Privatization of Government Policies

Since there are over 100 different Government Policies, I will just debate 4. The 4: Medicare & Medicaid & National Helathcare (Obamacare) Social Security Welfare Unemployment Benefits The Opening Arguments: Point 1 (Medicare & Medicaid): Why does the Government need to provide free healthcare to people? Are they obligated to do it? All it does is raise the National Debt. And plus, this kind of Government Healthcare raises doctor prices and a lot of doctors' offices don't accept Government Healthcare. And with Obamacare, why does every citizen have to have it? Isn't it their choice? And it's unconstitutional. And plus, it lowers doctors standards when profit is not a motive. These things should be completely eliminated. "Throat Cancer: Medicaid patients and those lacking health insurance were both 50% more likely to die when compared with privately insured patients.": http://healthystate.org.... "Medicaid may have a robust coverage policy, but because of its hassles and inadequate payments, Medicaid patients have the least access to health care. Because it is a shared state-federal program, it is much harder to change and monitor.": http://www.ama-assn.org.... "Given its concern over rising costs, it's extremely odd that Medicare has never attempted to educate doctors on how to order lab tests in cost-effective ways. Instead, in its accelerated anti-fraud mode, HCFA is now instructing labs to "voluntarily" set up their own programs to spy on physicians and to report "suspicious" test-ordering patterns. Labs that cooperate with this spying are told they can expect the HCFA to go easier on them when it is their turn to be audited. A Russian friend told me this reminds him of the Soviet Union.": http://www.hoover.org.... "All this is simply a misallocation of resources. When a state spends $1 on Medicaid, it gets more than $1 in what seems like free money–but that money comes from federal taxpayers (basically the same people as state taxpayers), and to them the money is not free at all.": http://www.nationalreview.com.... "The attempt to ‘socialize' and ‘equalize' health care "providers" so that the lines of distinction between physicians, nurses, and ancillary personnel are blurred. Why? Are the hundreds of years of tradition and time-honored values embodied in the M.D. (medical degree) of no significance? Does the President not see consequences of his actions to elevate non-physicians to practice beyond the safe boundaries of their scope of training?": http://americasmedicalsociety.com.... "The Constitution draws lines by enumerating certain powers for the feds while reserving other authority to the states or the people. Obamacare's mandate doesn't lie within those enumerated powers.": http://www.washingtontimes.com.... Point 2 (Social Security): Social Security is a big Ponzi scheme where the people on top get most of the money and the people below get little. Why is it the Government's job to force people to save? Why doesn't the individual person either save or sink? Why does the Government force us to use Social Security? It should be privatized. "It's nothing more than a Ponzi scheme. We're paying into it now, with the expectation that there will be a return on our "investment" when we hit the golden years. The truth of the matter is, the population is living longer now than ever before, which is putting a drain on the available SS funds. Then the problem is compounded by elected officials who want to "borrow" money from the funds, like it's their own little bank account. Mark my words, when you and I are ready to draw from what we've put in, the coffers will be empty.": http://answers.yahoo.com.... "the nation's first Baby Boomer applied for Social Security benefits, an event which will be repeated by roughly 70 million more Boomers over the next two decades -- that's nearly 10,000 people every day. This massive demographic shift will trigger an explosion in the cost of federal health and retirement programs, which by 2034 will absorb 20 percent of GDP, equal to the entire federal budget today.": http://usgovinfo.about.com.... "Finally, Social Security drains capital from the poorest areas of the country, leaving less money available for new investment and job creation. Privatization would increase national savings and provide a new pool of capital for investment that would be particularly beneficial to the poor.": http://www.cato.org.... Point 3 (Welfare): When people start getting welfare, something I like to call "The Welfare Effect" ensues. In other words, when people start getting welfare, they get addicted to the "get money for nothing" policy. And they stay on it most of their life. And plus, it is not the Government's place to give people money under almost all circumstances. This should be completely cut. "Besides wrecking the economy, public welfare is just wrong. It is morally wrong for the government to take money from people and redistribute it to those who they say are in need (i.e. more likely to vote for them). Having said that I want to emphasize that I am not against charity. Just the opposite, I believe it is the duty of every man to help out his fellow man as he is able but I am very much opposed to public welfare.""In the U.S., the government is supposed to derive its powers from the people. At least, that was the way it was originally set up. How does this work? Let's consider the right to self defense. Most people would consider it reasonable for a man to defend his life and property. It's something we almost all need to do and so it's reasonable that we hand out that responsibility to the police and military. The important thing is that we have that right as an individual and we grant it to the government. The government is not doing anything we're not allowed to do individually. If we are poor and in need, do we have the right to rob our neighbour? Then the government shouldn't do it on our behalf.": http://mcmullans.org.... "Welfare is bad because many people abuse it. While the majority are just trying to get back on their feet, some people rely on welfare for years, living off taxpayer money rather than making an attempt to earn their own.": http://answers.bloglines.com.... Point 4 (Unemployment Benefits): This again follows "The Welfare Effect". Only this time, it raises the unemployment rate. When people can get unemployment benefits for a long period of time, they lose interest in working and instead become lazy and the "money for nothing" policy comes again. It raises the unemployment rate because people will stop looking for jobs. It is factored into the real unemployment rate (which is at about 15-16%). "As an employer, if I am looking at two resumes, and I see a person who was downsized, but within a few weeks took an entry level job, I am going to think highly of that person. On the other hand, if I see a person who was downsized, and then took an entry level job after two years, rightfully or wrongfully, I am going to think to myself that this person made no effort while they were getting unemployment compensation. You can guess who I'd hire. Who would you hire?": http://theiowarepublican.com.... "Adding another 4% to the estimated 2012 deficit, the President's requested extension would cost around $45 billion. And what about the human cost? Is it right to delay so many workers' reemployment? Is it right to artificially inflate unemployment? As with so many government programs, good intentions too often lead to bad results. In this case, those results can be measured in fewer jobs and in less personal dignity.