I hear socialists like Howard Dean saying we need national health care. He wants the government to take care of you. He is against "Health Care for Profit". Besides the un-American anti capitalist overtones. Do you really want institutions as incompotent as state or federal governments taking care of you?
If you ever had any dealings with government red-tape, I hope your answer is no. A good example of how inept government agencies are is Children and Youth Services. In two states, Florida and New Jersey, there have been massive problems with this agency.
A child in Florida who was supposed to be in the care of a foster family just...vanished. And now in New Jersey, four young boys were found almost starved to death. The oldest, who was 19 years old, was only 4 feet tall and weighed only 40 pounds.
What makes this bad is even after case workers saw these boys, they still let the parents take foster care of several more children.
Do you really think that a huge agency like the federal government will be much better at taking care of you than a proven system of health care?
Posted by tbux at October 27, 2003 08:35 AMOf course we don't want the Feds running health care. If health care is socialized, where is the competition? What incentive will these bureaucrat nurses and doctors have to "go the extra mile." As it is now, hospitals at least have a modicum of competition and so must make an attempt at customer service and satisfaction.
If you want our hospitals to be run like the post office then vote for Howard Dean.
Posted by: Rob at October 27, 2003 09:22 AMWe're on the same wavelength on this story. It sickened me when I heard the combined weight of the four boys was less than 140lbs. I immediately made a comparison between foster care and health care. If the foster care system can starve (or lose) a kid, I'm sure a state-run health care system can do the same.
Posted by: Interested-Participant at October 28, 2003 06:15 PM
