Originally Posted By: jack maloney
Originally Posted By: L.Brown
...our system has problems, but you're not doing much to help us solve them. And nothing you've said to this point is of any real value at all, unless you're willing to get behind A SPECIFIC PLAN.


As usual, Larry sets up a straw man ("A SPECIFIC PLAN") and then beats it to death - without providing any information on his part. According to Larry, I'm obligated to provide all sorts of details about something I never proposed ("A SPECIFIC PLAN"), while he provides nothing but vague generalities.

I agree with Larry that "nothing" I've posted here - the specific data on national health care costs and performance, the links to information sources - "is of any real value at all" to anyone whose mind is firmly closed and doesn't want to be confused by facts. I only hope that forum members with open minds will benefit from greater knowledge.

Sorry, Larry. I've seen your straw man arguments before. If you can contribute any legitimate facts to contradict the information I have provided and sourced, I'd be glad to discuss it. If you can contribute any worthwhile information to help us get a better understanding of the issues surrounding national health care, I'd be pleased to consider it.

Otherwise, I'll just ignore the usual spluttering from the peanut gallery.


Wow . . . asking for "a specific plan" is a STRAWMAN? So far, Jack, all you've given us is information surrounding the "concept" of universal health care. Infant mortality higher here than in many other countries; we pay more; etc etc. All well and good. So let's say I don't own a car. I have a horse or maybe a bicycle, and you've presented data showing why a car is a better idea. Well, since I'm not a car owner (analogy to most Americans not having any experience with universal health care), showing me that a car (universal health care) is a good idea is only the first step. But what would REALLY be helpful would be if you'd tell me WHICH CAR (which universal health care plan) is best for me (this country)? Surely, Jack, if you've done all that study, you can tell us whether Austria's plan is superior to France's or Sweden's, and why. And give us the specifics.

So far, what you've done is the equivalent of telling us that a double, either sxs or OU, is superior to a pump or an auto. Well, we're non-double owners, and we're looking for specific recommendations. I don't know about others here, but I wouldn't run out and buy a double based simply on a convincing argument that it's better than a pump or auto. There are bunches of them out there, and I don't know which one to buy. HELP! Same deal with universal health care. You've already admitted it's "not universally good", and you've already told us you don't favor either Obamacare or Hillarycare. So can we now . . . please, pretty please! . . . get beyond the generalizations about why universal health care is better, and get down to the SPECIFICS of what we should look for from our politicians in a universal health care plan YOU, PERSONALLY would support. Preferably based on an example of one you think works particularly well in country X, Y, or Z. Because it would seem if we leave it to the politicians, without our being better informed . . . well, for example, we're already being offered plans by Obama and Clinton, neither of which you like. So, where's the really good deal on a car or doublegun (universal health care) we should look to, since we know from what you've told us that there are bad deals out there?

Last edited by L. Brown; 02/24/08 07:54 PM.