Hi Tracy,

It was the "...we need to get back to our roots..." that caught my eye.

The "roots" you speak of have a context all their own.
For instance, slavery was accepted back then, and in the context of health care it seems to me that slaves got little if any while their masters could well afford whatever because of the $$$ gained by their slaves' work.
There was no "medical insurance" back then.
The US had a fledgling armed forces and had no interest in becoming the major power in the world.
There were no "income taxes" and the Federal/state governments earned $$$ through tariffs, duties, property taxes, etc.
There was no public education. People who could afford to sent their kids to school and beyond, and those who couldn't get schooling had plenty of work available to them anyway. Not well-paying, but nevertheless obviated the need for welfare.

Contrast these things with today. Your mightiest armed forces in the world costs $$$. Your education system costs $$$. As corporations send more work to China there is no work and so a need for welfare. (and I'm sure that you know that the biggest lobbyists AGAINST changing the status quo on illegal immigration are those corporations who literally cannot relocate their work to China (growers/packers, stores (like WalMart and virtually all others), cleaning services, labourers in construction, etc.) and scream blue murder at the possible loss of their cheap labour).

It's hard to find any unbiased writing on the issue of socialized versus private health care.
My favourite examples come from a couple of well known Canadian columnists who constantly criticized our medicare year after year until they needed it themsleves. Then they had the courage to eat their words and state that their experience was far different than they had imagined. Both those were before the internet, so I don't know that the articles are available.

>You are referring to socialized healthcare which this country is working towards in a slow manner. I disagree with that personally. Healthcare at others expense leads to unecessary care that clogs doctor's offices, hospitals and the health system in general. I read recently that a patient in Canada must wait 24 days for an appointment with a cardiologist and an additional 15 days for the same type of emergency surgery that Bill Clinton received. When my ex-husband had heart-bypass surgery they detected the problem and operated within 4 days. In Sweden, supposedly they have to wait up to 11 months for heart x-rays and 8 months for essential surgery. I don't know if these numbers are factual or not, I read them in an article while I was waiting to see the doctor with my daughter just two days ago. She had an ear and sinus infection and then caught Strep throat on top of it all. We were in and out of the doctor's office in a short period of time with a prescription that I got
>filled within the hour. When my appendix burst I stopped by the doctor's office in the morning and had surgery within 3 hours. I cannot complain about the general nature of our healthcare system now, only that there is a lot of bureacracy with some insurance carriers and not all employers offer affordable health insurance.
>All systems (capitalist and socialist) of healthcare have problems, but this country was founded on the principle of less government not more and as it is our government spends too much money on too much junk and all of it without consulting the tax payer. I want to see less taxes, less government, and less spending as it is. With the amount of taxes we pay now we should be receiving free healthcare (instead of our dollars going to other countries) but I don't think socialist healthcare is the answer. I would prefer to see that money in my pocket and let me continue to pay for my health insurance and choose my doctors. You won't like this but I really feel that there are plenty of countries out there whose government provides socialist healthcare and whose government in general leans towards socialism and those that want a socialist system should choose those countries over the U.S. If you want the government to take care of you then another government is the answer, not changing
>ours to a socialist system. We need to go back to our roots and get out of big government. This is not a welfare state nor should it become one. Those services have certainly become available to all and so people have come to expect them, but that is not the same thing as a 'right' to them. I will never believe in taking from the rich and giving it to the poor. It only leads to the poor staying poor and staying reliant on the government.
>
>
>>>Hi Dragan,
>>>
>>>what would you like to see in this potential 'health system?'
>>
>>Basic level of care included in your taxes. IOW, if you break a few ribs, or need a dozen teeth replaced, you don't have to go bankrupt and lose the houst (or, under new law, be in debt forever). It would be included in what you already paid. Now if you wanted titanium teeth or teflon coating on your new ribs, or whatever is above the basic, then you pay for the difference.