nice to see you're back to your old tricks, med. the "right" of your imagination surely does exist, but to consider it the majority or even a significant minority is nothing more than your own ego at work.
1.Right against any change in medical status-left wants single payer.
since this seems to be the driving force behind this entire thread, why don't we look at what a single payer system really does? it places the power of a major chunk of our economy squarely in the laps of the political elite. it takes the money and power from those who are able to pay and hands it to bureaucrats to dole out as they see fit. taking the profit motive out of medicine might seem a dandy way to reduce costs, but what about all the things those profits were supporting? if government run health insurance is run in the same manner as medicare, refusing payment whenever possible and rationing out what they will pay with an eyedropper, we can expect drastic cut backs in both medical research and the expansion of medical facilities. without private insurers to make up the difference for those penny pinching bureaucrats, quality care may become a thing of the past and all those medical advances the current system has invested in will come to a screeching halt.
the notion that single payer could ever be self-sustaining is a blatant lie designed to ease the conscience of its proponents. no government run organization has ever been self-sustaining. to support a seemingly endless line of bureaucrats, cost cutting measures such as reduced service and substandard performance are always tried, but they are never enough to pay for the gross inefficiency of everything the state turns its hand to. bowing to the demands of special interest groups and the necessities of political life, mediocrity reigns and the taxpayers are always the ones to tighten their belts as civil servants continue to get fat. the growth of government does not add to the growth of the nation's economy, it weakens the fabric of the private sector and, as those programs fail to meet their objectives and demand further revenue from the people, drains the vitality of a free market.
there is no doubt that some things must change in the way we run america's health care, but the destruction of an entire industry seems the foolishness of ignorant daydreamers and power hungry politicians. it is possible to lower the cost of care, make insurance more affordable and do away with many of the abuses that, though not as commonplace as we are led to believe, do occur. none of that is likely if we allow government's heavy hand to start mucking about with medicine and its adjuncts. i'm sure that those who hate the capitalist system would love to see us take another step down the road to its destruction, but those fools haven't the foresight to see where that leads and they seem to lack the sense of history that makes the destination apparent.
2.Right wants to expand war, kill the bastards-left wants to bring the troops home.
it has already been pointed out that a majority of our wars have been started by the party toward the left, but the idea that either end of the spectrum want to see such carnage is a gross oversimplification. the reasons given for our various military fiascoes run the gamut, but the underlying impetus is always ideological expansion. the money involved isn't all that important to those players, it is the power to be gained by bringing another nation in line with their world view. left or right, they all crave that power and will do most anything to attain it. claiming that all hawks are on the right undoubtedly makes you feel better about your ideology, but it ignores history and the entire mindset behind our political animals.
3.Right wants to keep all their money-left wants to provide for the common good, IE make sure everyone is fed, has shelter, and healthcare.
your robin hood complex is showing. it must be nice to stand there on the moral high ground and spit on the wealthy you so envy. from that altitude i guess you can't see the millions upon millions of dollars that are given each year as charitable donations, much of it by those righties you detest, to care for the poverty stricken and indigent. it seems that it isn't giving that they despise, it's paying for a bureaucracy that gives them no say in how that money is spent and that takes the lion's share to prop up their little fiefdoms. surprise; with very few exceptions,
no one wants to see needless death and pointless despair. except for a few sociopaths, we would all like to see the destitute gainfully employed and capable of living without the need for charity (government or otherwise). the expansion of the welfare state isn't going to do that. government handouts aren't going to do it. penalizing the productive can only bring a few more of them into the ranks of the needy. so how is it that the liberal establishment's give-aways are going to do anything more than stave off the inevitable?
government is not a charitable institution. its prime duty is to allow the people to do as they see fit and keep them from ripping each other apart. the ponzi scheme that is the welfare state does nothing more than create a dependent class that drains the productive to no particular end and enriches the middle man. we have been told that this is a necessity because the rich are greedy mother fuckers and the poor are downtrodden victims. you, along with a substantial percentage of the population, have taken this indoctrination to heart and, in the process, have handed those middle men the keys to the kingdom. ignoring what good the private sector can do, you want to place all our eggs in the government's basket and, from behind a curtain of privilege, allow them to dole it all out as they see fit. well you can do as you please with what is yours, but i would like to know that what i choose to give away is going toward something that helps build society and so would most reasonable people.
.....there are plenty of crooks in the congress and white house. #1 cause, lobbyists.
no amount of money or power can corrupt an honest man and we obviously have very few of those available for public service. i realize that blaming lobbyists alone for the corruption of government allows you to place the entire burden on big business and whichever special interest groups you wish to demonize, but there had to be a hand out in the first place or there would be no place for the pay off to go. lobbyists are certainly complicit in the enslavement of the people, but they are merely filling a niche in the bureaucratic marketplace. time and again i've asked the simple question, "where does the sin lie?", and it is obvious that you should have added difference #4, the left wishes to blame our woes on business and the right sees the corruptibility of our representatives as the worst of the problem.
Generally speaking, the right is well off, and the left is poor, or less than well off.
so it's greed that makes every thing happen? the greed of the rich, wanting to keep what they have, and the greed of the poor, grasping for what others have earned. why is it that the greed of the rich, even those who donate faithfully to worthwhile causes, is so much worse than its counterpart amongst the poor? your "left" seems infatuated with greed and more than willing to scapegoat anyone for the sake of their agenda.
I literally just choked on my sandwich reading that.
