Reality Check: Universal Healthcare / Nationalizing Banks is not "saving" the economy

[KingCondanomation]

It is consuming it.

Part of the free economy right now is private healthcare insurance and private banks. By having government take these things over, the economy shrinks as they are essentially being consumed.

You can certainly make the argument that it could help other parts of the free market economy in the short term (and I don't believe that), but you cannot argue the fact that you end up with less of a free market economy.

Every generation government takes over more of the economy in some fashion, be it healthcare, retirement, higher education, drugs, daycare, etc...
Shrinking the number of companies, shrinking the amount of private capital, shrinking the free market economy.

[Onceler]

Honestly, I have yet to see a serious proposal where gov't "runs" either the banks, or healthcare.

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about universal healthcare, & Obama's proposal on healthcare in general, is that it seeks to turn management of our healthcare system over to gov't & to bureacrats. It does not.

[Bonestorm]

It is consuming it.

Part of the free economy right now is private healthcare insurance and private banks. By having government take these things over, the economy shrinks as they are essentially being consumed.

You can certainly make the argument that it could help other parts of the free market economy in the short term (and I don't believe that), but you cannot argue the fact that you end up with less of a free market economy.

Every generation government takes over more of the economy in some fashion, be it healthcare, retirement, higher education, drugs, daycare, etc...
Shrinking the number of companies, shrinking the amount of private capital, shrinking the free market economy.

I don't even know where to begin with this one.

[KingCondanomation]

Honestly, I have yet to see a serious proposal where gov't "runs" either the banks, or healthcare.

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about universal healthcare, & Obama's proposal on healthcare in general, is that it seeks to turn management of our healthcare system over to gov't & to bureacrats. It does not.

Universal healthcare as the Dems want it (for now) is a de facto nationalizing of the private health insurance (not industry) market.

And government owning ANY share in ANY bank gives them some degree of running it just like any other stockholder. Of course they are far more powerful than that given that they set the rules.

Do you think Crédit Lyon helped expand French financial markets?

[KingCondanomation]

I don't even know where to begin with this one.

Well you could always start off with a "Hilarious" or the ol ivory tower "You don't know what you are talking about" rubuttal? Those always work nice to help avoid having to put up any real counterargument.

When you have government take over ANY part of the free market economy, you shrink it, do you think you have MORE private investment options in Venezuela after Chavez nationalized much of the economy?

[Topspin]

This post is worthy of the comedy channel. The coming boom oboma starts will have fat old republicans crying in their alter boy boyfriends arms for years to come. BURN

[KingCondanomation]

This post is worthy of the comedy channel. The coming boom oboma starts will have fat old republicans crying in their alter boy boyfriends arms for years to come. BURN

Even Obama doesn't seem to be talking about any coming boom...

You are an eternal optimist toppy, that's a great thing but history has shown that good times come from leaders who inspire people to look to themselves, as you have done to gain wealth, not to look to government for taking over the economy and nationalizing parts of it.

[uscitizen]

Even Obama doesn't seem to be talking about any coming boom...

You are an eternal optimist toppy, that's a great thing but history has shown that good times come from leaders who inspire people to look to themselves, as you have done to gain wealth, not to look to government for taking over the economy and nationalizing parts of it.

Dano thinks Toppy is a great leader?

[Topspin]

I do think Obama is a great leader, far from perfect but way better than Bush. And I got rich under Bush.
A rising tide lifts all boats, what we have had the last 8 yrs is a rising tide at the country club only and yes my boat rose.
Buying stocks when everyone is running screaming for the exits is something that takes balls and I have been praying for for 15yrs. It's testing my will have I have dropped several hundred thousand in net worth.

[Bonestorm]

Well you could always start off with a "Hilarious" or the ol ivory tower "You don't know what you are talking about" rubuttal? Those always work nice to help avoid having to put up any real counterargument.

