Socialism? What about plain inefficiency?
By Connie
@connierebel (1557)
United States
August 27, 2009 2:56pm CST
Some people don't consider the government takeover of the banks, the auto industry, and healthcare to be socialism. But even if its not, what about the inefficiency of everything the government gets its hands on? Social Security is a mess, Public Education is hurting, and even the Cash for Clunkers program turned out to be a "clunker" for the car dealers who participated. I don't know why anyone would think that government control of the healthcare industry would make it any better. They can't even take care of the programs they already have control of. As a matter of fact, the government can't even take care of itself!
1 person likes this
1 response
@jonakyl (493)
• United States
28 Aug 09
I think a lot of people who are against national health care were first against it for that very reason. Before even learning all the details about it, that reason you gave alone is enough reason to question whether we should have it or not. Now that some of the details have come out about the bills, the arguments have become more specific about those issues. But every time we see another instance of government inefficiency, it always gets brought up as a reason against health care, so even though it isn't discussed as much in the health care reform arguments, I think it's still in the back of everyone's mind.
