Socialism and Healthcare
I recently began reading The Reagan Diaries (everyone that knows me well understands my admiration for Ronald Reagan). In reading a passage from his diaries regarding America’s grain embargo in the 1980s with the Soviets, Reagan said the following about the Soviets:
“Their socialism is an ec. failure. Wouldn’t we be doing more for their people if we let their system fail instead of constantly bailing it out?”
Reagan was a true conservative and what he knew well was that socialism is simply a failure. Unfortunately, many in our country now want socialized medicine. Some want complete socialization and other just want to play around with a little of it. Either way, it’s really bad for our country.
People define socialism, especially in regards to medicine, in many different ways. Yet, for me, socialized medicine is simply where the government redistributes wealth from the masses to pay for healthcare for some or all Americans.What would Reagan say about socialized medicine? Well, no doubt he would be completely against the current movement for government intervention in our healthcare system, especially those that want a Canadian or UK type system.
In my mind socialism is simply bad for our country and frankly immoral. Look at Reagan’s quote again, as he had it right. We should let socialism die on the world political stage just as communism did. For the better of us all, America should not go down this path in healthcare.
November 23rd, 2007 at 10:49 am
I agree 100% with Reagan. His philosophy can apply to even more than socialism. It applies to anytime someone or something is enabling another not to feel the true effects of a situation. Our government does this with the welfare system. The poor have learned to depend on the government bailing them out rather than learning how to incorporate disciplines in their life to help them overcome poverty. Granted, this isn’t true for every impoverished person, but for many it is. A lot of times this dependence leads to system abuse. Government enabling is a vicious cycle.
As far as socialized healthcare in our country, I don’t believe socialism would stop there. It’s no secret that in a health care system such as Canada’s or the UK’s, waiting periods for the majority of non emergency services are several months long. What happens when a person needs care in order to remedy an orthopeadic problem or any non emergency problem that is keeping them out of work? If this person has to wait 8 months for treatment, then wouldn’t the government be expected to help or intervene with the person’s inablity to work and make a living during the waiting period? Would this mean more government intervention with the employer? I believe the more the government plays a role in our lives, the more the government has to continue playing a role in our lives. When would it end?
December 11th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I agree with Reagan being a conservative and love “Reagonomics”. The goverment’s role in the lives of those less fortunate in this country would never end. Once they start supporting someone and that individual finds they can be supported by someone other than themselves, what should they do about their own problems? It’s so easy to go to the mailbox and pick up a check.
The government now has a way to keep the less fortunate in society dependent upon them - for their existence. They’ve created their own need for existence. Sort of a sick prophecy. In turn, the government requires those of us who can pay our way in life because we have made good, right choices and have decided to work hard and stand on our own their supporters! Outrageous.
It creates the desire to do whatever can be done to not allow government fingers in our pocketbooks. Socialized healthcare? No way.
November 12th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
0f1i2h4va1o9skb5