Homestead mailing list

[Clansgian AT wmconnect.com]

> Yes I am extrapolating on what may happen in time, but every government 
> program throughout history seemed like such a good thing in the 
> beginning, only to run amuck years later.
> 

There are only two equitable positions for the government to be in with 
regards to medicine:  1) Completely in charge of it  or else 2) Completely 
out of it

My preference would be 2.  Get the government at all levels completely out of 
medicine.  No payment for it, no regulations, no licensing.  It's up to the 
consumer to accept the credentials of the facility, pharmacy, and doctor or 
not.  Anyone who does harm is subject to civil penalty, just like with 
everything 
else.  This way medical care would be VERY cheap, a minor out of pocket 
expense.

2 isn't going to happen.  Our present crop of citizens is not going to take 
responsiblity for checking out their doctor and durg pusher ....er.... 
pharmacists.  So we have a 'worst of both worlds' hybrid system where the 
medical 
profession buys off the government (big surprise there, eh) to outlaw all 
competiton and keep the price of medical services crushingly high and at the 
same time 
telling the people to impoverish themselves for their wealth or die.

So since 2 isn't going to happen, and more's the pity, then it needs to be 1. 
 Medicine needs to be socialized.  If then services are a bit slow in coming, 
fine.  Better that than almost every person in the country rattling when they 
walk from the pills to correct such devastating diseases as 'restless leg 
syndrome' and imaginary maladies such as ADHD.