Why does the right defend the wealthy class

[Sun Devil 92]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Liberals/Socialists/Progressives/Communists hate both the middle class and the working class because...

they HATE the "wealthy class".

Go back to school you stupid ****.

If you look at my posting history...that isn't me.

I am not a progressive.

But the article raises an issue I've had for a long time. The wealthy class link up with the governing class and together they screw us.

There is tons of money in D.C. It's a huge rapefest.

Ok...In what way are you being screwed?

As I've pointed

Liberals/Socialists/Progressives/Communists hate both the middle class and the working class because...

they HATE the "wealthy class".

Go back to school you stupid ****.

If you look at my posting history...that isn't me.

I am not a progressive.

But the article raises an issue I've had for a long time. The wealthy class link up with the governing class and together they screw us.

There is tons of money in D.C. It's a huge rapefest.

There's tons of money in Dc...Yet you think the federal government needs more......I don't get it....
I do actually. I want you to explain yourself

I don't have the numbers on the tip of my tounge, but I believe government spending is something like 20% of GDP.

That is way way way to much.

That means the government picks winners and losers.

Why do we think there is such heavy lobbying in D.C.....because big business can't afford to lose on those handouts.

I worked for a multi-national that got tens of millions in research money.

You try and apply for that same cash (just a handful) as a three person business.....best of luck. The paperwork alone can cost you an awful lot. Meeting all the requirements....a whole lot more.

 

[1treedancer]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

What you gave me was your response (which is essentially to fleece that rich) to the problem you perceive to exist.

What I want to know is how all that money got in the hands of so few according to you.

 

[1treedancer]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

What you gave me was your response (which is essentially to fleece that rich) to the problem you perceive to exist.

What I want to know is how all that money got in the hands of so few according to you.

It started with Reaganomics. From the 1930s to the 1980s, the economy grew steadily, for the first time in the history of our nation we went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure.then along came the sainted gipper. Read a book.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

What you gave me was your response (which is essentially to fleece that rich) to the problem you perceive to exist.

What I want to know is how all that money got in the hands of so few according to you.

It started with Reaganomics. From the 1930s to the 1980s, the economy grew steadily, for the first time in the history of our nation we went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure.then along came the sainted gipper. Read a book.

I am always curious to hear how this was supposed to have happened.

Can you provide an example of how reaganomics did this for someone ?

 

[Dad2three]

I'm not sure why I have to be a POS to point out hypocrisy. I may be a POS for other reasons, but that's not one of them. The fact remains that plenty of people--of whatever political persuasion--love to sound lofty when it comes to taxing the wealth of others, but seem to lose their fervor when it comes to their own money. Pointing out this one or that one who give a lot of their cash away to charitable causes doesn't change this. In the case of Bill Gates, I am of the opinion he just doesn't want to go to his death bed with the moniker of Satan hanging over it. Being reviled the world over changes some people. Personally, I think we owe him a debt of gratitude for bringing technology to the masses on an unprecedented scale--this includes you Mac fanboys.
I just think it's like spotting some great celebrity vegan unawares at a Carl's Junior with a Mile High Bacon Cheeseburger in her mouth--right after preaching to the masses about the evils of meat.
Let those who talk the talk, walk the walk first. Lead by example.
There's nothing about that that makes me a POS.

Yum!

The POS "thinks" it's hypocritical to have GOOD GOV'T POLICY" OVER VOLUNTARY TAXATION. Shocking


Good little rightie, ignore the Buffett rule min 30% tax on incomes ABOVE $1,000,000 a year REGARDLESS OF LOOPHOLES

THAT'S WHY YOU ARE A POS BUBBA!

 

[Dad2three]

Yeah, keep "punishing" us, you dumb bastards. You are too ******* stupid to realize that we pay for your dinner and that your favored tax policies quell growth. You also apparently do not get that one day we will just ******* leave. I already have my exit strategy established - New Zealand.

PLEASE PULL A FUKKN GALT YOU DISLOYAL POS CONS. PLEASE!

Favored tax policy quell growth? You mean Ronnie's 50% the first 6 years? Ikes 90%? LBJ 70%?

I guess YOU KLOWNS SHOWED US, DUBYA HAD THE LOWEST SUSTAINED EFFECTIVE TAX "BURDEN" ON THOSE JOB CREATORS" SINCE THE GOP GREAT DEPRESSION, AND LOST OVER 1+ MILLION JOBS, LOL


QUEL JOBS? LMAOROG

 

[Andylusion]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

The rich do not need defended. The rich, are the people who create jobs, who produce wealth, who make the economy go around.

Why do you attack the people who feed, clothe, and build everything you want in life?

