Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Translation: "I can't think of even a semi-lucid argument to refute what you said.
|
yeah, thats right.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
I doubt you'll find any private school teacher who has less workload than a public school teacher. Additionally, putting a blanket quality statement on either system is asinine. There are fabulous public schools, and there are craptastic private schools, and vice versa.
|
blanket statements work good only when you want them to? I'm shocked. If there are fabulous schools and craptastic schools (public, private, doesn't matter) why the difference?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
No doubt by reading, which you learned how to do in the public school.
|
I learned to read at the age of 3. Not in a school.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Americans have the wrong idea of school. School should not be concentrating on just teaching you knowledge. It should be teaching you how to ACQUIRE knowledge.
|
as my wife calls it, 'regurgitation education'. You are right. Schools should not just be teaching how to remember things, they should be teaching how to teach ones self AFTER school.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Sounds like your school managed to get that right. The old teach a man to fish philosophy.
|
Not something I learned in school. It took Marine Air Traffic Control School to teach me that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
No you won't. You'll end up with good schools in the wealthy communities and crap schools in the poor communities. Exactly what we have now. Sure there will be the odd exception to the rule, just as there is now, but overall that's what you'll end up with.
|
There is truth in what you say, but federal regulation over this is not going to fix it. As you said, funding it smarter.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
That analasys isn't half bad. But how are we supposed to correct that unless we stop letting insurance companies pull those shenanigans. We as private citizens certainly don't have the authority to tell them to quit. The government must do so. . . now whether you want to do that by having government take over the insurance/healthcare industry, or just having the government tell the insurance/healthcare industry exactly how much they're allowed to charge, it all amounts to the same thing. Government control of our healthcare. Either way, the insurance companies no longer get to screw the sick.
|
In other discussions I've had about this, the answer is to deregulate how the insurance companies get to mandate and guideline doctors/hospitals. If an insurance company does not have the ability to tell a doctor how to do his job, then the doctor can actually prescribe the best treatment without fear of dealing with both the insurance company and the medical board.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Now if we go to a purely socialized medicine system it'll eliminate the ability of insurance companies to overcharge the government for care because the government will, essentially, be the insurance company.
|
How's the VA working out for alot of people?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
What you suggest the doctor should be able to do is economically unfeasable. A doctor 1) doesn't have time to administer his own private insurance company It's and 2) wouldn't be able to get the numbers to survive.
|
I missed putting in my entire statement. My apologies for rushing and inadvertantly misleading you.
What I meant to say was that, in the current system, people with health insurance have their prices set by the insurance company, not the doctors. Now, for a very common standard test, if a patient has insurance, the test must be charged at the insurance company price (which is generated on a state average basis) but even if it could be done cheaper in a heavier populated area, the doctor is unable to deviate from that price. This is the problem with price controls. It will cheapen the price in some areas, but cost more in others, like heavily populated areas. So i'm not intimating that the doctor should run his own insurance company as well, just that the doctor should be able to set his prices for tests and procedures...not insurance companies.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
Keeping it small is anathema to the socialized medicine concept. Socialized medicine means equal healthcare access for all. In order to do that you have to have a blanket supervisory body at the highest level. Obviously we'll have state-by-state run branches of the federal system, but in order to provide equal care to ALL americans it MUST be federalized.
That, btw, is why you're wrong about schools being socialized. They're not, because they're not run equally across the country.
|
Ever heard of the Department of Education? What do they do? Granted, they don't centralize power like other countries do, but even at the state levels there really isn't that much progress and benefit.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by shakran
I don't think anyone's trying to create an illusion that no one would have to pay more in taxes. We all would, but we'd all benefit from it. By your logic we should all privately build roads in our communities. If I want to get from my house to your house, I can by-god build the road. This is just a wrongheadded way to look at social programs.
|
Funny thing about social programs is that some people inevitably pay more than others. How did the property for those roads get acquired? Do you truly think that 'fair market value' was gained by all? There are unintended consequences in all that we mandate through government policy. We would be wise, for once, to take exceptional pause before we federally centralize yet one more thing.