Habenero

The Republicans tend to harp about socialism as if it is an evil thing that is to be avoided at all costs. What they don’t want you to know is that under the Bush and McCain bank deregulation efforts that we are currently reaping the benefits of, the debt of the banks has been socialized. That’s right, the banks can’t be allowed to lose the money they pissed away, we save them by taking on their debt which is a drastic form of socialism. The down side to that socialistic response, the banks are still free to piss away money, but they get to keep any profit they manage to make without sharing the profit with us. The government will be paid back without getting any real benefit from owning a stake in the banks.

McCain’s plan to have the bad mortgages be bought by the government, is yet another attempt at making maximum profit for the banks and screwing us. The banks will sell the debt at face value, not market value. That rewards the robber barons bank owners for making bad loans and makes it much more difficult for the government to do anything but lose in the long haul.

Anti-abortionists claim to be pro life, most are not (support of a death penalty automatically excludes one from truthfully being pro life). They would love to have their socialist agenda, become law. They wish to force their ideology of life beginning at conception upon everybody. They usually also are against having those most likely to become pregnant given enough information to prevent one. Just saying no doesn’t work for drug users or sexually active teens. Teens that are informed about proper methods for contraception are less likely to get pregnant, but are no more likely to engage in premarital sex. The one main place I do not want government intervention is in bedrooms or between doctors and their patients.

If you are going to socialize one area that should not have needed it, why do you not socialize the one thing that would benefit the most Americans, our health care. We are not enabling our citizens to have full and productive lives under the present system. Many older Americans have to choose between eating and medicine. We DIE at a younger age than the citizens of many countries that have socialized care. To further make my point, those of us that do have coverage pay higher premiums for our insurance because ultimately the costs for the uninsured patients unable to pay are passed on to us. Why not make the system fairer for all?

Medicare and Medicaid were reasonably well run programs before Bush got his hands on them. They were among the better government run systems. A health care system incorporated into that existing system would offer significant benefits to the majority of Americans. As it is now, health care varies significantly from plan to plan and state to state, so much so, that it is sometimes impossible to find coverage for older employees that were forced to find a new job when their ex employer decided to ship their job to Bangalore or Manila. Why would you be content to cover some citizens, when all of us need it?