 

[Andylusion]

The Middle-Class Squeeze

Here are a few good paragraphs:

When things go backward in nations accustomed to middle-class stability, people start to ask questions. What is the use of capitalism if its rewards go to the few and its risks are dumped on the many? The rights of property do not seem so enticing if the value of what you own collapses or if that property is trapped by debt. What is so great about globalization if it means that the products and services you offer are undercut by foreign competition and that millions of new people can come to your country, take your jobs and enjoy your welfare benefits?

Great international banks and other corporations—and their top executives—can devise a life that escapes normal tax jurisdictions. Their successes are globalized and accrue chiefly to them; their failures crawl back home to die, at the expense of the rest of us.

So instead of feeling that it is a privilege to be an ordinary citizen of a free country, many of us start to feel a bit like suckers. Hope—the inseparable companion of progress—fades and is replaced by disappointment, even bitterness. It has always been understood that opportunity carries some price of insecurity, but what happens if insecurity rises and opportunity contracts?

################################

Here is big business screwing the little guy...again. They use the government like they'd use a lawyer.

And the final paragraph has some pretty nasty implications.

many of these so called free trade agreements are not free trade at all, but what I call cartel capitalism.

Explain? What example do you give?

 

[Dad2three]

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

What you gave me was your response (which is essentially to fleece that rich) to the problem you perceive to exist.

What I want to know is how all that money got in the hands of so few according to you.

It started with Reaganomics. From the 1930s to the 1980s, the economy grew steadily, for the first time in the history of our nation we went 50 years without a crash or major bank failure.then along came the sainted gipper. Read a book.

I am always curious to hear how this was supposed to have happened.

Can you provide an example of how reaganomics did this for someone ?

Besides GUTTING the EFFECTIVE tax rates which changed the US to the financialization of the world economy? Where Reaganomics actually increased taxes on the avg worker while doing that? While it GUTTED federal spending on domestic spending, which with Reagan's new "federalism" it gave block grants and the like which put more burden on the states, counties and cities?

WHILE Ronnie gave a nod to start the war on unions? Ignore anti competition laws (monopolies) and vetoed the fairness doctrine which created Faux "News" and hate talk radio to misinform the dumbfukkks (mainly CONServative CONfederate Staters and the "religious" right?


Where Ronnie ignored Ed Gray's warnings on the S&L crisis that started in 1984 and would've stopped 90% of the S&L crisis, but Ronnie had an election to win (like Dubya, sound familiar?) so he ignored the warnings? And cheered on the "free markets"?

You morons are just sheeple who "believe" rather than use critical thinking and honesty

Rushblo ($400 million), Beckie ($200 million), Insannity ($80 million), Billo ($50 million) , they are just "looking out for the common guys", it just so happens their interests are served by you sheeple right?? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

The rich do not need defended. The rich, are the people who create jobs, who produce wealth, who make the economy go around.

Why do you attack the people who feed, clothe, and build everything you want in life?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

You would replace a bad program with a program that's already going broke? How would that work?

You do know that Medicare only pays part of the bill for their patients, don't you? Hospitals and doctors make up the loss when they get cash or private insured people. Take private insured patents out of the mix, and you have closed down facilities which happened so many times in the past. It's one of the reasons our health insurance increased so much the last couple of decades.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

The rich do not need defended. The rich, are the people who create jobs, who produce wealth, who make the economy go around.

Why do you attack the people who feed, clothe, and build everything you want in life?

I have to ask why you index to this position on my point of view.

People can become rich.

I want more people to be rich.

Somehow, my view of the world and economics says that in a well functioning economy.....

If there is 1,000,000,000 in wealth to be had, I would think that NATURAL economics would say that we should see

1,000 millionaires

not 1 billionaire.

What I am saying is that the way things are set up....NATURAL economics do not function because GOVERNMENT is a complicit ally to the rich in protecting their ability to continue to garner wealth.

GOVERNMENT is "We The People".

We are allowing this to happen.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

You would replace a bad program with a program that's already going broke? How would that work?

You do know that Medicare only pays part of the bill for their patients, don't you? Hospitals and doctors make up the loss when they get cash or private insured people. Take private insured patents out of the mix, and you have closed down facilities which happened so many times in the past. It's one of the reasons our health insurance increased so much the last couple of decades.

A perfect place to start !!

Medicare is a hot button topic.

The goal isn't to have a government program.

The goal is to deliver health care to people who need it.

When we start with discussing the goals we hope to achieve that we can have better programs.

The right cries about the potential issues with government health care.

At the same time, the left defends to the death programs that are weak and stupid in so many ways.

No TRUST = No PROGRESS

 

[1treedancer]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

You would replace a bad program with a program that's already going broke? How would that work?

