With so much vitriol, it is hard to know what we are debating.

The following is from a facebook post gone awry; I put too much time into it, I figured I should share it here :)
------------------------------------------------------

I guess I am confused about what we are actually debating.  There is a ton of demogoguery and lashing out at labels and boogey men, and very little facts or discussion on specific policy, problems, or solutions.

I see a ton of talk and anger about taxes and how Obama making businesses go out of business, but no reference to exactly what policy he has implemented that has caused this.  I see anger about taxes, but as  Mike points out, the tax rates are nowhere out of the norm, and I would guess that everyone here (even those with businesses) are paying less than the last 8 years.  I agree that he missed a very good opportunity to get the economy going quicker with better use of the stimulus money.  We need tons of municipal projects like roads and bridges, so they don't fall down.  We are in deparate need of more hospitals, schools, and fire departments.  We could build more police deparments and fund them so they aren't spread so thin.  As shown by Moody's research (hardly a partisan source), food stamps is also a good way to jump start the economy.  (http://www.economy.com/dismal/article_free.asp?cid=102598  about half way down the pay - or if you don't want to read - http://endtheecho.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/mz_012208_1t.gif).  Of course that is politically difficult and he would have been attacked by the same people, and, I am sure the communist, socialist, fascist labels would be flying even higher and louder.  Even though the logic makes perfect sense it is ignored by those with an agenda or those protecting their ideology.  Building stuff means you have to hire people.  People who buy stuff.  Stuff that has to be made that hires more people.  There is beauty in the simplicity.  

If a large company, whose products aren't selling, gets a tax break, do they give it to the employees?  Do they start making more product that isn't selling?  If you say yes, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.  Sarcasm aside, it goes directly to shareholders, investors and maybe a couple of executives.  Now, take the same amount of money and give it to those who are barely getting by, and guess what, they spend it.  Maybe they go out to dinner.  Maybe they treat their children to something that they normally can't afford, or maybe they just eat better.  Whatever it is, it goes directly out the door again.  And VOILA, the big company is now selling more widgets, and making a profit.  They now need more workers - who get hired and buy more widgets.  It is amazing how it works for both rich and poor.  Amazing, something good for the country is good for EVERYONE.

That being said, I know more than one company that is staying alive directly because of the stimulus.  An architectural firm I know about is staying afloat because of state projects coming down the line from stimulus money.  As I mentioned above, this is the type of stimulus needed.

I see anger about people getting handouts and taking advantage of the sytem, however, those are a minor problem.  In addition, the simplicity that seems to strike me is ** Healthcare is going to be cheaper if we take profit out of the equation **.  I don't see access to ones care that could keep someone healthy or save their life as any less of a right than police protection.  How can I have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, if I am denied life?  Is it any more tragic that a child, adult, or senior citizen dies of an easily treatable disease than murder?  Well, I don't and about three times the number that are murdered die every year for lack of health care. http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSTRE58G6W520090917 - cut the numbers in half and it is still appalling.  Especially when they are easy to prevent.  Making a profit - now lets get this clear, I am not talking about doctor pay, I am talking about "investors" and executives of the insurance companies - making a profit on healthcare is dangerous at best.  The incentive for the insurance companies is NOT to pay claims.  This isn't fantasy, this is seen over and over again, I have had it happen to me.  They deny a claim that they clearly should pay - that is easy.  You figure some people won't argue and just pay.  You have to fight to get what you have paid for.  That isn't even including the snide tricks to disqualify someone or catch them with fine print or procedural clauses.  I have worked in medical billing, I have seen some of these tricks and loopholes.  

It comes down to this, profit is not evil in all circumstances.  I am all for it in selling widgets or whatchamahoos.  It is not good when it is life or death.  There is no time or energy for fighting the insurance companies when you are also fighting for your life. Plain and simple, profit should be taken out of healthcare.  Healthcare is ALWAYS LESS than Healthcare + Profit + Marketing.

Let me point out, that, even though I feel like I am pretty well researched, I welcome sound logical arguments that prove me wrong.  Sound arguments like that help shape my opinions and let me be stronger, smarter, and more informed; however, shouting communist, socialist, "love it or leave it", is going to do nothing for my opinion and tells me more about you than my views.