In response to:

Improving Health Care

davishipps Wrote: Jun 15, 2012 9:47 AM
Did you read these sentences? "Contrary to what some Republicans say, we didn't have a free medical market before Obama came to power. We had a system that limited competition through occupational licensing, FDA rules and other government intrusions, while stimulating demand through tax-favored employer-based "insurance," Medicare and Medicaid." Isn't that (effectively) what you mean by healthcare being a "quasi governmental agency." I've never seen Stossel pull punches or be "loathe" to being honest and transparent. He even admits that the Brits and Canadians like their socialized medicine - something I've not seen from other conservatives or libertarians. He's not always right, but I thought this particular article was spot-on.
c136 Wrote: Jun 21, 2012 1:16 PM
I agree. Maybe Stossel didn't emphasize it enough, though. One thing I've heard that I think should be mentioned more often is how cheap health insurance was before Medicare and other government programs got started in the mid 60s. I've heard that you could get health insurance for $15 ... A YEAR!!!, in the early 60s before government "helped us".

Any day now, the U.S. Supreme will rule on whether the Obamacare insurance mandate is constitutional. Seems like a no-brainer to me. How can forcing me to engage in commerce be constitutional?

But there's a deeper question: Why should government be involved in medicine at all?

Right before President Obama took office, the media got hysterical about health care. You heard the claims: America spends more than any country -- $6,000 per person -- yet we get less. Americans die younger than people in Japan and Western Europe. Millions of Americans lack health insurance and worry about paying for...