If the Feds ran supermarkets, would you expect cheaper food ...

or better service? Why do we think health care would work like that? Maybe the WalMart model, with posted prices would work better.

Obama was and is not a very original thinker. His ObamaCare is just the same old stuff. Maybe something really different would be better.

Posted by Christine & John at November 13, 2013 6:07 PM
Comments
Comment #374042

C/J, if the Feds ran supermarkets there would be little food. My best friend lived in Poland under the communists. The food, clothing, paint and most other stores had long lines or empty shelves. He returned to Poland eight years after the Soviet Empire dissolved and found Poland completely changed. Food and other commodities were plentiful and cheap. Capitalism had returned and the people benefited.

Under the commies Poles who wanted to paint their homes were told what color was available and allowed. Under their management system they produced what they wanted, rather than what people wanted or needed. Sound familiar?

obamacare is what obama and the liberals wanted, not what the people wanted.

Posted by: Royal Flush at November 13, 2013 7:19 PM
Comment #374043

Royal

I lived in Poland eight years. It is proof positive that communism is stupid and immoral. I am afraid, however, that almost a quarter century after the fall of the Berlin wall, the lesson is being forgotten.

Posted by: CJ at November 13, 2013 7:53 PM
Comment #374046

There has never been a lesson to learn. The left are oblivious to what communism has done to other nations. The left has had a one track mind and at this point in history, Obama just happened to be the man in place to initiate the plan.

There was a joke going around on Facebook; if the Federal Government was in charge of the Sahara Desert, within a few years, there would be a shortage of sand.

This is going to boil down to one of two scenarios:

1. Obamacare will implode.

2. Obama will trick the Republicans into bailing him out.

Obama is supposed to be coming out with the big fix on “If you like your HC, you can keep your HC”. I look for Obama to call for a subsidy to be given to all Americans whose rates have gone up and they can’t afford them. If the Republicans refuse to vote for this; they will be labeled as harsh and not compassionate toward those in need. Of course, a subsidy would do nothing to help the problem…just a band aid.

The chaos associated with obamacare is exactly what the left wants. The goal is single payer government run HC. There is only one problem…we still live in America and we still vote for Reps and Senators; and right now those Dem Reps and Senators are in real trouble.

Posted by: Political Hostage at November 13, 2013 10:25 PM
Comment #374146

I have a different idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66QdQErc8JQ

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 14, 2013 7:55 AM
Comment #374158

CJ, the problem with Republicans is that their brains aren’t wired to comprehend the difference and necessity for non=profit organizations, like government. Your article is ridiculous, equivocating as it does, government function and supermarkets. The government is in the business of protecting and defending those who can’t on their own, protect and defend themselves from all manner of adversity from predation to invasion.

With 30 to 40 million Americans lacking health care and health care inflation eating our future, it was appropriate for the government to step in under law, and remedy these circumstances, since the private sector demonstrably and logically would not and could not. Non-profit endeavors are necessary, just as government is necessarily a non-profit. If that statement doesn’t make sense to you, then it is one reason you are a Republican.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 14, 2013 12:37 PM
Comment #374176
CJ, the problem with Republicans is that their brains aren’t wired to comprehend the difference and necessity for non=profit organizations, like government.

David, you know very well that there is a difference between non-profit organizations and government. non-profit organizations (of which many Republicans freely donate to at much higher rates than Democrats) cannot use FORCE on anyone to fulfill their functions.

I am for replacing most of the government with non-profit organizations, but for some reason this is frowned upon by many progressives, I wonder what that reason could be?

Posted by: Rhinehold at November 14, 2013 3:35 PM
Comment #374195

David & Rhinhold

That’s right. Government is not like a non-profit. It is like a government and that is very different.

Government does many useful things. It is necessary. Some things it cannot do well. It looks like this insurance scheme is one of them.

Rhinhold is also right about non-profits. We conservatives give a lot more liberally than do liberals.

Posted by: CJ at November 14, 2013 5:51 PM
Comment #374199
The government is in the business of protecting and defending those who can’t on their own, protect and defend themselves from all manner of adversity from predation to invasion.
Perhaps David R. Remer could use a wiring diagram as well. Perhaps he has his head stuck in the sand and cannot see the invasion that is taking place on our southern border by illegal Mexicans and people from many other countries. Perhaps he wants to remain ignorant of the many citizens killed by those illegals in our country. Perhaps he doesn’t see, because his head is in the sand, of the many people killed needlessly by police using no-knock, military style invasions of people’s homes. Perhaps he doesn’t see the violation of people’s rights, when police use a blanket stop and frisk policy to do their job, because he has sand in his eyes. Blue sand.

David R. Remer is not one to talk about how government is so benevolent and trustworthy, especially when his actions, while in control of this WatchBlog site, correspond so well with the Democratic’s actions when dealing with people they disagree with. It seems he’s falling back into his snarky and arrogant ways. I do hope no one mistakenly let’s his finger get back on the moderator trigger.

Posted by: Weary Willie at November 14, 2013 7:42 PM
Comment #374235

Typical of Conservatives to FAIL the logic test I presented. Government IS a non-profit organization. That makes it like a Non-Profit Organization, separate and distinct from a FOR PROFIT supermarket. Your responses SiMPLY point out that among non-profits, there are differences. True. But, but doesn’t in anyway address the point made about the difference between FOR PROFITS and NON-PROFITS.

As for your other point, in general, the RICH do give more per capita than the poor. Conserving wealth is a hallmark of Conservatives, even as they advantage themselves of GOVERNMENT tax deductions for charitable contributions. In essence recovering some or most of their donations by lowering their effective taxable income. The poorer and middle class in America can’t deduct their charitable contributions from taxes because their deductions don’t exceed the required percentage of adjusted gross income, forcing them to take the Standard deduction instead. Hence, the conservatives with wealth have incentive toward charitable giving that profits them. Ergo, they give more than their less wealthy American neighbors per capita. Doesn’t exactly speak to conservatives having a larger claim to compassion.

Posted by: David R. Remer at November 15, 2013 12:46 PM
Comment #375666

It’s no agnosticism that backpack accept been one of the replica handbags must-have alarm of activity for humans anytime back recorded history began. It’s a affirmation of aftertaste and fashion, as able-bodied as a attribute of agreeable cachet and recognition. Recently, replica handbags are accepting common popularity. There are millions who ambition to own a absolute artisan bag but cannot allow to do so. This is because the aboriginal artisan handbags are actual expensive. Thus, the replica handbags accept taken the apple bazaar of replica handbags uk absolutely by storm and are in abundant demand. In a word, while you may allegation to absorb added than you can allow on an aboriginal handbag, the replica backpack will bulk you much, abundant less, while searching every bit as elegant, adult and chic as the masterpiece. This agency that affairs replica will accredit you to own altered pieces befitting your apparel and occasion. Replica duke bag is what about accepted as backpack that archetype the actualization and blush of abounding big-ticket cast name handbags but they are fabricated by altered actual such as lower above of chanel replica covering and lower above of stitching. Replica backpack sometimes aswell alarm affected handbag, which sounds absolutely acrimonious to buyers and all of us do not ambition to buy affected handbag. Replica backpack is not consistently the affected archetypal of able-bodied accepted cast name ones, but they are addition another for humans who could not allow to by accurate big-ticket handbag.

Posted by: Jodie at January 16, 2014 1:51 AM
Post a comment