We have the right to keep and bear arms...
Should we demand the government provide us with an AR-15?

We have the right to free speech...
Should we demand the government provide us with a radio/televisions station?

We have the right to worship as we please...
Should we demand the government build us a church, synagogue, mosque, etc...?

We have the right to healthcare...
Should we demand the government provide us with health insurance?

If the government provides us with our rights, do we really have rights?

Obviously my questions are rhetorical. True freedom is born in an individuals right to provide for himself or for his fellow man if he so chooses, absent of government coercion.

Let hear from the "free" huddle.

Free speech... the government shouldn't go out of its way to monitor free speech... Fox News. Let them say what they want. We have the right to have a dissenting opinion!

should we demand the government provide courts to "establish justice" we should and do
should we demand the government provide police to "insure domestic tranquility" we should and do
should we demand the government provide military to "provide for the common defense" we should and do
should we demand the government provide health care to "promote the general welfare" we should and have done for some with medicare and medicaid
all these demands help to 'secure the blessing of liberty"

All those aforementioned demands are public goods, that the government MUST provide. They MUST provide them b/c market failures are present. If the government does not provide them, the market will fail to provide such goods, b/c it would be unreasonable to exclude non-payers and unreasonable to charge each person individually. Government needs to check to make sure it is a public good before they provide it.

General Motors is not a public good. They are a business, and they should have failed.

the present healthcare system is an obvious example of a market failure.

Why? My healthcare is fine.

I'm still waiting on my free shelter and food. I would think that those would be even more vital to Americans than having health care, but you never hear anyone say anything about that.

isadore wrote: the present healthcare system is an obvious example of a market failure.

If the government fails to adequately provide something, it is not a market failure. A market failure is when the market, left on its own, would fail to produce something, b/c there is no incentive for producers.

listen closer
there is insufficent attempts to fill in the wholes in our economic system with food stamps, housing allowances and medicaid

ernest_t_bass wrote:

isadore wrote: the present healthcare system is an obvious example of a market failure.

If the government fails to adequately provide something, it is not a market failure. A market failure is when the market, left on its own, would fail to produce something, b/c there is no incentive for producers.

as in failing to provide a necessary service to several million Americans at an affordable level of price

that might not fit your book definition, but it is a failure that is causing untold expense and suffering

Yes, I am providing the textbook definition of a market failure. What you are describing is a situation in which the government is failing to provide the public good.

Answer the question posed above. Why is the government not providing my food and shelter? Isn't that part of 'general welfare'?

a public good that the government has so far not been allowed to provide.

They should provide it though, right? They better hurry up and do it so I can quit my job.

The purpose of government "safety nets" (which would be your food and shelter) are for people who are experiencing unfavorable economic conditions. When you hear the term "welfare," you automatically think negative thoughts b/c of the people out there that abuse it. Same with food stamps, WIC, subsidized housing, etc.

If you are experiencing unfavorable economic conditions, then the Govt will be there to help you out with food and shelter. When you no longer need it, but choose to stay on it, you are abusing it. Or, if you just "choose" not to go back to work, since you are on welfare, you are abusing it.

I hate big government, with a passion, but every society needs some type of safety net. Safety nets and/or public good are BOTH needed in situations where market failures are present.

so ernest, we need a public option, right.
tell me when you get done sticking needles in your FDR, stiglitz, krugman dolls, or are they your heroes for pushing and supporting a real safety net.

I think that those folks who really want government intervention with health insurance need to step back and think about a few things.
- how efficient and effective has government handled health related programs so far? (try not to laugh)
- has our government ever learned its lesson? Or will it? (please don't laugh)
- who has read the VA thread? (stop laughing!)
- when high powered elected officials claim that they want a single-payer system and that it will take them 15-20 years to do it, do you believe them or do you think that they are lying? (you sound like a hyena)
- isn't the government just taking a group of people that we're already paying for (in one way or another) and giving them a title so that the government can tax us even more? (still laughing?)

while central you are often quite purposely hilarious, this time you are way off.
we have got the a health care system that fails to cover tens of millions of citizens, that gives us the lowest life expectancy of any industrialized nation with the highest infant mortality rate. these other nations have been able to design much more effective and inexpensive healthcare systems than we have. that is nothing to laugh about.

isadore wrote: while central you are often quite purposely hilarious, this time you are way off.
we have got the a health care system that fails to cover tens of millions of citizens, that gives us the lowest life expectancy of any industrialized nation with the highest infant mortality rate. these other nations have been able to design much more effective and inexpensive healthcare systems than we have. that is nothing to laugh about.

And you honestly think/trust our elected officials to do something like that? I wouldn't trust anyone in office to babysit my cat, let alone design/implement a health care system for the U.S.

Safety nets like unemployment and even welfare which are just general handouts to people that can be spent any way they choose are acceptable to me in a limited form and should really be run by each state. Any government entitlement into a specific industry like health care can not be financially sustained because the government's presence in that market will distort (meaning skyrocket) prices, which means everyone else will need help paying those prices, which means more government intervention, which means $12 trillion debt and crashing currency.

isadore wrote: so ernest, we need a public option, right.
tell me when you get done sticking needles in your FDR, stiglitz, krugman dolls, or are they your heroes for pushing and supporting a real safety net.

I'm just stating economic facts. I HATE big government.

tk421 wrote:

isadore wrote: while central you are often quite purposely hilarious, this time you are way off.
we have got the a health care system that fails to cover tens of millions of citizens, that gives us the lowest life expectancy of any industrialized nation with the highest infant mortality rate. these other nations have been able to design much more effective and inexpensive healthcare systems than we have. that is nothing to laugh about.

And you honestly think/trust our elected officials to do something like that? If so, you are more delusional than I thought. I wouldn't trust anyone in office to babysit my cat, let alone design/implement a health care system for the U.S.

it is sad you have so little faith in the American people. Our elected officials are a reflection of us, we select them. They may not baby sit your cat, but they run the institutions that protect you and your family, the police, courts and military.

isadore wrote: while central you are often quite purposely hilarious, this time you are way off.
we have got the a health care system that fails to cover tens of millions of citizens, that gives us the lowest life expectancy of any industrialized nation with the highest infant mortality rate. these other nations have been able to design much more effective and inexpensive healthcare systems than we have. that is nothing to laugh about.

I ain't gonna lie... this was a tough read
:huh:

isadore wrote:it is sad you have so little faith in the American people. Our elected officials are a reflection of us, we select them. They may not baby sit your cat, but they run the institutions that protect you and your family, the police, courts and military.

When elected, these officials focus on ONE thing in particular, before thinking about the "public" .... RE-ELECTION.

While this may not be true for 100% of all elected officials, it is definitely true for the majority.

Cleveland Buck wrote: Safety nets like unemployment and even welfare which are just general handouts to people that can be spent any way they choose are acceptable to me in a limited form and should really be run by each state. Any government entitlement into a specific industry like health care can not be financially sustained because the government's presence in that market will distort (meaning skyrocket) prices, which means everyone else will need help paying those prices, which means more government intervention, which means $12 trillion debt and crashing currency.

privatizing health care sky rocketed the price.
it kept the price much lower other nations with true public options.