Posted on 12/01/2003 8:01:35 AM PST by presidio9
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:50:31 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
But they often do very well with what they have - sometimes better than what urban hospitals do with many more resources.
With some regulatory changes they might be able to do even better.
I made that "remark" because....
I can even extent this idea, without being cute, to the one area where there should be total efficiency -- the idea of ideal itself, the potential to proceed toward the ideal goal.
In theory, potential is the only form of existence not subject to decay. However, even as one ponders a potential, the thinker is aging, getting closer to death. So practical potential may only be considered by a dying individual, and then passed along to the next generation of thinkers who themselves are dying. It is the idea itself which remains intact -- and in carrying an idea along throught the generatations we humans approach as much as we may the practical realization of some part of divinity.
(Ironically, unobserved potential may be the single case where the unobserved tree falling in a forest makes no sound. Yet it may be stumbled upon at any time, and then it will have always been there. It is not until it is unearthed that the potential may make its sound.) Comprendez-vous? <LOL> This is definitely NEVER an ideal world.
You understand why I and others have been going to great pains to separate liberal thought from Leftist thought don't you? Please see fporretto here. (What he calls strategic liberals I call ardent Leftists.):
Only perpetual optimists, morons and those who gain from the mistakes don't learn from and correct those mistakes. We don't flounder so much as we are forced to follow top-down impositions.
Larry -- you've openned a great avenue for discussion here. As you can see, we are not alone. I think too many are ready to ascribe you to groups 2 and 3 rather than 1. When you are willing to concede that group 1 provides too much cover for the other two, and especially group 3, you may find many of others (not all) becoming less harsh.
I bet you find it no surprise that I willingly break down the conservative camp much as fporretto has the liberal camp.
But you can minimize the number of people so affected.
I think I've come up with reasonable proposals in my neighborhood. I find it highly unlikely that I've come up with the only possible solution.
That's what every pig and tyrant says. What a cop-out.
I think that's why I'm tolerated around here. It sure isn't because of my sweet personality.
I think too many are ready to ascribe you to groups 2 and 3 rather than 1. When you are willing to concede that group 1 provides too much cover for the other two, and especially group 3, you may find many of others (not all) becoming less harsh
Nah, people aren't going to become less harsh towards me...nor should they.
I'm the consumate, cantankerous, contrarian. My function is to piss people off by contradicting whatever they say...and thereby force them to think about their assumptions.
That's not my chosen role...but it is my role...and I revel in it to the extent I'm able.
If the cost of correcting the current budget crisis is the end of small rural hospitals then good and well. Here's why.
1) From my perspective small rural hospitals are part of the problem. Their economic feasibility is based on government largess. They've migrated from selfsuffiency to government dependency in just 50 short years. 50 years at the government teat.
2)Medical care for the poor is feasiable. Just not the level of care that the poor expect and feel they are entitled to. When Calfironia recognizes that we can't continue to provided 1st class health care to Mexico's poor then we are on our way to financial solvency
3) One further observation. In my neck of the woods, central California, small rural hospitals almost exclusively meet the needs of the consequences of illegal immigration. End access of the illegal alien to all but emergency services and 50% of our health care budget will evaporate.
True.
Medical care for the poor is feasiable. Just not the level of care that the poor expect and feel they are entitled to
True.
In my neck of the woods, central California, small rural hospitals almost exclusively meet the needs of the consequences of illegal immigration
In my neck of the woods, Eastern California, it's old folks, white welfare cases, and road kill (tourists in too much of a hurry).
Now I've a glimpse of from whence your point of view.
If you're located where I think your located you should have explained the location as isolated rural hospitals which is a public health concern of a different breed. I'd sure want a rural medical facility if I lived on the Modoc Plateau or north of Bode or near the Saline Valley or on the outskirts of Baker.
With the exception of the back side of the Sierra's most of California's rural residents are less than 40 minutes from a major population center.
Isolated it is...back side of the Sierra nails it.
If you know 395 you can understand that travelers to Mammoth or Reno would not like hearing that a major portion of the highway may not receive adequate medical coverage in the future.
They are paid for, as taxes, by those who work in the private sector.
Say you work in the private sector - for some company that provides computer services to the government, or weapons, or road construction, or any of a million things the government obtains through contracts with private industry.
You pay taxes on what you earn - naturally.
So are you the beneficiary or the provider or both of the taxes which the government uses to pay your salary? If the government cuts spending and you lose your job as a result are you the beneficiary or the victim of that policy?
Your three definitions of the "Left" are interesting and I agree with them. Though the three are "intuitive " to most conservatives, the definitions help solidify the "Left's" description. Thanks for posting it.
You certainly are one who enjoys the circular argument, aren't you? This is a which came first, the chicken or the egg, the government or the individual. I vote for the individual, you are voting for the government. There is no government without the individual. In your scenario above, what if I choose to only do business in the private sector, exclusive of any government intrusion. I and my associates have produced wealth for those in our business chain. Can government make the same claim? Moreover, can gov't. make any claim at all regarding its utility unless it taxes Peter to do a favor or service for Paul? No, it can't. Government does not make wealth. It can use it for the public good or ill. But the DMV makes nothing, is nothing, without automobiles built by private companies (I know, that are driven on public roads paid for by gov't., but built by private paving companies).
The real crux of the US system of economy is that it is compound. Part capitalist, part socialist. It is not pure. But just as the private sector has the duty to pay fair and equal taxes, the public sector has the duty to spend that tax money in a fair and equal manner. The government of California has not done that. You can blame the private sector if you loose your public job, but I maintain that it was actually the public sectors fault in hiring you to a job it could not maintain.
Gray Davis should have set some money aside, just for Larry's job , before he left Sacramento. Larry, it's all Gray's fault.
Government does not make wealth
The government certainly does - when it allocates resources wisely. For example, to build needed infrastructure, or educate the public, or advance research (I was thinking of NIH).
A very good argument can be made that the government is far worse at this than private enterprise, but it's another thing entirely to claim that government never does anything wisely or well.
The government of California has not done that
Grey Davis, California's finest...sigh...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.