- Joined
- Dec 18, 2019
- Messages
- 4,292
- Reaction score
- 634
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Communist
The market responds to demand, right? So, now, in addition to the demand for iPhones and other bells and whistles, there is a serious demand for real Social Justice.
Why doesn't the market offer it?
That's a very bold assumption you are making. Because employing a huge bundle of money to perform services is NOT the foremost motivator of Public Employees. Most know full well that their jobs are well within what we could call "The services industries". They ARE public servants. Their motivations are thus very different from those who work in other Services Industries that are profit motivated and thus highly competitive. This latter factor changes everything.
Capitalism in the United States (by the way. the richest country of capitalism) led to:
- unemployment
- homelessness
- poverty
- starvation
- illiteracy
US capitalists: "The greatest threat to society is communism!"
This is so stupid that there is no answer to it...Communism, on the other hand, has always made absolutely everyone miserable, save for a handful of cronies abusing the power vested in them.
I agree, and I think that the illusion of the superiority of private industry that we have lived under for several decades is fading pretty quickly right now. Private industry can be exceptionally efficient at producing profit, but if the goal is to provide a universal service it's probably best left to the government.
Private industry can be exceptionally efficient at producing profit, but if the goal is to provide a universal service it's probably best left to the government.
Private industry can be exceptionally efficient at producing profit, but if the goal is to provide a universal service it's probably best left to the government.
Well stated.
We do not have an example of a thriving economy that doesn't admit some role for government intervention in the form of regulations, subsidy programs and welfare programs. Markets aren't perfect and you might justifiably hold that other things beside efficiency matter.
On the other hand, in most circumstances, they appear to be doing a better job. None of that should be controversial, especially not from the vintage point in which we find ourselves, being able to look back at the 20th century and the first two decades of the 21st century. "The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen" characterizes the relevant political space, with near anarchy on the one side and socialism on the other.
This is so stupid that there is no answer to it...
You have entirely too much faith in the profit motive producing the best results for the most people. All to often profits come at the expense of things like the air we breath and the water we drink and that is when there is not out right fraud involved. The value of Govt. employees that do the best job they can because they believe in what they do should not be underestimated either. Everything does not revolve around profit and it can also be the enemy like in health care where the quest for profit drives up costs and leaves people unprotected.
Mr. Peanut, to what extent of probability governments are the superior solutions, should be considered in specific individual or categories of cases.I agree, and I think that the illusion of the superiority of private industry that we have lived under for several decades is fading pretty quickly right now. Private industry can be exceptionally efficient at producing profit, but if the goal is to provide a universal service it's probably best left to the government.
Ludin, we have to reduce the cost of medical insurance to those persons or enterprises directly or indirectly paying the medical insurance companies; (i.e. the purchasers). Transcribed from the General Political Forum/Health Care:The profit motive actually does produce the best results. If it doesn't then well I don't make profit and I go out of business.
You are confusing regulations anto operate. Those are called regulations. If everyone acted benevolent then regulations wouldn't be needed.
Companies would automaticallyd profit.
capitalism needs a frame work take the steps needed to safe guard the environment etc ... For the most part they do but there are always bad actors.
Regulations are meant to punish the bad actors.
In a fully capitalized healthcare system costs would be way down. We do not have a fully capitalized healthcare system.
We have a very heavily regulated one that is highly controlled by the government.
That is what is driving up the cost of healthcare. ... There are some changes that are needed but government is 80% of the issue in healthcare and how hospitals and insurance companies operate
are the other 20%.
Can Democrats and Republicans agree upon anything to reduce medical insurance costs?
Medical insurances' annual fees per patient may make some financial sense, but annual deductibles are nonsense. We do not want to discourage people from seeking preventative and screening medical services that are reasonably applicable to their current medical rather than their financial conditions.
Deferring such reasonable preventative and screening procedures can lead to some individuals' future death, and/or catastrophic disabilities and their treatments' costs. Reluctance to pay for such procedures is economically and financially and socially contra-productive to our nation and our population.
Regardless of whatever shall be our nation's future healthcare policies, it would be prudent for the federal government to require all approved Affordable Care Act, (ACA) policies should prohibit any annual deductibles before their coverages “kick-in”.
I suppose that some government and non-government insurance plans have identified some reasonable preventative and screening conditions and procedures for which there's no patients' out-of-pocket costs.
We should consider federal government formally compiling and updating an expanded book of all items for which all ACA approved policies would be prohibited from charging out-of-pocket costs.
