From: Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: Presidential debates #2
X-Xxdate: Fri, 16 Oct 92 16:34:02 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Company
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:37:15 GMT

In article <1992Oct16.192856.14847@iti.org> Allen W. Sherzer, aws@iti.org
writes:
>Having read both Clinton and Bush plans I can say that both offer !Real
>Solutions!; or at least specific ideas.
>
>The basic difference between them is interesting. Take health care,
Clinton's
>plan is to develop a standard insurance policy for the whole nation and
>require 'pay or play' for that policy.
>
>Bush's plan is to use vouchers and incentives to insure that every
American
>can afford insurance.

Note: Experts have said that Bush's plan will leave millions uninsured.
Clinton's plan insures everyone and saves 10 times more money (about $1700
per family per year).

>
>Clinton will make a health box and stuff every American into it wether
they
>fit or not. If you want to give up something inside the box to get
something
>outside, tough luck.

Define "outside". Since "inside" is defined as everyone having
preventative and
emergency health care, regardless of financial means, it is hard to see
what
your complaint is here.

>
>Bush wants to make it possible for people to pick the sort of plan that
best
>fits their needs and give them the means to do so.

The only problem is that 1.) it won't cover everyone, and 2.) does
nothing about the
health care cost growth (insurance premiums going up at twice the rate of
inflation and hospital supply and pharmecutical costs going up at
four times the rate of inflation for instance.). This problem is
complicated
and caused by many factors.

Bush's solution is too simplistic (every time he presents a plan, all he
can come
up with is a tax break.), and suffers from the same disease as
welfare....it doesn't
solve the problem, it just treats the symptoms. Furthermore, the tort
reform concept,
although I think it is a good idea, is far from the biggest factor in
health care
cost growth.

>
>On every issue this difference was apparent. Clinton wants to have
Washington
>dictate THE solution to every problem and make people follow it. Bush
wants
>to set the rules so people can pick their own way. Clinton wants to
empower
>government, Bush wants to empower people.

Sorry, but I suggest you really haven't read Clinton's plan. Clinton is
suggesting
workfare (people empowerment), job training (people empowerment),
education
reform (people empowerment), small business to create jobs (people
empowerment).
To call Clinton a classic liberal is a fallacy. The philosophy of his
programs is
to replace the regressive social programs of the sixties with progressive
social
programs which solve the root problems and empower people to help
themselves,
thus causing social programs to shrink themselves.
He wants everyone to have the opportunity to use their talents
and achieve their maximum potential. That, my friend, is real empowerment.

>
>  Allen
>
>-- 
>+---------------------------------------------------------------------
-----+
>| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves    
   |
>|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                   
   |
>+----------------------191 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF
DCX----------------------+
Dr. Norman J. LaFave
Senior Engineer
Lockheed Engineering and Sciences Company




When the going gets wierd, the wierd turn pro
                               Hunter Thompson
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton