We(US voters)have an opportunity to fix healthcare and choose the best way over time. That opportunity exists due to the unique Republic in which we live. There are 50 separate government laboratories in which to experiment the best way to handle healthcare, the States. Give them back the power to choose what works for them, one size does NOT fit all. The health challenges facing Alaska are very different to those facing Massachusetts, etc. etc.

This is the system put in place 239 years ago and we need to return the power of decision to the local citizens who have to live with the results of those decisions everyday.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Again, an incorrect interpretation, regarding my opinion.

You weren't stating an opinion, you were asking a question regarding what sort of solution I would come up with.

Understanding no Left Winger, Right Winger nor Deity Believer, can Intellectually understand anything outside their little, self-imposed world. Here goes.

I am speaking of these Foundational Beliefs:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely

and

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

Therefore, knowing that neither Secular Ideologues nor Religions Fanatics (same thing) can understand this nuanced and non-shallow thinking. And... Believing in the above, cannot mean, excepting to the three Partner's in Crime mentioned:

Hilarious, you just called two rather absolute statements 'nuanced and non-shallow thinking'. I think you don't understand the meaning of the word nuanced, but I assure you, if you use it to describe absolute statements that form the core of your beliefs, youre doing it wrong.

Besides, just because you don't identify as a Democrat or Republican or anything like that it doesn't mean you are ideology free. Indeed, the fact that the core of your political beliefs are based on two absolute statements suggests a certain ideological dogma.

I would believe, No Power can be given to any Controlling Agency?

What!!!!

Just that any power given. must be done very reluctantly. With the understanding that it will become evil.

Yeah well absolute power only corrupts human beings. A computer is a computer, no matter how much power you give it it doesn't become corrupt, at least not while its not sentient.

Besides, its no longer a question of whether you want to delegate that kind of power to some controlling agency or not, that has already happened. They are called insurance companies, they regulate who gets access to what kind of health care and under what circumstances. That power has been delegated because it needed to be delegated. Its impossible to run a sophisticated high quality healthcare system where such power is not delegated to some kind of controlling agency.

The only choice you really have is to decide whether that controlling agency is part of the government or whether its a private organization that operates with the aim to make a profit.

Mnwerb, I've been watching you keep saying let a super computer give us a solution. I'm a computer guy, so let me ask you this: Have you talked to a super computer lately and received some sort of confirmation that a super computer will be fair, honest and equitable with regard to handing out a (functionally) limited resource to a population which (functionally) has an UNlimited demand?

Do you have confirmation that human beings will be fair, honest and equitable with regards to handing out functionally limited resources to a population which functionally has unlimited demand? Because I have confirmation that this is most assuredly NOT the case.

Which brings me back to the original argument. If humans are the problem, then the solution to the problem is not some difference in the way the human aspect is configurated (private insurances/government agency), the solution is to limit the human element as much as possible.

Besides, its no longer a question of whether you want to delegate that kind of power to some controlling agency or not, that has already happened. They are called insurance companies, they regulate who gets access to what kind of health care and under what circumstances. That power has been delegated because it needed to be delegated. Its impossible to run a sophisticated high quality healthcare system where such power is not delegated to some kind of controlling agency.

Yes. Been there, done that.
They do have computers (super computers are not needed) BUT all policyholders are scrutinized by an überdoctor.
And who select the überdoctors?

So what makes you think a super computer will have any different effect?

Here is what the computer industry do to you.

I am gross and perverted
Im obsessed n deranged
I have existed for years
But very little had changed
I am the tool of the government
And industry too
For I am destined to rule
And regulate you

I may be vile and pernicious
But you can't look away
I make you think Im delicious
With the stuff that I say
I am the best you can get
Have you guessed me yet?
I am the slime oozin out
From your Internet.

You will obey me while I lead you
And eat the garbage that I feed you
Until the day that we don't need you
Don't got for help...no one will heed you
Your mind is totally controlled
It has been stuffed into my mold
And you will do as you are told
Until the rights to you are sold

Janne, you've been watching too many skynet movies. Mnwerb--you too. Best estimate is that computers won't have the ability to *think* until the year 2080 or so. Computers cannot infer. Until we create a computer that becomes self-aware, it can only do what it is told to do.

A long-time friend of mine in the military (now dead and buried) once told me of his experience with the first BRAC. (Base Realignment And Closure).

He was tasked to go to a couple of bases and collect objective data, compile, do the math of adding/subtracting and multipying by a weight factor to objectively come up with the name of a base to close which made the most sense.

If we don't start following (again) the rules we've agreed to follow from previous generations, we're screwed.

First of all. I have not seen any skynet movies and Mnwerb (Мишель is Mikael ) has not as well! What is skynet movies?
Secondly objective data? There are none.
Hey. I am a system developer with databases as a specialty for over 30 years!
Two om my customers are Big Pharmaceutical companies!
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tribologen.se%2F&edit-text=
I have also military experience that you dont have!

Is it reasonable to believe I have military experience you don't have? Anyway, that's beside the point. You missed my point. Maybe cultural/language barrier? My point is the *ruling class* here in the U.S. has been doing what ever they want for a while now. And they are getting more bold and brazen about it. Our ruling class is out of control. We are headed towards a dictatorship. This is not good.

The pitchforks are coming.

And my main point with Mnwerb is that using a computer to decide how health care dollars are spent (in a communist fashion) is absolutely ridiculous.

I agree, in that it makes no difference whether a computer is programed by people or people to make a decision.

Allow as much freedom as possible, allow as many people to make their own choices in life as much as possible and there will be less human suffering and misery.

In order for that to work the playing field must be even, and I doubt that is in human nature to allow that, there will always be some who exploit the system to their advantage. That does include those at both the bottom and top of society.

