FCC and the internet

[Samuel Thurston, III]

On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Steve Furbish <sfurbish at nerdshack.com> wrote:
> David Sanders wrote:
>> Oh really please be realistic. The government are not going to be the
>> ONLY healthcare available - it was supposed to be an option much like
>> we have in the UK where any person is eligible for free universal
>> healthcare no matter their circumstances.
>
> I find your definition of "free"  sadly amusing. It's almost as if you
> believe that nobody is paying for it?

How exactly is one supposed to state that the only cost to the
end-user of the service is through taxation?  There's no such thing as
"free" and I think that's well understood, so let's not dissect the
use of a word that means exactly what he used it for.

>> Now I see it has been
>> watered down at the behest of large healthcare organisations. Do you
>> people really not want free universal healthcare? Do you really not
>> care that much about your fellow man that you think they should go
>> without so that you don't have to part with your tax money?
>>
> So is it "free healthcare" or just some imposed charity?

You already pay the imposed charity.  Medicaid tends to the extremely
poor. Medicare for the elderly.  Your personal income tax money covers
employer tax credits for subsidizing employee care.  Your insurance
premiums are higher to cover the cost of poor- and middle-income-
uninsured defaulting on hospital bills.

> Personally I
> have nothing against healthcare reform with a state run public option.
> I'd also like to see tort reform as a big part of managing costs.

How exactly does tort reform work?  Which lawsuits do you mandate are
"frivolous?"

> Unfortunately, this gigantic federal program we're about to be saddled
> with will rob the middle class to care for the poor while leaving the
> rich virtually unphased and untouched.

let's say for the sake of argument that the CBO estimate of $856bn USD
over the next 10 years is accurate.  Average that to $85bn per year.
Annually we collect a little over $2000bn in revenues. Yeah this
gigantic program is a whopping %4 of revenue spending (that's without
counting deficit spending, which would make it closer to 2%)

>> I thought Thoreau and the "Yankee Spirit" were dead, but they're still
>> alive and just as outdated as you might expect them to be.
>>
> Aye, the idea of a (constitutional) monarchy was rejected by our
> founding fathers when we booted out your King George so long ago and
> despite the apparent  desires of the Obama administration to import it
> back here in time for his own coronation there are those of us
> "outdated" yanks who tend reject the effort.

After 8 years of GWB and Cheney you think it's Obama who wants to
bring back the monarchy?