Yes, yes he is.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I have never waivered in my opinion that we need universal preventative health care in our country. Our system of law making is built on compromise - or used to be until the radical right came upon the scene. Though I have never advocated for socialized medicine.
I've supported a hybrid where we have public/private participation (which in fact we have a limited form today in our county hospital system) and every citizen is provided low or no cost preventative health care from cradle to grave.
It's funny (as in odd) that your side argues about personal responsibility and 'welfare queens' yet opposed holding those who can afford health insurance from the requirement to buy it.
Number three raises the same objection we've 'heard' for one hundred years but adds on that both government and the private sector are incapable of working together or apart to solve a problem. Better described thusly: No soluton exists and any idea suggesting one must be foolish.
Lack of regulation is why the US has the highest priced healthcare in the world. You'd think it would be the best, but it's #37.More government regulation always makes thing cheaper and more accessible.
I get the point, but Levin is hardly the guy I want in my corner.
I get the point, but Levin is hardly the guy I want in my corner.
I'd never heard of teh guy until I saw this. Regardless of this man's background, the point he makes here is solid.
Number three raises the same objection we've 'heard' for one hundred years but adds on that both government and the private sector are incapable of working together or apart to solve a problem. Better described thusly: No soluton exists and any idea suggesting one must be foolish.
??? That's not what I said at all. It's not that government and the private sector are incapable of "working together", it's that they shouldn't - certainly not in the way you're advocating. Corporatist government pushes us down a path toward full blown fascism. It's a direct refutation of liberalism, eschewing individual rights and egalitarian government in favor of group privilege. I'll always reject this sort of development, regardless of its presumed short term benefits.
Nor did I say that no solution exists. That's you pouting because I'm pointing out how your suggested solution is worse than the problem it's trying to solve.
Number three raises the same objection we've 'heard' for one hundred years but adds on that both government and the private sector are incapable of working together or apart to solve a problem. Better described thusly: No soluton exists and any idea suggesting one must be foolish.
??? That's not what I said at all. It's not that government and the private sector are incapable of "working together", it's that they shouldn't - certainly not in the way you're advocating. Corporatist government pushes us down a path toward full blown fascism. It's a direct refutation of liberalism, eschewing individual rights and egalitarian government in favor of group privilege. I'll always reject this sort of development, regardless of its presumed short term benefits.
Nor did I say that no solution exists. That's you pouting because I'm pointing out how your suggested solution is worse than the problem it's trying to solve.
What I inferred is your solution is the status quo. Yes or no?
Ideology is the last thing we need in seeking solutions, which is why the posts of the other two are not worth commenting on. They think they know The Truth but never express it in practical terms for it's much easier for them to cavil and call others stupid. Nothing sagacious has ever been written by either of them.
??? That's not what I said at all. It's not that government and the private sector are incapable of "working together", it's that they shouldn't - certainly not in the way you're advocating. Corporatist government pushes us down a path toward full blown fascism. It's a direct refutation of liberalism, eschewing individual rights and egalitarian government in favor of group privilege. I'll always reject this sort of development, regardless of its presumed short term benefits.
Nor did I say that no solution exists. That's you pouting because I'm pointing out how your suggested solution is worse than the problem it's trying to solve.
What I inferred is your solution is the status quo. Yes or no?
Absolutely not. The status quo is a mess. I don't know how you inferred any support on my end for the current state of things. I see most of the same problems you do.
I'm just tired of seeing our nation suckered into to bad agendas with the claim that doing "something" is always better than doing "nothing". In the case of PPACA, it's my conviction that it's worse.
Ideology is the last thing we need in seeking solutions, which is why the posts of the other two are not worth commenting on. They think they know The Truth but never express it in practical terms for it's much easier for them to cavil and call others stupid. Nothing sagacious has ever been written by either of them.
I couldn't disagree more. Ideology is the first thing we need. Ideology is how we answer the broad questions (What kind of government do we want? What is its purpose? What kinds of problems should it try to solve in the first place?) that inform immediate policies. Without it we're simply blowing in the wind, subject to the whims and ambitions of whoever is currently in charge.
The greatest good to the greatest number.
The greatest good to the greatest number.
How many millions have perished under the guise of that idea? You see, your value requires a central planner to determine exactly what is best for the greater good. Problem. Big problem.
Personally, I value freedom.
What I inferred is your solution is the status quo. Yes or no?
Absolutely not. The status quo is a mess. I don't know how you inferred any support on my end for the current state of things. I see most of the same problems you do.
I'm just tired of seeing our nation suckered into to bad agendas with the claim that doing "something" is always better than doing "nothing". In the case of PPACA, it's my conviction that it's worse.
Ideology is the last thing we need in seeking solutions, which is why the posts of the other two are not worth commenting on. They think they know The Truth but never express it in practical terms for it's much easier for them to cavil and call others stupid. Nothing sagacious has ever been written by either of them.
I couldn't disagree more. Ideology is the first thing we need. Ideology is how we answer the broad questions (What kind of government do we want? What is its purpose? What kinds of problems should it try to solve in the first place?) that inform immediate policies. Without it we're simply blowing in the wind, subject to the whims and ambitions of whoever is currently in charge.
I think your speaking of values not ideology. My values are framed by two ideas: The Golden Rule and The greatest good to the greatest number. Within that structure one can be pragmatic when proposing ideas and not limited by preconceived directions which deny one to explore the universe of ideas.
The greatest good to the greatest number.
How many millions have perished under the guise of that idea? You see, your value requires a central planner to determine exactly what is best for the greater good. Problem. Big problem.
Personally, I value freedom.
OH bullshit. You see the phrase the greatest good, etc. as limiting, one which limits individual freedom and ignore the Golden Rule aspect which I posted.
Absolutely not. The status quo is a mess. I don't know how you inferred any support on my end for the current state of things. I see most of the same problems you do.
I'm just tired of seeing our nation suckered into to bad agendas with the claim that doing "something" is always better than doing "nothing". In the case of PPACA, it's my conviction that it's worse.
I couldn't disagree more. Ideology is the first thing we need. Ideology is how we answer the broad questions (What kind of government do we want? What is its purpose? What kinds of problems should it try to solve in the first place?) that inform immediate policies. Without it we're simply blowing in the wind, subject to the whims and ambitions of whoever is currently in charge.
I think your speaking of values not ideology. My values are framed by two ideas: The Golden Rule and The greatest good to the greatest number. Within that structure one can be pragmatic when proposing ideas and not limited by preconceived directions which deny one to explore the universe of ideas.
No, I'm referring to ideology. What most people call 'values' are too vague to be of much use guiding political policy.
Is such a perfect solution, nope. But the NRA ideology won't allow for any discussion on this idea or any idea to limit guns in our society.
Now we're taling about gun control. It's like a find the goal posts, if you can thread.
Is such a perfect solution, nope. But the NRA ideology won't allow for any discussion on this idea or any idea to limit guns in our society.
It's not only not a perfect solution, it's an INSANE solution. Your ideas only limit guns in the hands of law abiding citizens. Criminals and crazies don't care about your regulations. Therefore, your rules have the actual consequence of putting good people at a disadvantage when facing armed criminals! That's insane.