Alright Constitutional Scholars...

[Peikko 1,575]

Danno, you are racing off one these wild flights of fancy again

Edited May 22, 2009 by Madame Cleo

[mRx 16]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Which would be... making sure that the cord is connected to the toaster?

Seriously, market-furnished regulation is the most overlooked and underappreciated safety-net in an economy.

Due mostly to the fact that it is not overtly advertised through politial wizardry (i.e. propaganda headlines like: "FDA saves us from armaggeddon")

[Peikko 1,575]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Are you saying there are no regulations pertaining to the provision of safe electrical goods in the US? Hmm, I didn't know that. Now I will be more careful the next time I plug in a toaster...

Seriously though, the model provides an economic stability due to the balancing forces of supply and demand is a sterile one. Humans are humans, once you add them into the mix what should be a nice straight forward equation, ceases to be one. It also presupposes that everyone has equal access to information, has equal intelligence and equal footing on the economic ladder. Would that it were so. Seriously, it would be really lovely if regulation were not required. I can see the downside of it, I really can.

[scandal 951]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Are you saying there are no regulations pertaining to the provision of safe electrical goods in the US? Hmm, I didn't know that. Now I will be more careful the next time I plug in a toaster...

Seriously though, the model provides an economic stability due to the balancing forces of supply and demand is a sterile one. Humans are humans, once you add them into the mix what should be a nice straight forward equation, ceases to be one. It also presupposes that everyone has equal access to information, has equal intelligence and equal footing on the economic ladder. Would that it were so. Seriously, it would be really lovely if regulation were not required. I can see the downside of it, I really can.

Equal intelligence? Well we all know THAT's not true

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others....... (George Orwell)

[justashooter 430]

Let's discuss the U.S. Constitution's Preamble.

"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Does any of the above need to be codified or interpreted (judicial activism), or can we take it for face value (strict constructionist)?

the crux of the question is, what is the "general welfare"?

this thread appears to be based upon the assumption that universal state mandated and managed health care is in the interest of the "general welfare". that assumption has yet to be validated.

my grandmother used to say that anytime someone gets something they haven't earned, that someone has earned something they didn't get.

if you acknowledge that the "general welfare" does not include the taxation of productive people for the benefit of unproductive people, your unproductive population may fall back upon the "domestic tranquility" phrase, which implies that a quiescent populace is of benefit to the nation. perhaps domestic tranquility should be your rallying cry.

[Peikko 1,575]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Are you saying there are no regulations pertaining to the provision of safe electrical goods in the US? Hmm, I didn't know that. Now I will be more careful the next time I plug in a toaster...

Seriously though, the model provides an economic stability due to the balancing forces of supply and demand is a sterile one. Humans are humans, once you add them into the mix what should be a nice straight forward equation, ceases to be one. It also presupposes that everyone has equal access to information, has equal intelligence and equal footing on the economic ladder. Would that it were so. Seriously, it would be really lovely if regulation were not required. I can see the downside of it, I really can.

Equal intelligence? Well we all know THAT's not true

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others....... (George Orwell)

Orwell had some interesting things to say (Go social history via reading novels!)

[mRx 16]

Seriously though, the model provides an economic stability due to the balancing forces of supply and demand is a sterile one. Humans are humans, once you add them into the mix what should be a nice straight forward equation, ceases to be one. It also presupposes that everyone has equal access to information, has equal intelligence and equal footing on the economic ladder. Would that it were so. Seriously, it would be really lovely if regulation were not required. I can see the downside of it, I really can.

People make judgements that they believe will benefit themselves. This is A priori. If it turns out that their individual judgement is in error, then they experience a loss. From an epistemological standpoint, the error in judgement becomes posteriori knowledge.

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, and?

Although, even that isn't a given. People make judgments for other reasons aside from personal gain.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

well, it was written for the white gentry male of the times..did not apply to blacks..indians or women....

...or gheys.

especially mutli-cultural (mix of black-indian) ghey women

#######? They exist?????????????

[mRx 16]

Yes, and?

Although, even that isn't a given. People make judgments for other reasons aside from personal gain.

No they don't.

[rebeccajo 14]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Which would be... making sure that the cord is connected to the toaster?

Seriously, market-furnished regulation is the most overlooked and underappreciated safety-net in an economy.

Due mostly to the fact that it is not overtly advertised through politial wizardry (i.e. propaganda headlines like: "FDA saves us from armaggeddon")

Matt -

Market furnished regulation is like any other economic principal. Nice on paper but not necessarily workable in the real world. When you are talking about the necessities of life, such as food and good health, if one of the components of the principal is 'out of whack' the results can be catastrophic.

Market furnished regulation only works if you take greed out of the equation. When you have colluded greed (such as we saw last summer with the price of fuel) then the principal completely collapses. Not to mention the fact that you have sort of an odd market principal at play with for-profit health insurers holding the reins over doctors and hospitals. If the hospital is also 'for-profit' then you have another dichotemy.

[almaty 19]

well, it was written for the white gentry male of the times..did not apply to blacks..indians or women....

...or gheys.

especially mutli-cultural (mix of black-indian) ghey women

#######? They exist?????????????

only in novels, so don't worry

[scandal 951]

There exists such a check and balance system already; not government-driven, but market-driven. Works for every other industry. Why wouldn't it work for healthcare?

You are kidding me, aren't you?

Do you need to perform a detailed inspection on a new toaster oven before you plug it in to ensure that you will not die of electrocution?

At least a perfunctory one., and stand back for a few seconds...

Which would be... making sure that the cord is connected to the toaster?

Seriously, market-furnished regulation is the most overlooked and underappreciated safety-net in an economy.

Due mostly to the fact that it is not overtly advertised through politial wizardry (i.e. propaganda headlines like: "FDA saves us from armaggeddon")

Matt -

Market furnished regulation is like any other economic principal. Nice on paper but not necessarily workable in the real world. When you are talking about the necessities of life, such as food and good health, if one of the components of the principal is 'out of whack' the results can be catastrophic.

Market furnished regulation only works if you take greed out of the equation. When you have colluded greed (such as we saw last summer with the price of fuel) then the principal completely collapses. Not to mention the fact that you have sort of an odd market principal at play with for-profit health insurers holding the reins over doctors and hospitals. If the hospital is also 'for-profit' then you have another dichotemy.

I don't understand either of your posts. Please define "market furnished regulation"?

I understand the concept of a market.

i understand the concept of regulation imposed from without, by a regulatory agency, in order to provide desired properties in that market. Typically (in financial markets)- a level playing field for all participants, fair access to trading venues and liquidity, orderly controls such as circuit breakers on sharp market moves. Plus things like limits on insider trading, regular audited financial statements, etc. etc.

In non financial markets - we have FDA regulating health and safety of our foods and medicines, EPA regulating quality of air and water, OSHA regulating our workplaces, FAA regulating our air space and commercial aircraft, etc.etc.etc.

All of these are imposed on the market from without. In some cases we do have industries self regulating from within ( e.g. Bar associations, AMA).

I don't understand any of what either of you said in this context of "regulation".

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, and?

Although, even that isn't a given. People make judgments for other reasons aside from personal gain.

No they don't.

Do so, I post in response to your posts all the while knowing it's going to be futile. I gain nothing

[GaryC 7]

Might I point out that this is the preamble of the constitution. It's basicly the introduction. There are no rules stated there. It serves as the intent but not the details. Using it to make law is like reading the introduction of War and Peace and thinking you know what is in the book.