When people say we need balance [in government] I suspect they don’t really know what they are saying. There is a place for balance and there is a place to go all one; way let me explain. I am a Liberal that means I support socialistic elements and capitalistic elements but not necessarily the two together. In the U.S. often because of the compromise nature of policy we get ‘balance’ half capitalistic, half socialist policies…in other words the worst of both worlds. Look at healthcare in general, we spend way more per capita on healthcare then every other country (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita) Yet we do not get the services for said costs because they fall into the insurance gap. This wedge that has sprung up between capitalistic and socialist healthcare called insurance milks the American people of the profit for pushing a bunch of paper. Healthcare, as a service for the American people would function better if it were all socialistic. Next, I like retail products and online services totally free checked only by the consumer’s desires, in this way we get the very best of products and services without weighing them down with a lot of useless tax and regulation. Americans should be free to pursue their dream without government sticking their nose in areas it doesn’t belong. Finally there is a third area and that is fairness regulation without direct intervention, Banking is an example where we need fairness regulation, to keep everyone safe from the greedy banker making unethical investments with investors money without full discloser. Bank examiners need to make sure banks have enough assets to cover loans etc (Pre-deregulation stuff) In this way, balance is achieved in general but individual elements are all one way or the other or only regulated with fairness laws. But the dumping tax payer money into something that isn’t 100% public is just plain flawed.
Posted on: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 03:28:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015