>> "provide for the common Defence, and promote the general Welfare." *Promote*, not *provide*.
It is totally part of the social contract of any functioning community that one takes care of one's own. <<
Ideally, opportunities will allow people to provide for themselves. But if that doesn't happen, it is society's responsibility to provide at least survival needs. Reason being, a society which does not somehow meet the needs of it is citizens will cease to exist.
>> HOWEVER. When you get something with freakin' 300 MILLION people in it, you know as well as I do that you can't do one size fits all. <<
Agreed.
>> We say, "Okay, medicine must be non-profit. We will accredit non-profit orgs to do medicine, and we will accredit schools to teach medicine, and we will encourage people to become doctors and nurses and techs and such like, but there will always be multiples of each, and people can choose who they go to.... but we're not doing medicine *directly*." <<
Crucial point: nonprofit =/= volunteer. It does include volunteer systems, but also paid ones. You can get fair wages. It just means outsiders can't take money out and pocket it for their own self-aggrandizement. If a nonprofit turns a profit (yes, this happens) they have to either reinvest it in the organization, disperse it to members, or some combination.
>> .... which is why we need to re-make the whole damn thing in the first place, but that's kinda outta scope here... <<
If only. Ideally, I'd recommend studying the many examples of health care systems to see who does what best, then combine the best solutions into a fresh model. Because duh. But nobody wants to do that because *fairysparklewoo* AMERICA IS #1*** and therefore better.
>>then they'll have room left in their profit structure to actually serve decent food. <<
I'm actually a big fan of their 24-hour breakfast because their breakfast sandwiches are now (usually) edible. Didn't use to be.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dancing_serpent
Re: Well...
Date: 2017-06-15 03:48 am (UTC)It is totally part of the social contract of any functioning community that one takes care of one's own. <<
Ideally, opportunities will allow people to provide for themselves. But if that doesn't happen, it is society's responsibility to provide at least survival needs. Reason being, a society which does not somehow meet the needs of it is citizens will cease to exist.
>> HOWEVER. When you get something with freakin' 300 MILLION people in it, you know as well as I do that you can't do one size fits all. <<
Agreed.
>> We say, "Okay, medicine must be non-profit. We will accredit non-profit orgs to do medicine, and we will accredit schools to teach medicine, and we will encourage people to become doctors and nurses and techs and such like, but there will always be multiples of each, and people can choose who they go to.... but we're not doing medicine *directly*." <<
Crucial point: nonprofit =/= volunteer. It does include volunteer systems, but also paid ones. You can get fair wages. It just means outsiders can't take money out and pocket it for their own self-aggrandizement. If a nonprofit turns a profit (yes, this happens) they have to either reinvest it in the organization, disperse it to members, or some combination.
>> .... which is why we need to re-make the whole damn thing in the first place, but that's kinda outta scope here... <<
If only. Ideally, I'd recommend studying the many examples of health care systems to see who does what best, then combine the best solutions into a fresh model. Because duh. But nobody wants to do that because *fairysparklewoo* AMERICA IS #1*** and therefore better.
>>then they'll have room left in their profit structure to actually serve decent food. <<
I'm actually a big fan of their 24-hour breakfast because their breakfast sandwiches are now (usually) edible. Didn't use to be.