Some portion of costs for all (government or non-government) ACA approved medical insurers costs due to items within the federal book of no out-of-pocket reasonable preventative and screening conditions and procedures items' costs should be federally subsidized.
Similarly, the government should provide catastrophic medical cost insurance for both insured or uninsured individual legal residents' entitlements;(Hospitals need such reimbursed even for non-insured patients).
These federal direct and indirect medical insurance subsidies should be charged to a general rather than to any more specific medical item in the federal Budget; (not directly charged as a Medicare, or Medicaid, or veterans or CHIPs cost items).
These government subsidies would reduce these costs attributed to all ACA approved medical insurance plans and can be considered by state regulators of medical insurance prices. Respectfully, Supposn
Ludin, we apparently agree. U.S. prescription drugs remaining patent durations shouldn’t begin being reduction during their trial periods, but rather when they can be legally prescribed in the United States.... One thing that will help is changing the patent rules so that just because you add a new feature does not renew the patent. You get 20 years that is it. after that it is up for grabs on the open market and anyone can make it. ...
Ludin, we apparently agree. U.S. prescription drugs remaining patent durations shouldn’t begin being reduction during their trial periods, but rather when they can be legally prescribed in the United States.
Patent and copyright law’s purpose is to encourage dissemination of new products and ideas while protecting the rights of their creators. It’s not an eternal right.
Those improving a formula or device, should not entitle renewal of the underlying product’s patent or copyright applied for date. If there remains a market for the unapproved product, it should be in the public domain when it’s patent or copyright expires. Respectfully, Supposn
Ringo Stalin, within a democratic -republic, elections of officials advocating what we consider to be in our nation’s best interests, should be among the primary methods of indicating our aspirations. There’s not an apparent sufficiently large national polarity of voters that are proponents of both free I-phones and/or increased public taxes or debts to pay for them; there’s not apparently a large plurality of national voters sharing YOUR aspirations for our nation.The market responds to demand, right? So, now, in addition to the demand for iPhones and other bells and whistles, there is a serious demand for real Social Justice.
Why doesn't the market offer it?
I agree, and I think that the illusion of the superiority of private industry that we have lived under for several decades is fading pretty quickly right now. Private industry can be exceptionally efficient at producing profit, but if the goal is to provide a universal service it's probably best left to the government.
Ludin, we apparently agree. U.S. prescription drugs remaining patent durations shouldn’t begin being reduction during their trial periods, but rather when they can be legally prescribed in the United States.
Patent and copyright law’s purpose is to encourage dissemination of new products and ideas while protecting the rights of their creators. It’s not an eternal right.
Those improving a formula or device, should not entitle renewal of the underlying product’s patent or copyright applied for date. If there remains a market for the unapproved product, it should be in the public domain when it’s patent or copyright expires. Respectfully, Supposn
Marketing. Capitalism is the only way for america. We are told that over and over and over. The supposed job creators who bless us with permission to work for them getting basically nowhere ourselves but helping those with have more and our government helps with their insistence that helping companies helps the average person. When ten percent of the world's population owns ninety percent of the world's money, something is out of balance. We the people have no idea of how much black money is spent but my guess is it's billions and billions each and every year on military stuff as if we don't have enough capacity to kill the world a thousand times over. Capitalism as far as I'm concerned allows those with a license to steal even more. It isn't individual people who screw up america, it's those with that do it.Private industry is not always the superior solution:
There are people that believe “government’s the problem rather than solution. I heard Milton Friedman state that half of what our federal government’s spending is wasted. A great proportion of all other than federal spending, (including commercial and personal spending) is also “wasted”.
We, as individuals generally believe that governments’ spending for what we approve of, to the extent that’s spent in manners that we approve of, is justifiable; all other governments’ spending is less than justifiable. That’s politics. There are extremely few items of governments expense that are not controversial. Governments’ lines of expenses are criticized or subject to objections by some aggregate individuals or groups. Political disagreement occurs more so in democracies but also occurs within nations of only one political party or of extremely few leaders.
Outsourcing some specific government functions would be contrary to the public’s interest. There are some government functions that can be outsourced, but government rather than private industry provides them in a superior manner. Many other nations provide their population Wi-Fi, medical insurance, railroads and other public transportation at lesser expense and in a manner superior to that of the United States. It’s nonsense to contend that private industry does or will perform every function in a manner superior to government.
Respectfully, Supposn
When ten percent of the world's population owns ninety percent of the world's money, something is out of balance. We the people have no idea of how much black money is spent but my guess is it's billions and billions each and every year on military stuff as if we don't have enough capacity to kill the world a thousand times over.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?