nation-x

You have a point there... but in reality, if the government didn't offer the services it does, our infrastructure would simply fall apart and we would revert to being a third world country... if you doubt that then you really don't have a clue.

The Federal Government is really a direct response to the needs of the people... government isn't the problem... Reagan was wrong when he said that and the real problem lies with the people in the government who politicize every issue and play to the polls instead of governing with common sense. I will grant that common sense will probably never play a majority role in what government does... but that is a reflection of the people as well... because you can't even begin to tell me that the majority of people use common sense... we are in a society where common sense is the minority and TV Land mentality is the majority. If you want to call me an elitist for saying that the majority of Americans are idiots... than you can do so... it doesn't reduce the pure FACT that it's the truth.

The real truth is that the majority of the American people don't use logic or education to decide where they stand on issues... most don't even pay attention. If they DO know something about an issue it is typically whatever they heard from some talking head or from a friend. Yuppies are the worst... they take positions just like politicians do... you can typically make an accurate judgment of where they stand by who their friends are, where they work or where they go to church because they will mirror their environment. This is why I refer to them as sheep (sheeple).

As far as Health Care, there are very legitimate arguments to be made for and against the current proposals... there is no doubt about it. However, I think that anyone that says that the status quo is better than trying to make a positive change needs some education. The current Republican arguments are just ridiculous, typically false and say ALOT about those that repeat those talking points. Those false arguments from the right are every bit as wrong as the raging left who have been attacking Blue Dogs and Obama for not insisting on a public option or pushing a single payer solution. DailyKos is FULL of those type of diaries.

I can make arguments for AND against the current healthcare proposals that are based on real facts and not bullshit talking points. Here are a few that are legitimate arguments against them... I don't think I need to argue for it because alot of people are alreqady making great arguments for the proposals.

Legitimate Arguments Against Health Care Reform (as proposed):

1. The current proposals claim that we could realize a $500B savings from the current Medicare program. This would be accomplished by eliminating fraud and waste as well as evolving the program to focus on preventative care and standardizing treatments based on the consensus of the medical experts on what works best rather than paying based on services rendered. The problem I see with this is that, without Tort Reform, it exposes huge risks to physicians who typically do alot of extra (and typically unnecessary) tests in order to create a paper trail to prevent malpractice claims. The number one reason for the increase in health care costs in the US is malpractice insurance costs that consumers end up paying as part of the service charges from care. We need Tort reform so that doctors aren't paying $30K-100K/year in malpractice insurance premiums and adding to the cost of health care services.

2. Although the bill does not provide any health care for illegal immigrants, it SHOULD require that illegals provide proof of residence and ID (foreign or domestic) so that they could be identified as illegal immigrants. I don't think that this would be such a hard thing to accomplish as part of the electronic records part of reform. It's the same basic premise behind requiring them to get drivers licenses. It's about identifying who they are and where they reside. This data should be reviewed by immigration authorities and we should start enforcing our immigration laws.

3. The public option should only provide basic coverage and no more. This isn't really an argument against the public option... but it seems to me that the current proposal to provide a public option makes sense because it provides a cheaper means to provide coverage to people who can't afford coverage... but it should only provide basic coverage. This would make it easy for private insurers to compete with it while preventing subsidy to those same private insurers that would cost more. It's a proven fact that the administration costs of Medicare are way lower than those of the private insurers and there is savings to be realized there as we cover those who can't afford coverage. The problem with the current proposal is that it doesn't explicitly make it clear that it would only provide basic coverage.

There are a few more arguments that could be made against the current proposals... but none of them have anything to do with the bullshit coming from the right wing spin machine.