Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
10.22.2009 5:38 pm

Government can’t handle a land sale, and it wants to run health care

St. Louis Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this
Say, liberal Post-Democrat, er, -Dispatch editors and columnists (including alleged sportscribe Bryan Burwell), never mind for a minute us conservatives opposing the government running health care for 307,000,000 Americans, which it will end up being, because what they are currently running–Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security–are currently over $107 trillion in the hole.  And never mind, your Savior has now wracked up an annual deficit of $1.42 trillion–more than all previous presidents combined–with another $10+ trillion deficit anticipated in the next ten years.  Yes indeed, we (no doubt, racists) don’t believe the government runs anything well (the Military being the only exception), wastes taxpayer money, etc.
 
But forget all that.  Check out your local government.  The St Louie government sells a parcel of land, that if they had any brains at all, knew would be used as an approach to a new bridge over the Mississippi, to an individual for $2.  Yes, $2!  (Hell, I woulda given $3!)  Anybody ever heard of a parcel of city land being worth only $2?  And now, just a few years later, the government gets to buy it back for $2.3 million.
 
Regarding any government entity running anything, we rest our case.
 
Al Dorn
O’Fallon, Ill.
11 comments

Al, that’s chump change compared to the deals the BLM and US Forest Service make to mining companies, timber companies and corporate ranches throughout the western half of the country. Check that out if you really want to get fired up about government waste and inside deals.

— Lunar Chiroptera
8:39 pm October 22nd, 2009

Now Lunar, I thought you wanted this “efficient” government to run health care? Please explain to us what makes this different!

Al, you are totally on target. Now, the problem is that liberals don’t get it. Don’t waste your time. They all come up with magic on how this will be different. After all, you can’t fix stupid!

— superdave
11:33 pm October 22nd, 2009

Yup Al,
We really should get rid of Medicare. What a fantastic suggestion. I’m sure all of those senior citizens will easily be able to buy health insurance in the private markets. And you know, except for the very few who get rejected for being too old, or too sick, or too fat, or too thin, or taking medicine, or high blood pressure, or high cholesterol, … I’m sure the health insurance companies will be charging them totally reasonable and affordable premiums. Because I don’t believe the $50,000 per year cost for a 75 year old in the Missouri High Risk Pool would be out of reach for any seniors. Do you?

— Lisa12
1:00 am October 23rd, 2009

is,
Isn’t that what you and your republican friends WANT? To eliminate Medicare? Heck, the government can give you the $2,000 you have paid in and you can use it to buy insurance in the private market. I’m sure all of those senior citizens will easily be able to buy health insurance in the private markets. And you know, except for the very few who get rejected for being too old, or too sick, or too fat, or too thin, or taking medicine, or high blood pressure, or high cholesterol, … I’m sure the health insurance companies will be charging them totally reasonable and affordable premiums. Because I don’t believe the $50,000 per year cost for a 75 year old ($100,000 for a couple) in the Missouri High Risk Pool would be out of reach for any seniors.

— Lisa12
11:47 am October 23rd, 2009

oops. last comment posted in wrong thread.

— Lisa12
11:50 am October 23rd, 2009

Dorn is just a nutcase tea partier who worshiped Reagan and Bush’s for 20 years while pushing us $9 trillion in the hole. Now, suddenly, deficits matter.

I’m guessing he didn’t vote for Clinton even after his ‘96 budget surplus.
Ain’t it time to polish your gun Al?

— Garrison
2:11 pm October 23rd, 2009

“Now Lunar, I thought you wanted this “efficient” government to run health care? Please explain to us what makes this different!”

Now that’s a good question dave, thanks for asking it. You see, the BLM and the USFS are very weak branchs of government and have from the outset been public extentions of the private industry lobby groups. USFS policy is strongly directed by the tiber industry proponents. This is of course in contrast to USPS which leans towards a more balanced, forest preservation policy. The BLM is strongly controlled by the ranching industry. This is the government branch that allows a rancher to own 100 acres and graze 10,000 cattle. How does he do that? He leases 5000 acres of public land from the BLM for a couple of bucks per acre per year.

So to get to your question, right now the healthcare industry (health insurance companies) are regulated by the individual states. The insurance lobby is to the state government as the rancher’s lobby is to the BLM or the forest industry lobby is to the USFS. State insurance commissioners are notoriously pro industry and anticonsumer. By placing regulation at the federal level we can establish a healthcare delivery system that is more transparent and more consistant. Medicare is a good model hear. It has it’s problems but in terms of efficiency it delivers greater service at less cost than the private companies.

— Lunar Chiroptera
3:36 pm October 23rd, 2009

wow al,
You seem to have all the answers. Maybe you should have run for president. After W. Because he didn’t lead us all into war-hell and debt. I really think you are on to something.
BTW, I’ve got a swamp on a nice parcel of land I’m selling…

— Joy0309
3:07 am October 25th, 2009

is the swamp full of oil? Maybe move to CA,

— Almon
5:34 am October 25th, 2009

Garrison there was no surpuls in 96 or 97. There was in 1998 and that was only after the people took control of congress away from Clinton.

— cedodst
3:05 pm October 26th, 2009

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All