No. of Recommendations: 9
In addressing my last post you have chosen to ignore my analogy of road networks (which I carried throughout the post)and address only the mail and military analogies (which were mentioned only once in passing).

I will admit that I did not address the issue of road networks. I will freely admit that I am not the brightest person on this board. But, frankly, I don't see the analogy. How you can compare concrete to humans is beyond me.

This provided you the opportunity to label my points as "socialized medicine".

I did not label your points a socialized medicine. I asked the question, "Do you advocate socialized medicine?" You stated that "health care is very similar to these cases", namely the Post Office and Military. They are federally controlled.

Now you have engaged in the Republican tactic of dismissing valid arguments by attacking those who point out when programs or laws provide advantages based on income. This is a legitimate and valid concern and the flippant dismissal by staunch Republicans as "liberal tactic of class warfare" does nothing to address it.

I was a Democrat and a member of the United Steelworkers Union for a number of years. I am a registered Republican and usually vote a split ticket based on who I think will do the best job. I am probably more Liberterian than anything. I would not characterize myself as a staunch Republican. But, in your post you mentioned "rich" or "affluent" at least 7 times directly aimed at physicians. I read your post as insinuating that most Docs practice to get rich rather than deliver quality care. Although, not a physician, I felt a need to call you on this assertion. By the way, what programs or laws provide advantages in health care based on income? Medicaid? Medicare?

This is an example of right-wing dogma that is totally off subject. It has nothing to do with anything I've said.

You wrote, "You seem worried that doctors may not be able to get rich if we apply some level of control to where they practice via our health care regulations/laws/etc." When the government controls where someone can engage in their profession, or how they can engage in their profession in order to serve the people, it is socialism. Call it right-wing dogma if you wish. It is germane because the Canadian Health Care system is socialized medicine, and I quoted from the WSJ some of the significant problems with this type of system.

You seem to be against change. So in order to attack a proposal for change you label it a "liberal tactic of class warfare" then follow up by comparing it to "liberal-marxist thought". For goodness sakes, my analogy was between the medical industry and the road construction industry. Is that so threatening to you that you have to label me a communist?

Not all change is good. Socialized medicine, in my view, would be a change for the worse. I don't think the system in Canada works very well for major medical problems and I think some of points I made from the WSJ support that view. Socialized anything is marxist in nature.

I never labled you a communist, perhaps you might re-read my post. I don't stoop to name-calling when discussing different points of view. I'm threatened by very little. I am at peace with who I am and my views. I recognize that others may disagree with me and I will listen to their points, as I advocate mine.

Well. . . why go on?

Agreed.

Respectfully,

BB

Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.