Is a libertarian is essentially a slow conservative?

The government is providing Single Payer healthcare for the elderly way more COST EFFICIENTLY than the private sector.

In other nations their governments are providing UNIVERSAL Single Payer healthcare for their entire populations for far less than the private sector is doing here in America and providing better care too.

The libertarian FALLACY that the private sector is more "cost efficient" than the government is just a load of bovine excrement without any shred of factual substantiation.

 

In order to use government as the means to achieve what you consider to be the "greater good" do you, or do you not, insist that the government use it's police powers to enforce conformity to your version of the "greater good." As for morality, of course it's about right and wrong.

How else are you going to accomplish your moral objectives?

Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

By what measure? Private insurance companies spend less, per capita, than medicare does on administrative costs.

[/quote]
In other nations their governments are providing UNIVERSAL Single Payer healthcare for their entire populations for far less than the private sector is doing here in America and providing better care too.
[/quote]

What measures are you using for "better care" and are you factoring in the cost of obtaining the money and the political cost of shifting that money? Probably not.

If cost efficiency is your MORAL goal, then find the cost efficient way that works for. Not everyone wants your MORALS, no matter how SUPERIOR you think you are in them, shoved down their THROATS. I'd rather pay more for my care and get the things I want than live under a government healthcare equivalent of the DMV because it's "cheap." And, it won't even be cheaper. The FALLACY you authoritarians fall into is never CALCULATING the real cost of obtaining the FUNDS necessary to provide universal healthcare. You don't consider the cost of TAXATION, the cost of political WRANGLING, and the massive DEBT these governments incur to IGNORE pension liabilities down the road.

By the way - does capitalizing certain words help? Do you imagine yourself winning an argument by raising your voice? I'm trying it on you to see what it does. I suppose, like a religious fundamentalist preacher, it only works one way for you - your way.

 

Another load of bovine excrement with zero substantiation. Medicare overheads are 2% while private insurers are 15% or more. When you use private insurance you only get 85 cents worth of healthcare for each dollar in premiums. For Medicare you get 98 cents of healthcare for each dollar in premiums. In other nations their governments are providing UNIVERSAL Single Payer healthcare for their entire populations for far less than the private sector is doing here in America and providing better care too.
[/quote]

What measures are you using for "better care" and are you factoring in the cost of obtaining the money and the political cost of shifting that money? Probably not.

[/QUOTE]Strawman duly noted and ignored for obvious reasons.

YOU came up with your Libertarian FALLACY about "cost efficiency" so why don't you OWN it and try to DEFEND it instead of dissembling and equivocating?

I use capitals for EMPHASIS because it is quicker and easier than using the BOLD function. That you are whining about posting style exposes the vacuousness of your position that you are clearly unable to defend with factual substantiation.

 

I don't insist anything except that people and businesses follow laws just as they are supposed to do today. If democratically elected bodies enact legislation for "greater good" then it is incumbent to follow those laws. You are trying to make it sound like enacted democratic legislation that benefits people is creating a police state. I suppose this is the libertarian fantasy that any government benefit to the people creates tyranny or a police state.

Weird.

What moral objectives? If the majority of people begin to realize that being ruled by corporate lobbyists and armament industry oligarchs is bankrupting the country with debt and serving only the interests of a handful of wealthy individuals then they may come to realize that electing people with socially democratic ideas may serve their interests better and that there is a role for government in using resources to benefit society as a whole.

You are trying to make it sound like I am going to create a dictatorship to achieve my objectives while, of course, it is the contradictions of unfettered capitalism and proponents of John Birch fantasies who want to concentrate wealth in the hands of of a diminishing minority and destroy true democracy by using that wealth to project political power and corrupt democratically elected leaders - just as we are seeing today.

Huh? That is all you have to say on the subject is that two wrongs don't make a right? No criticism on your part of the failings of the system you are backhandedly promoting other than platitudes?

 

The tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.