amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
2 edits | reply to Fox McCloud
Re: Healthcare and socialism?
said by Fox McCloud  :Ron Paul has specifically described that non-profit organizations and churches would help provide healthcare for those who couldn't afford it, which is the way it used to be until public funding crowded them out If you want to play the "way it used to be" game, we could go back to when health care was lightly regulated. Your neighbor could set a fractured arm, or deliver a baby if you wanted to save money on a doctor visit.
The root cause isn't "public funding." It's that we didn't want third-world health care conditions. To achieve that goal we gave the medical association (which became the medical establishment) control over its industry, to establish standards and use Public Law to enforce those standards "in the public interest."
It was the loss of those "free market" choices (for the social good of a rising standard of living) which led to increased calls for "public funding."
This is no different than other social evolution, such as public water, sewer, roads, etc. Society is always looking to improve standards -- and recognizing that a social responsibility goes with those improved (artificial, not "market-based" standards).
That's where Ron Paul breaks down. IMO, Ron Paul pseudo-libertarians are a fraud. They like to use the big-L Libertarian rhetoric to sound like their positions are "principled" (unlike everyone else). But, they quickly dodge all the disconnects in big-L rhetoric by explaining "I'm not a big-L Libertarian...."
The result is a mish-mash of incomprehensible positions based upon sound bites. Selectively focusing on things like how we should "return to a time before public funding" -- while ignoring what public funding was a response to. (I.e., they don't want to return to a time before public standards because, "hey! I'm not a Big-L Libertarian!!!!").
Mark |
