U.S. has many `socialized' services
The howling about public funding of national health care as "socialized" medicine is amusing.
The Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast and National Guards are "socialized" defense, publicly funded. The U.S. post office is "socialized" information delivery, publicly funded. The national and state highway systems are "socialized" transportation infrastructure, publicly funded for safe and reliable travel. Fire, police and EMS departments are "socialized" protection, publicly funded to keep us safe. The FDA is "socialized" food and drug inspection, publicly funded to keep us safe from bad food and medicine. The U.S. court system is "socialized" law, publicly funded to safeguard our rights as citizens. These entities exist solely to protect the public and our nation; exactly what national health care would do.
No one debates the fundamental usefulness of these publicly funded entities. No credible advocates pump billions into opposing these "socialized" services, because it would be so ridiculous. Moreso, there are few legal ways to profit in doing so.
Yet advocates opposing national health care exist, and they're in it for the money. The AMA, insurance providers and hospitals fear losing their stranglehold on health care. Rather than give up their opportunities to profit on the public's health, they prefer 45 million Americans live with daily risk to their well-being.
Opposition is all about protecting current health care providers' financial prerogatives. They need to be taken to task. Their other objections are smokescreens. Too costly? Look at the defense budget. Cut it. Protect us in other ways. Too unwieldy? Break it down like state and regional services. Too complicated? Nothing could possibly be more complicated that what we now have. Too slow to respond? Fund it properly and it won't be.
Today, health care is really wealth care. It only works for the well-to-do and the providers. We need change.
Larry Bennett
East Meredith
Money should have been spent locally
Thank you for covering the State of the County breakfast June 17 where Otsego County Board Chairman James Powers spoke and took questions from the audience.
Unfortunately, I could not attend. Unfortunately our county government does not provide many opportunities for residents to ask questions of our public servants.
County board meetings are predominantly held during the day when the vast majority of residents are unable to attend. Representative Powers should be commended on his availability for the breakfast but he should also provide the same access to residents who work days and who might have had difficulty coming up with the $30 for the breakfast.
Since I was unable to attend, I would like to pose a question to Representative Powers:
"Why did the county board approve a no-bid contract on March 4, 2009, (Resolution No 94-20090304) for up to $225,000 in professional services for creative design of tourism program advertising?"
As a fiscally conservative person, I find it difficult to accept paying more than is necessary for services. I am concerned because no-bid contracts reek of cronyism. The company in question may in fact be the company best suited for the work, but we will never know. Our local officials have demonstrated a blatant disregard for one of the processes that keep honesty and accountability in government.
I am also at a loss as to why our representatives would take steps that preclude any opportunity to keep this money in the local economy. The company receiving almost a quarter of a million in our bed-tax dollars is based in Lake Placid. I am sure their local businesses appreciate the economic stimulus provided by Otsego County. I would have preferred if the money was spent in Otsego County, bolstering our sagging sales revenues.
David Polley
Oneonta
Print this story
E-mail this story
