Edwards, health care, and communism

Kizzume

I don't know about you, but I find some of Edward's latest pushes for health care to be rather communistic. Not socialistic, but communistic, as well as still including the negative aspects to capitalism.

He believes in a strange system of garnishing wages for health care INSURANCE, not just to pay everyone's health care, but INSURANCE, and that everyone should be REQUIRED to have insurance:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/11/edwards-garnish.html

Then he believes that everyone should REQUIRED to go to the doctor on a regular basis.

Something strange I just found:

When I do a search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&um=1&q=edwards+checkups+mandatory&sa=N&tab=nw

I get a lot of responses--many from news organizations, whether they're right wing or not.

But when I search those same terms in Google News, NO results. I see news articles returned from years ago on Google news, and they can't return those? What's up with that?

Anyway--he seems to be for a type of government that I would not wish to be a citizen under. I'm not going to take medications I don't want to, and I'm not going to pay for the beuocracy of insurance companies in a mandatory sort of way. If I'm required to pay, it should be something ran for a non-profit purpose.

I don't like Edwards at all now.

chuq · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 135 Location: Gulf South

Sorry, as an ultra-liberal I do not see his proposal as communistic. It will however be billed as "creeping socialism". Kucinich's plan is closer to socialism than Edwards.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject:

I'm all for socialized medicine. I'm not for what he is proposing. It's a horrible mix.

debateman · Joined: 05 Dec 2007 Posts: 349 Location: New Mexico

We really need a working blend of public and private to ensure the best of both worlds. When you socialize medicine it makes research less appealing and we you privatize you are unable to ensure basic care to all. A hybrid is the only logical option.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:42 pm Post subject:

Yeah, it does make research less appealing, but it just doesn't seem like there's a feasible way of doing a hybrid without it screwing over someone. I don't know. I'll really have to think about that.

chuq · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 135 Location: Gulf South

So what you guys are saying is, research is about the cash not about the assistance to mankind.

Kizzume · Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 3:43 pm Post subject:

?? No. It's about both. Without cash, the assistance won't happen.

chuq · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 135 Location: Gulf South

Kizzume · Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 2:40 pm Post subject:

I just realized the idiocy of my last response---you were talking about research and I was talking about assistance. Duh kizzume.

I agree--people do research into those kinds of things to help mankind, not to get a big paycheck. They're not the ones making the bucks as it is--the management is. At least with the government it would be harder to completely screw over the ones doing the research.