From: "Gary Britt" 

I didn't say I agreed with all the socialized healthcare you cite.
Healthcare would be in a LOT better situation today if we hadn't screwed up
so badly about 50 years ago when we began to adopt a private insurance
"third party payer" model that separated the consumer of the
healthcare services from price effects and choices.  The insurance model
did NOT have to be based upon third party payer and could have been based
solely in a reimbursement kind of situation, but at the time we didn't
realize how drastically and critically removing the consumer of healthcare
from price decisions and effects through third party payer insurance
systems would cause healthcare costs to skyrocket.

I'm not in favor of free ambulance rides for anything except true emergency
service, such as heart attacks, accidents, strokes, that kind of thing.
Again that are certain levels of services that must be achieved BEFORE you
can rationally state you have ANY GOVERNMENT at all.

I believe the minimum needed to achieve the existence of government are
common defense, police, fire, and EMERGENCY care.

Everything else beyond that is elective and begins your sliding scale
(perhaps), but there is no government of any form before you achieve these
basics.

Gary

"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
news:43bc3726{at}w3.nls.net...
> So where does your desire for a free ambulance ride filter into this
> equation?
>
> It's what an electorate wishes to choose as required services that will
vary
> the degree of socialism. Everyone wished that the government protect them
> for foreign threats. Hence we accept a standing army.
>
> There is the socialized part of the health care sector  which includes
> Medicare, Medicaid, the Indian Health Service, Department of Veteran
> Affairs, the Public Health Service, programs such as KidCare, and the bulk
> of medical research. Some estimates place the percentage of socialized
> health care here between 60-70 percent.
>
> you've been socialized. It's ok to come out of the closet and show your
ssn
> 
>
>
>
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:43bc323a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > Yes I understand what you are saying, but what I'm saying is
"emergency"
> > services ARE the province of any government and that these very basic
> > services and purposes are NOT about line drawing.  They are about the
> > definition of government.  A government that does NOT provide national
> > defense, fire, police, and true emergency accident services is NOT a
> > government at all.  If the government did not provide national defense
and
> > define its borders, how would you tell there was a country there at all?
> > If
> > the government doesn't provide national defense, police, and fire then
> > what
> > the hell would the government be providing, what purpose would it serve
at
> > all??
> >
> > You are confusing the point at which government arises (i.e., national
> > defense, police, fire, and emergency services) with drawing a line on
> > providing additional ELECTIVE services beyond those necessary to achieve
> > government's existence.
> >
> > Its not line drawing or a sliding scale to socialism.  Its the
difference
> > between having a government and NOT having any government.  Hence my
> > comment
> > about pure libertarianism/anarchy.
> >
> > Gary
> > "Rich Gauszka"  wrote in message
> > news:43bc01be$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> Really? They are all degrees of society providing a service. Health
care
> >> would just be another add on. It all depends on how many add-ons one is
> >> willing to accept
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Gary Britt" 
wrote in message
> >> news:43bbff5d$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> > Basic services such as national defense, fire, police, ambulance
don't
> >> > have
> >> > anything to do with socialism versus capitalism.  Those services
aren't
> >> > something that requires socialism for a society to
provide.  I think
> >> > you
> >> > are
> >> > confusing pure libertarianism/anarchy with capitalism in
making this
> >> > distinction.
> >> >
> >> > Gary
> >> >
> >> > "Rich Gauszka" 
wrote in message
> >> > news:43bbfa98{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> >> The point most of us are trying to make was that degrees of
socialism
> >> > aren't
> >> >> necessarily undesirable for a society. It all
depends on perceived
> > value
> >> > for
> >> >> those services.  Some draw the line further up the
level than you do
> > but
> >> >> most ( even those arguing that socialism is evil
incarnate ) readily
> >> > accept
> >> >> and desire some of it's benefits.
> >> >>
> >> >> The trick for any society has always been where to
draw the line
> > between
> >> >> capitalism and socialism
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Mark"  wrote in message
> > news:43bbf256{at}w3.nls.net...
> >> >> > Listen guys, I'm fully cognizant that my position has
contradictory
> >> >> > elements to it, I suppose I could spend a lot
of time elaborating
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > refining various aspects, but I'm not going to
do it. I simply
feel
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > fire, police and rescue are the most basic of
protective services
to
> >> >> > citizens and should not be billed out in a
piecemeal fashion as
they
> >> >> > are
> >> >> > provided to people in trouble.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Illogical or not, that's my story and I'm
sticking to it 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5