unemployment insurance – depends – for people abusing the system/lazy people who are on it too long – it needs to end.

    Social security – privatize it.

    Here’s a way to fix the system – get the moochers out! If only the TRULY needy were helped – we’d be OK – but in order to do that, you need subjectivism – and then you get lawsuits because Joe Smith who happens to be a (fill in the race here) didn’t get it – and that’s DISCRIMINATION!

  3. mycowardice Says:

    My point is that you agree that the government serves a fundamental purpose. Some services shouldn’t be left to luck, the free market or charity.

    Giving away donuts is the straw man here. Health care is something fundamental most of us will eventually need.

    Instead of having a system that works against us, one that is left to luck or to charity, I much prefer to have the government tackle this problem just like it tackles the topics I listed above.

    The whole point of social security is to have a mandatory safety net. To privatize would defeat the purpose. The same logic should apply to health care. A minimum should be provided and managed. The rest, we can leave to the private sector.

    (A minimum = more than just access to the emergency room!)

  4. inkslwc Says:

    OK – the donuts was a joke, not really a strawman, but that part is insignificant.

    The difference between police and fire and h.c. is that police and fire really can’t be easily abused – and it’s a LOT cheaper (not to mention it’s locally controlled.) – I have NO problem if a local area wants to do free local health care – it’s THEIR option – so the people have an option in their taxes – also – people also can go to say the next county if they want “better” (i.e. costlier) health care.

  5. James Says:

    If anyone cancels Police services, I will go on a rampage (just kidding).

    However, I am all for aid, welfare, etc. Especially if the state has more responsibility to provide for it. We do need welfare, and aid for people who actually need it, not for those lovely welfare queens.

  6. James Says:

    The federal government and state governments would save billions and billions of dollars if they distributed aid on an as needed basis, not on a basis of people who are too lazy to work.

    Now, I wouldn’t mind government provided dounuts! I love donuts! 😛 kidding


  7. mycowardice Says:

    So we only do ‘free/common’ services when they can’t be abused? is that our criteria?

    We deal with policing and fire protection because we think that
    1- it’s more efficient
    2- it’s necessary to keep society going
    3- it’s a better way to allocate the risk

    so for 1, the point is that we can’t all be creating our own fire dept. So, we create one for everyone and share it. We don’t make the fire dept a profit center.

    2: we can’t afford to have houses burn and for people not to have the means to stop those. Having individuals with burnt houses means that we lose productive members of society. Thos people will become a burden on the rest.

    3: We know that houses will burn. So instead of having one person hold the bag, we share that among all people.

    Look at the burden the current system is creating. Companies have to deal with health care on top of what they do. People are forced to go into bankruptcy because they can’t deal with the hospital bills. We all pay for people using the emergency room because they don’t have preventive care. Etc.

    As for the donuts, obviously the government can’t provide them if they want to provide health care…. So I vote for the health care 🙂

  8. Denver Dave Says:

    I some would agree that there is a difference between access to health care and donuts. While we may sneak an extra donut, few would seek an extra gall bladder operation.

    No one expects health care to be free. One way or another we will pay for it. The discussion is whether is is best paid for like we do education, roads, fire protection, police or whether we should pay for it like we buy donuts.

    As for what people from other countries think – – have you seen the movie SiCKO ? Most people that I have talked to from other countries including Canada, England, Australia, New Zealand think that their countries approach to health care was better than the US. Just look at Tommy Douglas’ status in Canada (responsible for creating the Canadian health care system).

    Isn’t it time that we take the 20 to 30 percent of our health care dollars that is going to health insurance industry profits and administration and actually spend it on delivering health care?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: