[geeks] healthcare was: nVidia 8800GT for Apple Mac Pro

[Shannon Hendrix]

On May 22, 2008, at 15:46 , der Mouse wrote:

>> So far there has been no plan in any nations I've seen yet, where the
>> taxes are not higher than the free market costs for the same
>> services,
>
> True, and probably inevitable.  The major benefit is that of spreading
> the cost out mor evenly, where "evenly" is actually defined by the
> taxation mechanisms in place.

In other words, let's push everyone down to the same level.

That's how that looks to me.

There is nothing wrong with "spreading the wealth", but there private  
systems which can do that.

You can also create limited socialized systems to help those who need  
it, but government doesn't want that.  Instead they want to put  
*everyone* under the same system.

A lot of the reasons have nothing to do with healthcare, and  
everything to do with curbing personal freedom and economic power.

Hillary Clinton's ideas read like a totalitarian manifesto, for example.

> Or, of course, you may see that as a disadvantage rather than a
> benefit.  And there are endless arguments over how useful the values  
> of
> "evenly" implemented by the various taxation systems are.

Well, in America, the IRS is actually illegal.  It boggles the mind  
that people put up with it.

Interesting note: if you abolished the IRS today, US government income  
would reduce to 1997 levels.

Personally, I think our government could make do with that.

I don't so much mind income tax, even though it is illegal, if it were  
flat rate and there was no political power encoded into the system  
like there is now.

Maybe that could be used for social medicine, but *only* if the  
private system were preserved and if it could be returned to a free  
market like it was before.

That combination might be workable, but only if our government would  
stick to that and not "embrace and extend" it.

-- 
"Where some they sell their dreams for small desires."