Ryan's Budget Proposal - It's a Start

[utgibbs]

Corruption is an endemic part of our current culture.

can you name a govt worldwide devoid of corruption?

Devoid, no. Far less than ours - yes.

But if corruption is the problem, than we need to focus on the private sector, which greatly contributes to our government corruption, and is far, far more efficient at corruption.

 

[droski]

ok what country has far less than ours?

 

[utgibbs]

ok what country has far less than ours?

Canada. I don't think we are in the top 20, although we are certainly far from the most corrupt.

Again though, this is non sequitir. This is slashing NPR and thinking you have solved the budget deficit. The private sector is far, far more efficient and less accountable for corruption. This should be the focus.

 

[droski]

CBC News Indepth: Canadian Government

 

[milohimself]

The government healthcare initiatives we have at the moment have absolutely proven to be the direct opposite of efficient.

Absolutely there are gross inefficiencies with our public healthcare system, but how exactly does that mean public health care is intrinsically flawed?

The system needs massive overhauling, not an axe and not less access.

Literally volumes could be written on ways to reduce cost and expand coverage. Not to mention the light at the end of the tunnel, being healthier people -> more productive people -> more people paying more in taxes than benefits received.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[utgibbs]

CBC News Indepth: Canadian Government

Whoa, the "hospital document scandal" and "Tunagate!" are fantastic scandals. I only wish we had some of those.... Unfortunately, these are scandals, not prevelance of corruption per se.

Where is the comparison to the US? Try this, generally the most quoted source:

Transparency International - the global coalition against corruption

 

[droski]

god how you love pointless, arbitrary, and unprovable rankings.

 

[utgibbs]

Absolutely there are gross inefficiencies with our public healthcare system, but how exactly does that mean public health care is intrinsically flawed?

The system needs massive overhauling, not an axe and not less access.

Literally volumes could be written on ways to reduce cost and expand coverage. Not to mention the light at the end of the tunnel, being healthier people -> more productive people -> more people paying more in taxes than benefits received.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

:good!:

 

[utgibbs]

god how you love pointless, arbitrary, and unprovable rankings.

False, true, false.

The metrics are arbitrary, but well thought out with a rigorous methodology. And this is the group people who are concerned about corruption use the most.

When given Canada, you gave me "Tunagate!" Where would "Tunagate!" rank on top ten US scandal charts?

We can turn it around, god how you hate to try to measure the real world (since it usually skuppers your world view massively).

And finally, this is a total red herring. Again, a large part of government corruption stems from the more efficient private sector corruption.

 

[droski]

False, true, false.

The metrics are arbitrary, but well thought out with a rigorous methodology. We can turn it around, god how you hate to try to measure the real world (since it usually skuppers your world view massively).

the irony here is off the charts.

 

[utgibbs]

the irony here is off the charts.

I can understand not knowing the formal defintion of irony.

But you don't even know irony when you see it?

 

[utvolpj]

The system needs massive overhauling, not an axe and not less access.

there are changes that wouldn't require hundreds of billions of dollars that would go a long way. We don't need Obamacare to change it

 

[utgibbs]

there are changes that wouldn't require hundreds of billions of dollars that would go a long way. We don't need Obamacare to change it

No we don't.

But we also must recognize the fundamental inefficiency of the private sector, and the fundamental flaw in considering health care a "market" too.

 

[utvolpj]

No we don't.

But we also must recognize the fundamental inefficiency of the private sector, and the fundamental flaw in considering health care a "market" too.

still wrong

 

[droski]

I can understand not knowing the formal defintion of irony.

But you don't even know irony when you see it?

oh please do educate me.

 

[utgibbs]

still wrong

Still right as rain. Always have been, and for the foreseeable future, always will be:

And that's removing almost 20% of the population from "the market" (sic).

 

[utvolpj]

you keep assuming the current model is the best it gets. Get your gov't out of the way and let it actually work. Make the changes that have been suggested over the past few years and your useless charts become overpriced tp

 

[droski]

wait a minute. canada is #2? how is that possible with the lack of corruption in that country?

 

[utgibbs]

wait a minute. canada is #2? how is that possible with the lack of corruption in that country?

Spending half per capita on health care = corruption? Struggles with irony and struggles with the idea of comparisons?

:crazy:

 

[droski]

Spending half per capita on health care = corruption?

:crazy:

if corruption is what makes govt inefficient how come canada is the most costly country with nationalized healthcare?

 

[utgibbs]

if corruption is what makes govt inefficient how come canada is the most costly country with nationalized healthcare?

Could be several reasons. Maybe its the "obesity factor." Maybe eating moose heart is clogging arteries. Maybe the snows of Whitehorse make people more likely to get flu. lol:

Again, your own argument shows what a red herring you are entertaining. Obviously (as I said before) it's private sector corruption that is the real problem. That must be why the US has to pay double. That private system IS more efficient.

:hi:

 

[droski]

wait a minute. obesity might have an effect on health metrics? you realize you've argued the exact opposite for years now right?

 

[milohimself]

there are changes that wouldn't require hundreds of billions of dollars that would go a long way. We don't need Obamacare to change it

I think obamacare can have it's time and place, as I believe an ungoverned private health care system will never cover all of it's people. If you're of the belief that basic healthcare is a right (I know not everybody here sees it that way) then that's not an acceptable outcome.

Reducing costs without market distorting is the bottom line, and making people healthier to begin with is the biggest step to take. But providing for things like folks to get regular physicals and exams instead of waiting until er visits that will draw charity or get cost shifted to the rest of us is simple common sense.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[volinbham]

Let me see if I have this right:

The supermajority wants what Gibbs wants.
Gibbs wants true democracy where individuals get choices and a say

then

Gibbs hates the consumer culture in this country
Gibbs advocates massive culture change to reflect his point of view away from where it is now

Awesome

 

[milohimself]

wait a minute. obesity might have an effect on health metrics? you realize you've argued the exact opposite for years now right?

Hes a fulmer fan. What did you expect?

And yeah, curbing diabeetus may save the country a few dollars in the long run.
Posted via VolNation Mobile