ivwshane
Lifer
- May 15, 2000
- 32,504
- 15,387
- 136
Because you take the position of keeping government where it is today which is to assume that you don't want anything to change. The usual defense of this is "You can't cut or it will cause more problems than it saves."
Pharmaceutical innovation had nothing to do with that? Vaccinations? Surgical techniques? Medical devices? How about the shift of the population from highly manual labor intensive jobs to other less intensive jobs due to technology? None of those factors had a part to play in increase in life expectancy?
The reason why we should return to such a system where socialized risk and costs are gone is basically solvency of the government because of reduction of costs.
How does it reduce costs? Reduce government costs? Sure but it won't reduce the costs to the people. Why do you hate Americans? (See I can do straw men too)