You do know that Medicare only pays part of the bill for their patients, don't you? Hospitals and doctors make up the loss when they get cash or private insured people. Take private insured patents out of the mix, and you have closed down facilities which happened so many times in the past. It's one of the reasons our health insurance increased so much the last couple of decades.

Where did you get this s***?

“You would replace a bad program with a program that's already going broke? “?

Actually, According to the Medicare trustees report that the filed in 2015 “Medicare’s Hospital Insurance trust fund will remain solvent that is, able to pay 100 percent of the costs of the hospital insurance coverage that Medicare provides through 2030. “

as for as “Medicare only pays part of the bill for their patients.“

YES! that’s one of the reasons that UnitedHealth Group CEO’s Stephen J. Hemsley received $66.13 million in compensation last year.

UnitedHealth Group healthcare sells supplement insurance to seniors as well as Medicare Advantage insurance, a bundling of plans Part A (Hospital Insurance) and Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) and sometimes plan D(prescription drug coverage (Part D)under the banner of AARP.

 

[1treedancer]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

"So what" Care to share with us what you thought of it other than "So what"?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

"So what" Care to share with us what you thought of it other than "So what"?

Do I think it is wrong for the riches 1% to own more than the rest of the world (if they got it without the help of the government) ? NO

Do I think it is only possible (that so much wealth can concentrate) without the help of the government. Again NO.

I asked how this is possible...you only said Reagan. What did Reagan have to do with it ?

 

[Andylusion]

Thom Hartmann: How America Killed Its Middle Class

Not a big fan of Alternet.....but this one makes a statement I think begs a question.

Piketty is right, especially about the importance of high marginal tax rates and inheritance taxes being necessary for the creation of a middle class that includes working-class people. Progressive taxation, when done correctly, pushes wages down to working people and reduces the incentives for the very rich to pillage their companies or rip off their workers. After all, why take another billion when 91 percent of it just going to be paid in taxes?

This is the main reason why, when GM was our largest employer and our working class were also in the middle class, CEOs only took home 30 times what working people did. The top tax rate for all the time America's middle class was created was between 74 and 91 percent. Until, of course, Reagan dropped it to 28 percent and working people moved from the middle class to becoming the working poor.

#############################

So, as we continue to let the rich just go nuts...what is it that isn't there to prevent them.

Why does the far right vote to protect the interest of the rich ?

The answer lies, in part, in the fact that the far left is no better. First, they suck off the rich like others.

Next, they won't make a rational case. They need conservatives to join them. And yet they, like some of the assholes on this board, do nothing but antagonize them.

And the rich just eat it up......

######################################

This thread originally got moved to Europe because I led in with an article about the European middle class.

But the comparison is bright as the day is long.

I bash the left.

I bash the right.

Regardless, this is a huge issue in my mind.

Now, if the left starts squawking about how the rich screw them over...I'd ask how they get away with it. They only get away with it because the government protects them.

The right yells...hands off. But this article flies in the face of that.

The rich do not need defended. The rich, are the people who create jobs, who produce wealth, who make the economy go around.

Why do you attack the people who feed, clothe, and build everything you want in life?

I have to ask why you index to this position on my point of view.

People can become rich.

I want more people to be rich.

Somehow, my view of the world and economics says that in a well functioning economy.....

If there is 1,000,000,000 in wealth to be had, I would think that NATURAL economics would say that we should see

1,000 millionaires

not 1 billionaire.

What I am saying is that the way things are set up....NATURAL economics do not function because GOVERNMENT is a complicit ally to the rich in protecting their ability to continue to garner wealth.

GOVERNMENT is "We The People".

We are allowing this to happen.

First off, it's government duty to protect property rights. So in that aspect is most certainly is the job of government to defend the rich growing their wealth.

The moment you allow government to deny property rights to one group, they will be able to deny property rights to any group, including yourself. Look at Soviet Russia. Everyone thought that the communists would only take the property of the super wealthy..... when that wealth was gone, they started confiscating everything else. And when that was gone, forced labor in Gulags, was the natural result.

Same thing is happening in Venezuela. First they confiscated major international corporation property, then local corporations property, and now they are confiscating anything they want. When that runs out, who knows how far the socialist government in Venezuela will go.

And honestly, in a free-market capitalists system, the super wealthy can't 'monopolize' all the wealth in the country. If you go to socialized system, where government controls the wealth, they do. Chinese state owned companies, run by family members of Communist officials for 50 years.

But can you name the super wealthy US history? Likely not. Who here know the names Cyrus Field, Jay Gould, and Russell Sage? Likely none. But these are the "robber barons" of the past who supposedly controlled all the wealth in society. What happened? I thought they controlled all the wealth, and the government was assisting them?