When you have government take over ANY part of the free market economy, you shrink it, do you think you have MORE private investment options in Venezuela after Chavez nationalized much of the economy?

Hilarious. You don't know what you are talking about.

[Damocles]

Honestly, I have yet to see a serious proposal where gov't "runs" either the banks, or healthcare.

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about universal healthcare, & Obama's proposal on healthcare in general, is that it seeks to turn management of our healthcare system over to gov't & to bureacrats. It does not.

I partially like it as it doesn't centrally bureaucratize all health care and uses some of the better programs to extend insurance, it also doesn't put the whole burden on the tax payer stressing employer based insurance.

As huge government programs go it isn't the worst I have seen.

[Onceler]

I partially like it as it doesn't centrally bureaucratize all health care and uses some of the better programs to extend insurance, it also doesn't put the whole burden on the tax payer stressing employer based insurance.

As huge government programs go it isn't the worst I have seen.

It's why I liked his plan so much better than Hillary's in the campaign. Hillary & some universal advocates have always basically said "we're going to cover everyone, no matter what." Obama's plan has been much more oriented toward availability & affordability, and emphasizing how it can be paid for by changes within the industry.

I suppose I'm a centrist now. With issues like healthcare, the banks & energy, I don't see the gov't as the solution, or the free market; nor do I believe either can be trusted on its own. The best answer lies somewhere in the middle.

[Cancel 2016.2]

This post is worthy of the comedy channel. The coming boom oboma starts will have fat old republicans crying in their alter boy boyfriends arms for years to come. BURN

I think Obama is doing a good job thus far, but to predict a boom at this point is a bit optimistic. If he steers us to a breakeven in his first term I would consider that a huge success.

[KingCondanomation]

It's why I liked his plan so much better than Hillary's in the campaign. Hillary & some universal advocates have always basically said "we're going to cover everyone, no matter what." Obama's plan has been much more oriented toward availability & affordability, and emphasizing how it can be paid for by changes within the industry.

I suppose I'm a centrist now. With issues like healthcare, the banks & energy, I don't see the gov't as the solution, or the free market; nor do I believe either can be trusted on its own. The best answer lies somewhere in the middle.

But the only changes we have seen to healthcare have involved steadily more government involvement, the 40's with government making employer provided health insurance tax deductible and the Hill-Burton Act, the 50's with amendment to SS to pay for healthcare for poor seniors, the 60's with Medicare/Medicaid, the 70's with the HMO Act, the 90's with the Patients Rights Act, and this decade with yet more government involvement. And I am only including the MAJOR federal increases, there are far more minor ones and then there are even more at the state level.
You are not moving to the "middle", you are just moving to universal healthcare in steps.

[Onceler]

But the only changes we have seen to healthcare have involved steadily more government involvement, the 40's with government making employer provided health insurance tax deductible and the Hill-Burton Act, the 50's with amendment to SS to pay for healthcare for poor seniors, the 60's with Medicare/Medicaid, the 70's with the HMO Act, the 90's with the Patients Rights Act, and this decade with yet more government involvement. And I am only including the MAJOR federal increases, there are far more minor ones and then there are even more at the state level.
You are not moving to the "middle", you are just moving to universal healthcare in steps.

I'm talking more about the middle in terms of public vs. private controllled. Even with everything you mentioned, insurance companies & healthcare in general is still privately owned & run. Private ownership, on its own & without gov't involvement, is an issue. Most insurance companies have some sort of quotas for denying coverage, which is unacceptable. Insurance fraud is rampant & raises costs for everyone, as is price gouging.

Clearly, the gov't has a place in regulating & mandating measures for the industry. As I said, Obama's plan does not entail in any form the gov't "running" healthcare. It aims to make healthcare more available & affordable for everyone, which is something I strongly support. More businesses are dropping health coverage with skyrocketing costs. It is unacceptable that a working person should not at least have access to affordable health coverage & healthcare, and that is the way things are trending.