I don't know how much of a disaster it would have been

Post #215,444 by jb4 7/18/05 4:54:36 PM Reply	I don't know how much of a disaster it would have been But is it worse than what we have now? Hard to tell. But there are a few indicators: First, some of our largest corporations (read: contributors to the Republicans) are loudly and publicly crying that healthcare costs are killing them (which is most likely true), and that a "single payer plan" (read: nationalized healthcare, with Uncle Sam as the Single Payer) is necessary to keep them competitive. Second, the >40MM uninsured wouldn't be uninsured under that plan. Two big plusses. Now what would make her plan such a disaster so as to negate those plusses? jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #215,456 by ben_tilly 7/18/05 5:20:02 PM Reply	The amount of bureaucracy created... would have guaranteed mass confusion, no savings, and tons of room for corporate lobbyists to ask Congress to manipulate rules ad nauseum. I understand the desire to legislate a perfect solution. But when it comes to big government mandates, KISS. Her plan would have left us saddled with universal HMOs and crushing bureaucracy. In the maze of regulations there would be plenty of room to point fingers for why it failed. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
Post #215,463 by jb4 7/18/05 6:01:12 PM Reply	So in your mind bureaucracy == failure? Interesting, and there is probably some merit to that viewpoint. Of course, I could scrounge around and find some bureaucracies that were a resounding success. Yet what do we have now? "Guaranteed mass confusion, no savings, and tons of room for corporate lobbyists to ask Congress to manipulate rules ad nauseum." Yes, indeed.... So in absence of the "perfect solution", we have no solution. Dunno about you, Ben, but that doesn't sound like a ringing endorsemnent for the status quo, now does it? Hell, you're an IT guy...don't you believe in a solution that is "good enough" to solve a problem, or are you an ivory towerist that insists on all or nothing? (I think I already know the answer...it's a rhetorical question.) jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #215,477 by ben_tilly 7/18/05 8:27:32 PM Reply	No But in my mind, excessive bureaucracy is a red flag for potential failure conditions. Hillary's plan waved this flag way too boldly for my tastes. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)

Welcome to IWETHEY!