---

We are headed towards a dictatorship

No the US is not :)
For heaven sakes. Relax.
There is a big difference with computer technology and programming the computers and specify what the program should do.
There is a also a big difference with system developers and there customers.
I have been waiting one year(!) to get some answers from a Pharmaceutical company called Fresenius Kabi.
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=sv&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=sv&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fresenius-kabi.se%2F&edit-text=

I agree, in that it makes no difference whether a computer is programed by people or people to make a decision.

There is a big difference with computer technology and programming the computers and specify what the program should do.

As with all systems of thought or processing........G.I.G.O.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Until we *force* these people (the *ruling class*) to follow the rules, things will continue to get worse.

You do realize how ridiculous your statement is? The rulers write the rules so by definition they have to follow them, because whatever exception they create for themselves, but is unavailable to you, is the rule.

The only way your statement can make sense is that you write the rules and therefore they don't follow your rules.

The tyranny of the minority is just as frustrating as the tyranny of the majority.

And my main point with Mnwerb is that using a computer to decide how health care dollars are spent (in a communist fashion) is absolutely ridiculous. People (the *ruling class*) are in control. Until we *force* these people (the *ruling class*) to follow the rules, things will continue to get worse.

Right, so you are fine with people deciding how that money is spend. Or do you just want the entire what you call 'ruling class' to disappear or at least stop deciding where money get spend. And then what? Money spends itself? It naturally creates a fair and balanced spread? Money doesn't spend itself, people have to spend it. People are unfair, therefor why not let a neutral party, one that has no interest in money, spend it?

Computers aren't powerful enough? Well thats just nonsense, computers are more than powerful enough to do something as simple as following a set of rules that determines who gets money for healthcare and who doesn't.

And in any case, you and Clyde have been complaining that the Government can't do it because its corrupt and incompetent, while admitting that private insurances can't do it either. So, if human organizations can't do it, who can?

Capitalism has done more to raise people out of poverty than any other economic system.

Wrong, socialism has, over the back of capitalists.

And the Catholic Church has done more to preserve the lessons of history than any other religion. The Pope is currently in the U.S. right now and the feeling is that he now realizes the U.S. is not as evil as all the other countries who hate us tell him.

You mean the same pope that is riling on the US for its capitalist excesses, its greed and the fact that you guys have let the wealth gap grow to an insane degree. If anything, the current pope has more in common with socialists than American capitalists.

Centralized power and control, whether it's a super computer or not, is never a good thing.

Power only corrupts humans, not computers, so the whole fear of how absolute power in the hands of a few corrupts them is not an issue with computers. Aside from that, while you might want the least amount of central power as possible, the simple fact is that a modern society cannot exist without some form of central authority at least doing certain jobs.

Allocating healthcare resources is one of those jobs, at least, if you want a healthcare system that is available to as many people as possible.

Allow as much freedom as possible, allow as many people to make their own choices in life as much as possible and there will be less human suffering and misery.

In a capitalist society, the amount of freedom you have directly corresponds to how deep your pockets are. If you got a billion dollars on your bank account, you got near absolute freedom even to the point where laws no longer apply to you. You can get the best healthcare in the world, you can afford whatever car you want, live in whatever house you want, eat whatever food you want, there are virtually no restrictions to what you can do.

At the same time, for everyone who doesn't have a billion dollars in your bank account, that freedom is diminished. Sure, only slightly for multi millionaires, but once you start to dip below the million, you start to notice real restrictions. But frankly, the amount of people that have more than a million dollars on their bank account covers on a tiny fraction of the total population. The vast majority of people don't have nearly as much money on their bank accounts. Now, say you earn 60.000 dollars a year, do you have freedom? Hardly. You have to set up budgets, the places you can go are limited, the way you can spend your time is set because you have to work, the law most certainly applies to you. The only freedom you really have exists in your head. The freedom to chose between two different brands of the same stuff. Do you eat Captain Crunch of Chocopuffs for breakfast. Thats your freedom. Meanwhile, if you are unlucky enough to earn minimum wage, you don't even have that freedom. Then all you can buy is whatever is cheapest at the moment. There isn't even the freedom to decide between brands. All your actions are dictated for you by the emptiness of your wallet. Your freedom is a sham.

Thats what you are advocating, a freedom that only billionaires can enjoy, while everyone else toys away. Understand this, there can be no true freedom as long as freedom from want is not achieved.

So, Mnwerb, then just go ahead and admit that you're a communist.

I'll go ahead and admit that I'm a capitalist.

finis

P.S. At least with capitalism there are rich people who have a chance at keeping the ruling class in check. With communism, all power goes to the ruling class--which is fine, I guess, if you're a *member* of the ruling class.

There are no communists or capitalists in the SETI forum.
Et tu, Brute:)

So, Mnwerb, then just go ahead and admit that you're a communist.

I am most certainly not a communist. Communism still exists as some offspring of capitalism, it needs the capitalist paradigm to exist. I reject the entire capitalist paradigm and every form of socioeconomic and sociopolitical organization that is based on that paradigm.

P.S. At least with capitalism there are rich people who have a chance at keeping the ruling class in check.

Are you joking? The rich ARE the ruling class in capitalism.

Big Pharmaceutical companies are paying me money.
How about that?

Hehehe Laughing all the way to the bank.

Big Pharmaceutical companies are paying me money.
How about that?

Hehehe Laughing all the way to the bank.

What did u take? :P :D

---

non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU

Big Pharmaceutical companies are paying me money.
How about that?

Hehehe Laughing all the way to the bank.

What did u take? :P :D

LOL:)
They give me money not drugs.