Active Users:340 Time:16/07/2025 03:19:20 PM
It may still be a better option though, but I wouldn't consider it a likely great success story Isaac Send a noteboard - 13/10/2011 09:23:16 PM
I think the medical care could easily be state managed, but Social Security would be more difficult due to interstate migration.


I'm pretty confident we could overcome the 50 state hurdle, we do after all do it pretty much all the time, but whether we should, and how hard that hurdle would be to leap, depends on what one thinks SS is or should be, a savings account or low-risk low-yield investment, or an insurance program, or both. If it's the former it doesn't matter who runs it, fed, state, or private anymore than it matters if you have a bank account in Kentucky and now live in Florida, you just transfer the funds... or leave them there, doesn't matter and isn't hard either way. If it's insurance, then that's trickier but people need to remember that insurance is a system in which one on average pays in more than you payout, and accept that you won't see $3 return on $1 investment but rather $0.8 return on $1. And people need to decide which one they want, but it doesn't have to be all-in, we can do both, and people pick which, or we can let them do both in whatever ratio they want. Sliding into a tangent there but the savings/invest option doesn't really matter who does it, the insurance one kinda does but still isn't a huge hurdle and that one is one where 50 heads vs 1 could yield us dividends, so to speak, since it is actually possible to decrease costs of services that almost everyone uses by bulk purchase.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Reply to message
States and Federal Government - 13/10/2011 05:08:14 AM 570 Views
No. - 13/10/2011 05:59:07 AM 356 Views
Re: No. - 13/10/2011 07:07:14 AM 345 Views
Re: No. - 13/10/2011 01:59:58 PM 335 Views
Economy of scale applies to every private bureaucracy, but not government ones. - 13/10/2011 06:53:44 PM 325 Views
of course economy of scale applies just like diseconomy of scale - 13/10/2011 10:38:45 PM 382 Views
And both are a function of size rather than government. - 14/10/2011 11:08:53 AM 406 Views
This is a ridiculous claim - 13/10/2011 09:44:35 PM 332 Views
you can do it with block grants - 13/10/2011 06:13:48 AM 316 Views
Believing the states can't do it, is not the same as saying the states will be less efficent or more *NM* - 13/10/2011 06:42:34 AM 129 Views
That is a BS argument - 13/10/2011 02:08:23 PM 322 Views
Medicaid is already state-managed - 13/10/2011 06:22:54 AM 417 Views
Yep, You're correct. - 13/10/2011 06:53:38 AM 339 Views
I think you just pinpointed my basic problem with vouchers. - 13/10/2011 06:36:58 PM 362 Views
Ah, Tricare - 13/10/2011 10:07:59 PM 319 Views
I pretty much agree with this - 13/10/2011 02:03:04 PM 321 Views
It may still be a better option though, but I wouldn't consider it a likely great success story - 13/10/2011 09:23:16 PM 408 Views
No I do not believe they do could do Medicare or Social Security more effectively *NM* - 13/10/2011 06:41:03 AM 134 Views
Care to elaborate? *NM* - 13/10/2011 06:55:21 AM 157 Views
If programs to ensure federal citizen rights were divided among the states it would invite disparity - 13/10/2011 06:50:02 PM 394 Views
<Type Random Subject Here> - 13/10/2011 09:55:04 PM 333 Views
Because some things do not matter much with geography and culture - 14/10/2011 02:20:04 AM 315 Views
Yet again I must disagree - 14/10/2011 05:04:43 AM 332 Views
I agree, it's not necessarily that the need itself changes... - 14/10/2011 09:06:19 AM 311 Views
The first thought that came to mind..... - 13/10/2011 08:55:36 PM 333 Views
I disagree - 13/10/2011 09:49:15 PM 390 Views
Except when its time to retire.... - 14/10/2011 04:03:22 PM 312 Views
Absolutely not *NM* - 14/10/2011 10:55:01 AM 160 Views

Reply to Message