On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint <[email protected]>wrote:
You simply can’t rely on one-sided references to make important decisions > with these kinds of complex programs... > Agreed. > **** > > Thus, I find that reading the comment section helps to more accurately > inform me; but that depends on whether knowledgeable folks are > participating. > Yes -- the comments can be very interesting. > with the federal govt raiding the social security ‘fund’ and numerous > other bloated and wasteful programs, one would have to be blind to think > that the govt is going to do it more efficiently than a competitive system. > I have no problem with the basic gist of this -- I am sure there is a lot of government bloat that can be trimmed. I guess I'm one for trying to sift the wheat from the chaff, rather than throw everything out, and for making use of bargaining power when it can be used to the advantage of the public good. Careful measures, carefully taken, enacted in light of positive experience in similar areas in other parts of the world. I am also not one to believe the a purely market based system is going to do an old person who has no money any good. He or she will suffer more than anyone else, because he or she will have no purchasing power, and a market based system will end up specializing in plastic surgery rather than helping him or her with some basic geriatric problem. A similar thing goes for the mentally retarded, the chronically ill, the physically disabled and those who, for whatever reason, are unlikely to ever be gainfully employed because they don't have the skills or ability to be employed. Whenever I hear of market-based solutions, I think of these people and the likelihood that they will be forever scrounging around for their basic needs. I think the market has a role to play, but I think we should also not be persuaded into thinking it is a magic bullet. I don't imagine you have been persuaded that it is, but I think a lot of people have. Everything in moderation. Eric
