Well my point was that there were feasible alternatives to the postal service; so you aren't really disagreeing with me there. I have no problem with that, I don't want businesses entirely out of delivery, I just think the government can and should (and does) have a place there as well.

As for private insurance being a feasible alternative, it's not. The whole point of my statement was that not everyone can actually afford private insurance, so there isn't really a choice there for them.

A strongly worded response, devoid of any actual information.

I know it's easier to blame all the problems with a system on the system itself, but it doesn't actually help anything in the end to do so.



Again, no argument, here... but I'll ask you a question in return: Why is it rdiculous for me to want to live in a system where everyone is taken care of based on their needs, yet NOT rediculous to live in a system where having a need (such as treatment for a chronic condition) to begin with might disqualify you from being able to recieve affordable care from a private insurer?

I think the absurdity, the ridiculousness lies clearly within the latter category.

*laughs* Then why does it work elsewhere? Why do most industrialized countries on the globe have cheap access to reliable health care? It isn't like they're dropping like flies in countries with socialized medicine, so how can you possibly argue that I'm spinning you a tale?

You know, even as much as I am part of that "blame America first" liberal crowd that you always hear about, I find statements like this devoid of merit. For one thing, it's not an answer. It doesn't begin to tell us WHY Americans are selfish bastards, it just gives a short, stupid answer and tries to get away from the subject as quickly as possible.

Oh? I am.

okay, nevermind then, all my statements are cheerfully withdrawn. Obviously this mountain of evidence that's being thrown against my every statement in this posting is more than I can possibly hope to argue against.


Oh? Then explain to me how they work when someone can't choose the good or service they are attempting to purchase?

Let's say a six year old girl gets a rare form of Lymphoma that only 12 doctors nationwide can treat, and only one of them is in her area. In a supply and demand system, his services come at a high price because they are in very low supply, yet the lack of demand doesn't decrease their price because of the risk involved, and the fact that no consumer who needs them can just walk away like they can with say, a nice Vase.

How does the supply and demand system serve her better than an alternative?