Apparently they didn't control everything, and apparently the government didn't assist them.

Lastly, there is no reason to assume that in a natural economic situation, that we would see anything. That's all assumption, and wrong.

In a free economic situation, those with more abilities will get paid more, than those without. Those who choose to do things in high demand, will get paid more than those who choose to do things with low demand. And those who work more, and work smarter, and work harder, will get paid more than those who work less, work easy, and work unwisely.

In short, if everyone does high value jobs extremely well, then you will see dozens of millionaires. If only few do so, and most sit around on welfare waiting for government to fix their lives, then you will see a few billionaires and dozens of poor people.

Ironically, our system better matches what you claim it should be, than any other. You look at China prior to 1978, and what you describe as bad, is exactly what they got. Just a few people at the top of the government, and state owned companies, living like royalty, while 63% of the country lived impoverished, at $2 a day.

Our system has allowed more people in our country to be wealthy, than any other system. We have the largest number of wealthy individuals relative to population, than anywhere else in the world. You have a better chance of being a billionaire in the US, than you do in any other country.

And quite frankly, if you earn $31,000 a year, you are in the top 1% of wage earners in the entire world. So in all honestly, complaining about the system that affords you a luxurious life style that 99% of the planet can only dream about... just makes you a spoiled brat. I have no problem with the wealthy, and no problem our system. Go live 1 year in South / Central America, Eastern Europe, most of Asia, and then tell me how horrible our system is.

 

[Andylusion]

What's a "wealthy class"?

Heres a good place to start.

Richest 1% to own more than rest of world by 2016

So what ?

Why don't you tell us how that happened.

It would take several pages to tell how it happened, BUTT lets just say that I would put top marginal tax rates at the 74 percent pre gipper rate.

I would also take the cap off of social security AND repeal BOcare and replace it with Medicare for all.Hope that helps.

You would replace a bad program with a program that's already going broke? How would that work?

You do know that Medicare only pays part of the bill for their patients, don't you? Hospitals and doctors make up the loss when they get cash or private insured people. Take private insured patents out of the mix, and you have closed down facilities which happened so many times in the past. It's one of the reasons our health insurance increased so much the last couple of decades.

A perfect place to start !!

Medicare is a hot button topic.

The goal isn't to have a government program.

The goal is to deliver health care to people who need it.

When we start with discussing the goals we hope to achieve that we can have better programs.

The right cries about the potential issues with government health care.

At the same time, the left defends to the death programs that are weak and stupid in so many ways.

No TRUST = No PROGRESS

It's not about that at all.

There can not be 'progress' between two mutually exclusive views.

If I am watching a movie with my LCD projector, I want the room dark. If you are reading a book, you want the room light. There is no "progress" we can make reconciling these two mutually exclusive goals. You'll have to leave the room, or I will. We can't both get what we want because what we want are mutually exclusive.

I may trust you with my life, that doesn't mean we can find a solution to the "no light / total light" impasse.

You act like if we just "want to find a solution" that magically there will be a solution. That's not true. One side will have to not get what they want, or the other, or both.

The right-wing is correctly concerned about major fundamental flaws with government funded health care. We have government funded health care right now, and it sucks. So it's not "potential issues".... the VA had "absolute issues" not "potential issues". And every other government funded health care system has had the same issues. It's not an isolated VA problem.

The right, wants a more free-market capitalist based system.

The left, wants government funded care for everyone system.

These are mutually exclusive goals. There is no way to "make progress" on this. Either we go one direction or the other. We can't hold hands, sing songs, and pass a bill that is somehow magically both socialized free-market government funded capitalists based health care.

And both side have some valid points.

If we have government run it, then it will be politicized. If we have government pay for it, then it will be rationed, because government doesn't have unlimited funds. Universally this is either by denying care, or having waiting lists. Government health care is almost always extremely poor, and badly managed, and is almost always followed by fraud and corruption.

If we have a completely free-market capitalist based system, then people who pay more, get better care. Just like if you pay more, you can get better clothes than the $9 shirts at Walmart. Or a better car than that Chevy Aveo.

And just like if you don't have the money, you can't by the car.... similarly, some people are not going to get care. They will have to go to charity, or..... heaven forbid... families will have to start helping each other. Or get this... people will have to start being fiscally responsible. Crazy thought.

But that's how that works. Some people are not going to get everything they want if they have to pay for it themselves.

The other option is, government pays for it, and you end up on a 5 year waiting list for knee surgery, like in Canada. Or simply denied surgery because government deemed you not being worth surgery. Both have happened numerous times in socialized care systems.

It's one or the other dude. There is no middle ground. What's the center-lane alternative?