Healthcare Bill Notes

[ensteele]

First off, the National Parks use OUR MONEY to keep the park that way. Second, are you going back for another camp trip there? Probably not there. So, if there is another private park that provides better services, and nice beaches, you will probably go there and continue to go there because it is better and a better value. That is what the free market system is all about. If someone won't compete, they won't stay in buisness for long.

[Stilor]

Earl,

Originally Posted by ensteele

First off, the National Parks use OUR MONEY to keep the park that way.

You sound as if I am personally taking your money I am paying taxes too, so it's my money as well.

Then, as I pointed out - most of the issues could be addressed with little or no money spent:
- How much would a hand-out with map, access codes, etc. cost? $0.20?
- How much would it cost to provide truthful description of the campground and its rules on the web site? Nothing at the time of website creation, since they provided content anyway.

So this boils down to attitude and deception, not money.

And remember, NPS responsibilities are much broader than just running the campsites. They maintain forests, run search&rescue teams, do environmental cleanups, etc. - something that these private campgrounds don't have to provide for. Quick googling didn't produce a recent NPS budget, the most recent I found was for FY 2002 and it stated the net cost of "public enjoyment and visitor services" (which I assume included campsites) was $1.4B. Which is about $4 per capita per year.

Originally Posted by ensteele

Second, are you going back for another camp trip there? Probably not there. So, if there is another private park that provides better services, and nice beaches, you will probably go there and continue to go there because it is better and a better value.

Yes, assuming we manage to find such PRIVATE park. For now, we decided to go with government-operated ones, thank you very much.

Originally Posted by ensteele

That is what the free market system is all about. If someone won't compete, they won't stay in business for long.

Well, the motto of such business could be to stay long enough to con enough people. Word spreads very slowly for facilities that people don't use on everyday basis, so the owners could still count on a steady income from people who will come and leave with a "never again" impression.

[sowise]

Ok I have to jump in on this one too…
Stilor maybe you haven’t noticed but in your home state of California they are proposing to close 48 different national parks as well as cut funding to many schools, health care, and criminal justice programs.

They are also considering giving tickets to people who go onto closed facilities. Hmm a ticket for going on public land? Land we pay for to keep it safe and maintained (which will be still done even if they are closed).

That is just park closures in California there are many others nationally not to mention things like rest stops along the highways. So I don’t see how you can say the government is successfully running them? Sure some of the features and things may be more streamlined and easier but they have been getting A LOT of money to support those parks. If private parks had that kind of money I am sure it would be a different story. Private parks are not easy to come by because the government has the advantage. Plus there is no real profit for a private enterprise in owning a park. The government can buy the land or just assume ownership of it. They can decide what they want to do with it or place under some kind of preserve or protected status. As a private park with a preserve status it is very difficult to get permissions and go through the red tape to build anything on that land. So if you relate it to health care they may start rationing what is available due to how much money they do or don’t have in the budget. May even limit or minimize things like government offices that will have to handle those health care claims (I picture a building with old 50’s furniture and desktop computers running windows 95) where they will have too few people handling it and it will be very much like going to the DMV. I type to much and ramble so I am going to stop here but using the parks as an example to prove this point doesn’t make sense to me.

[Stilor]

sowise:

Yes, I noticed the proposed park closure. First of all, I am not happy with it, I'd really prefer if they went with either of two other options they had on the table - increase in the entrance fees or increase in registration fees. The hike in prices would be noticeable, but still not outrageous.

As to tickets: I think that makes sense, if they plan to reopen these parks eventually. If people are allowed to wander in closed unsupervised parks - the infrastructure in those parks is going to deteriorate very fast. I wish you saw what the parks in Russia looked like when funding stopped and there was no supervision in the parks.

I am also uneasy with reduction in funding for schools and criminal justice; especially with the latter. However, even more worrying is the mandamus of the judicial branch to release prisoners due to overcrowding, since "they are suffering". Did those prisoners consider victim's sufferings when they perpetrated their crimes? Sometimes the human right folks are just crazy... Everybody I know does not like this possibility of release of criminals...

And, as I am an alien, even though legal and taxpaying, I could only express my opinion - I do not have the power to vote. But all the issues above don't change what I tried to point out: government COULD BE more intelligent and effective than a privately-run enterprise.

Note I said COULD BE, not IS. And when left fully to a free market without any regulations, privately-run enterprises are likely to weigh in favor of their bottomline rather than public benefit. The government needs to step in to the health care business, either as a regulator or as a competing entity. I'd prefer the latter, just because the former option will likely reduce the number of cases of bad faith behavior from insurance companies, but is not likely to reduce the rates. Actually, it is likely to drive the rates even higher, since insurance companies will factor the cost of the regulation into the rates.

PS. To be clear: I support public health insurance option for people legally present in the US, not for illegal immigrants.

[K_Dub]

Originally Posted by sowise

They are also considering giving tickets to people who go onto closed facilities. Hmm a ticket for going on public land? Land we pay for to keep it safe and maintained (which will be still done even if they are closed).

There is already a system like this in place. It's called a lift ticket, and it's the reason I've been thrown off of MY land in Colorado countless times as a kid. $599 to ski at Vail, on National Forest Land. Land paid for, and maintained by tax funds, treated as private by the corporations renting it from us.

So how do I bring this years old rant on Colorado's ski areas into the subject at hand? Here's how:

Our gov't is supposed to be "for the people" remember? Corporations however are under no such restrictions. Their purpose it to generate income. What happens when health care stops being about the patient, and becomes about the bottom line? What happens to the Hypocratic Oath when doctors are restricted on what care is given and to who by businesses mandated to eek out every last cent? What happens to those, like myself, who are turned away from hospitals due to a lack of insurance, and left to fend for themselves? I spent 2 months with a hand-made splint on my broken wrist a couple of years back, because after spending over $300 on x-rays I could not afford to treat the fracture that had been diagnosed at Urgent Care.

I agree that government agencies are seldom the best way to get a job done, but when it comes to caring for the sick I think that healing should be the top priority rather than how much money can be made off of them.

And for the record: I'd take a weekend on BLM land over a National Park any day.

[LetItSnow]

Gee, our old LaSalle ran great.

This stuff always reminds me of that.

It's unfortunate that capitalism and socialism can't be better friends somehow.

[lhopp77]

"Let me get this straight… Obama's health care plan will be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it and whose members will be exempt from it, signed by a president who smokes, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is obese, and financed by a country that is broke. What could possibly go wrong? "

Lee

[K_Dub]

I'd rather wait in line to see a bad doctor, than not be able to see one at all. What do I have to loose?

[SuberNatural]

+1 same here