Velly EEEEnteresting. - Page 5

RadioPatrol · 02-20-2008, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awpitt

I guess it’s how each of us defines socialized medicine. I view define socialized medicine as govt run healthcare. Govt doctors, nurses, etc. Govt owned hospitals and clinics. No private insurance companies or medical faculties. Paid for entirely through taxes. In reading the Hillarycare and Barakcare proposals, I couldn’t find anything that talked about healthcare as described above.

yeah your right that would be Socialist Medicine, (gov provides all medical care and outlaws private care - unless it is for congress critters and Executive branch)

Hillary care is more like Fascists Care (businesses still run, but gov tell it how.......

This_person · 02-20-2008, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by awpitt

Yes there are lots of rules. It's a regulated industry. There's a ton of regs for running a daycare, Why? Because we grew tire of kids kicking the bucket while a daycare. The medical industry is regulated so we don't have a bunch of quacks out there killing people. Unless one decides to go live on an deserted island someone, there's going to be a certain degree of govt involvment. Yes, there are govt regulations of the medical industry but that doesn't rise to the level of being socialized medicine.

Regulating the industry for practices that effect the patient makes sense. Regulating the payment of bills and providing any portion of that payment via tax dollars is what makes is a socialist system. Government involvement in safety standards is much different than government involvement in funding the system.

*Larry Gude* ^(Premo) · 02-20-2008, 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by This_person

Regulating the industry for practices that effect the patient makes sense. Regulating the payment of bills and providing any portion of that payment via tax dollars is what makes is a socialist system. Government involvement in safety standards is much different than government involvement in funding the system.

...it doesn't! The government has NO role in telling a certified doctor how to do his job, none. You want a doctor sanctified by a politician or the AMA? Is a doctor better prepared following a mountain of government instruction or the teachings of his medical school? Should his residency be at a hospital or with some political action group trying to fight back?

It's fine to have political pressure on medical groups that serve as the approval and disciplinary bodies...to a point, but that's not what we have.

Doesn't anyone know a doctor? Ask 'em.

awpitt · 02-20-2008, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

I'll tell you one thing; I'd rather have an unregulated doctor on my island than a politician.

Good one. I'll agree with you there.

This_person · 02-20-2008, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

...it doesn't! The government has NO role in telling a certified doctor how to do his job, none. You want a doctor sanctified by a politician or the AMA? Is a doctor better prepared following a mountain of government instruction or the teachings of his medical school? Should his residency be at a hospital or with some political action group trying to fight back?

It's fine to have political pressure on medical groups that serve as the approval and disciplinary bodies...to a point, but that's not what we have.

Doesn't anyone know a doctor? Ask 'em.

We can disagree on the semantics of it (we both are saying there should be safety standards, just discussing the difference between who should enforce those standards), but my point was to get across the difference between safety standards and financial obligations as it pertains to whether it's socialized medicine or not.

No politicians on my island, either.