What is your solution.

Just chuck it all and let those with the most get what they want and everyone else be dammed?

For social security, I believe I would promote a "required" system where individuals / employers would have to fund private accounts. An annuity type fund would be preferable from my standpoint as it would provide both death and retirement benefits. Not perfect....but a step in the right direction since it would be private.

I don't have a problem with the employer requirement as abstract constructs have no "rights." It would be considered a cost of doing business. It would be considered a portion of your wages. As an employer, I'd rather do this than pay Uncle Sam to drop bombs on kids in foreign countries. This would in one fell swoop remove the government’s ability to raid the funds and engage in hostile endeavors.

So....you believe that it is OK to violate the constitution just because you agree with the agenda? Do you believe it to be just a piece of paper?

Disregarding the inequities and failures of the current corrupt system will not solve any of the problems. The system as it is now is non-repairable from my standpoint. In a few more years, when Doctors have to "bid" to provide services, where the elderly are getting their care from the lowest bidder and receiving substandard care......will that be enough for you?

There is a major problem with this paradigm. If someone cannot make a living performing a given task, they will not provide the service and younger generations will no longer study the craft. It will die. Or all of our doctors in 30 years will be from foreign nations working for foreign corporations with no-bid contracts. That is EXACTLY where it is heading now.

We all talk about unemployed workers. Yet, we also refuse to realize that the system we have (where large corporations provide insurance) is the root cause of this problem.

Have you ever tried to buy insurance for yourself? Good luck.....you probably won't be well received. Insurance companies don't want to talk to you unless you can bring them a large contract. I found it quite difficult to provide this benefit to my crew. Since we don't have 25+ employees, they (the agents) simply would prefer to go elsewhere.

Removing the "consumer" environment and the competition inherent in a given market to promote "bulk buying" has only raised the costs quite dramatically for both the individual and small business owners. This escalation will only continue with time.

I think from my perspective, removing the barriers to which insurance companies can provide coverage ( be that fee for service or HMO / PPO ), price fixing and egregious documentation requirements on the part of the providers would be a step in the right direction.

Let the consumer shop for their coverage as opposed to forcing them to go with BCBS of SC, CIGNA or one of the other "fiscal intermediaries" who then play fast and loose with "medical necessity."

I especially love it when the these intermediaries pay below wholesale cost for supplies.....which of course means that it isn't a covered benefit after all.

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

So you think that by completely reworking the system.

Removing all boundaries from moneyed interests and removing all protections from the less fortunate that will some how make this a better nation?

You have a lot of conjecture and theory but it sounds like a pipe dream to me. If you had some evidence that your desired system was more then a pipe dream I would like to hear it.

I will say that some of what you say has some resonance.

I am not a fan of walmart but you don't give giant corporations less regulation and expect them to do the right thing. OR do you want to get ride of all corporations, You know up until the civil war they weren't allowed to exists for more then 40 years.

I am for the decorporatization of this nation but I don't see how you can do that by removing the government.

How is having required yet privatized removing "protections" which currently don't exist? Or, do you prefer that our elderly live on 1K a month prior to their taxes? Yes...they too pay taxes.

How could I have evidence when it has never been tried? The welfare state was well entrenched prior to such strategies being deployed. I am sure you would have to have a "demonstration project" unlike what they did with the current system. That is, if your talking about SS which I am assuming.

If we are talking about that, then I can get quite specific. If we are talking about Medicare / Medicaid....it is a different animal. They don't function at all the same.

No...corporations will never do the right thing.
Their "function" is to maximize profits for their stock holders.
You could start off with ending "corporate personnage."
Again, only a step in the right direction.
What would be "the right thing" for wally world to do?

I am not an anarchist, I am a constitutionalist. Big difference.

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

__________________


Defeating market theocrats since 2001.

And the only way to prevent that is to take it out of their hands. History has proven that.

__________________
The law perverted! And the police powers of the state perverted along with it! The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law become the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish! - Frederick Bastiat

The 19th Century was not libertarian. Closer than now, to be sure, but not libertarian. And the "Robber Barons" and "Trusts" are really a myth because every single one of them were increasing supply and quality while constantly lowering prices. Most were taken down because other rent-seeking businesses used the jackboot of government to remove their competition when they couldn't compete on the open market.

- R

__________________

Libertarians: Trying to get people to
mind their own business since 1971.
The Freedom Files

__________________


Defeating market theocrats since 2001.

If people were getting better products for less money, their living standards were, by definition, getting better, not worse. (Many people mistakenly look at the 19th Century through the lens of the 20th, when to see the huge progress, one must see it through the lens of the 18th.)

- R

__________________

Libertarians: Trying to get people to
mind their own business since 1971.
The Freedom Files