R
rsnlfan
Guest
Ok. This is essentially the anti health care argument, except in a different form. Lets look at emergency services for example:
What? You expect me to pay taxes so people in other places can be protected by the police? No way! My ciy has the lowest crime rate in the state. As far as I'm concerned, all the underprivileged citizens of this country can die. Cause there's no way I'm giving up my money for them. That's socialism at its worst! All responsibility for our security should be given to private businesses. I don't really care if some people can't afford that. Not my problem. What!? You want to have a public security option too just in case these private companies realize that profit is way more important than protecting lives? Ya right. That would never happen. You know who else had public security run by the government? Hitler!!! So we're all Nazis now. Great.
I know this isn't a direct comparison, but I think its the same basic principle. Both protect lives. Both are/would be run, partially or otherwise, by the government. And guess what... there are plenty of businesses that still hire private security, so why would a public option hurt businesses? They would still have the option of buying private insurance. Please describe to me why or why not this is a logical argument for health care reform and the public option.
What? You expect me to pay taxes so people in other places can be protected by the police? No way! My ciy has the lowest crime rate in the state. As far as I'm concerned, all the underprivileged citizens of this country can die. Cause there's no way I'm giving up my money for them. That's socialism at its worst! All responsibility for our security should be given to private businesses. I don't really care if some people can't afford that. Not my problem. What!? You want to have a public security option too just in case these private companies realize that profit is way more important than protecting lives? Ya right. That would never happen. You know who else had public security run by the government? Hitler!!! So we're all Nazis now. Great.
I know this isn't a direct comparison, but I think its the same basic principle. Both protect lives. Both are/would be run, partially or otherwise, by the government. And guess what... there are plenty of businesses that still hire private security, so why would a public option hurt businesses? They would still have the option of buying private insurance. Please describe to me why or why not this is a logical argument for health care reform and the public option.