CDR: Re: why should it be trusted?

[Marshall Clow]

At 2:11 PM +0300 10/20/00, Sampo A Syreeni wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000, Marshall Clow wrote:
>
>>So these people are entitled to something for nothing?
>>(or in this case, $1500 of treatment for $1000 of premiums)?
>>
>>Why?
>
>Because keeping people operable longer makes for net savings for the
>society?

That's a nice belief.
Can you show it to be true?

[ Don't forget to factor in the opportunity cost of such a program. ]

>This perhaps isn't a reason for *private* companies to issue
>insurance fairly, but is a clear incentive to the society to nevertheless
>maintain a public health insurance infrastructure.

Rather, I would say that individuals should be able to decide on
the level of health care that they are willing to pay for.

>Following the same line
>of reasoning, it is beneficial for the society as a whole (whether through
>the government or through concerted action of individuals) to pressure any
>insurer to comply with this general goal.

Even if I conceded your premise (which I don't), I certainly don't believe that
this is true.

This is basically equivalent to "the end justifies the means".

How do you feel about forced sterilizations of mental patients and
other "undesirables"? Society would benefit by not having them reproduce.

On this side of the Atlantic, we get the pathetic wheeze "If it saves just one child....."

[ Switching topics completely. ]
>I think this can be accomplished without the Men with Guns as well.
And now you've completely lost me.
How would you compel people to pay taxes without a threat of violence?
-- 
-- Marshall

"The era of big government is over."
           Bill Clinton, State of the Union Address, January 23, 1996
Marshall Clow     MusicMatch   <mailto:mclow at mailhost2.csusm.edu>