About Healthcare
The Wall Street Journal, Monday Dec 27, 05, had a good article on what California has done to require hospitals to disclose their prices. Very revealing. The argument against universal healthcare is that "Market Forces" will produce better results. A major problem with this thesis is that healthcare providers, especially hospitals, don't/won't tell you before a procedure what your costs will be and what the likely outcomes are. It is the only industry that claims to be "Market driven" but doesn't tell you what you are getting and what the price is. Sounds more like a shell game to me. -- And this from a died in the wool free marketer. (Original on True Majority, Policy Issues, comment on Universal Healthcare post. Click Here )
Who is the "True Majority"
The True Majority is really made up of people on the center of American Politics. I submit that this group is generally compassionate in relation to the needs of the poor, etc. and tend to be very tolerant on social issues but also fiscally conservative. This majority would respond to a call for RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT (i.e. spend no more than revenue), ETHICS OF TOLERANCE, and SHARED SACRIFICE (We can all participate in the fight against terrorism, not just the men and women giving their lives and limbs, by paying higher taxes, using less fuel, etc.). (Note: this was orginally posted on Dec 28, 04 on the True Majority Policy discussion board.)
Social Security needs reform
posted 17 December 2004 07:11 AM on the True Majority Board (alias JT)
To say that there is no problem with SS the way it currently is structured is to put your head in the sand. There is a problem but not one that most people on SS today have to worry about. Indeed, Bush's proposal won't affect this population, so let's not resort to mis-information about harming today's old people (I'm one of them). Whether you agree with him or not (and I suspect that most who participate on this board do not) Bush has done a service by bringing the SS problem into the light of public debate. In one sense, privatization of SS (and even Bush isn't talking about complete privatization) is just another tax cut (this time it would go primarily to the "middle class") with the proceeds going into an investment account. The real problem is the multi-trillion in additional debt that our children and grand children will have to repay, in addition to the multi-trillion of additional debt already planned. SS reform which will result in indefinite viability (40 years isn't enough for those just leaving school) can be done but the longer we delay, the greater the sacrifice the younger generations will have to make.
Dems better understand the mass audience
Most people like (and can understand) simple direct statements. The dems rose to power in the 1930's with simple messages like "The only thing you have to fear is fear itself" and later in the 60's, "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." Then on the other side was Gingrich's "Contract with America." The Bushies are masters at framing issues into simple-to-understand sound bytes. e.g. "If you're not with us you're against us." Or, the Orwellian "Clear Skys," or "Healthy Forests." Darrell Waltrip (a well known NASCAR driver), in an interview before the 2004 election said something to the effect that he wasn't into issues, he backed the man who he felt he could look in the eye. A recent National Geographic Magazine snippet (the issue featuring the report "Was Darwin Wrong") reported that 47% of the US population believe that humans appeared on earth about 10,000 years ago pretty much looking like they do today. A commentator on CNN today (Dec 10, 04) remarked that people only want to listen to comentary that reinforces their own perceptions of reality.A large percentage of Americans (the majority?) really don't want (or don't have the intellect?) to learn about and develop reasoned opinions on issues.
The dems must first, figure out what they are. It it's all things for all people they might as well resign themselves to being a perpetual minority party. If they can indentify a clear focus for their philosophy and interpert it for the masses in a straight forward way, they have a chance. Pandering to an unlimited number of causes (OK liberal causes), creates a mish mash of messages that will result only in failure.
