Comments (12) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   senorbullwinkle said, 5 months ago

   SURE, WHY NOT ?

2. 

   Right_On said, 5 months ago

   Yes. Stay out of my affairs.

3. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 5 months ago

   Government should lead not govern. But Baroke is in favor of big government governing

4. 

   harleyquinn said, 5 months ago

   If it is “free” most would want them in the drivers seat.
   Well done comic!

5. 

   Ian Valenzuela said, 5 months ago

   Um, the government already directs traffic - it’s called traffic lights, speed limits, road signs - you know, all the thing that make traffic incredibly efficient, compared to the havoc that would result from lack of regulation. Kind of like the current situation we have with for-profit insurance, which makes life or death decisions for your family based on whether they can save a nickel or a dime.

6. 

   dtroutma said, 5 months ago

   After months of trying to get our “private” insurer to allow my wife to get the therapy our DOCTOR prescribed, with constant refusal, or at best authority for only part of the prescription, I’m more than ready for a government regulated system that will recognize the doctor and patient relationship, over the profit margin. No system is going to be perfect, but one that doesn’t put the profit margin first is far more likely to serve best.

7. 

   DrCanuck said, 5 months ago

   Ian asked an interesting question on the last Asay cartoon: “Why are the conservatives so against saving money [that a universal plan would save them]”?

   Answer: conservatives would rather save their ideology than their money.

8. 

   Gladius said, 5 months ago

   Canuck
   While I don’t want to be pigeon holed with the far right, There are several problems with the savings argument. So far, no one has demonstrated that the plans which are most likely to get through Congress will save any money. When the CBO came out with their numbers on the biggest plan on the table there was quite a bit of consternation.( and not just Republicans) If you can show me a plan that will give better coverage to everyone that we CAN afford I’d be all for it. Of course, one of the issues is defining afford.

9. 

   senorbullwinkle said, 5 months ago

   GLADIUS, Want to see a plan that will save us money ?
   Pick one. anyone. I dont care if it’s from mars. any one from anywhere will be cheaper, cause WE PAY THE MOST AND GET THE LEAST THAN ANY OTHER COUNTRY. SO as long as you dont pick what we already have, It will be cheaper.

10. 

    DrCanuck said, 5 months ago

    Gladius; you’re quite right; the plan is nowhere near finalized, nothing is definitive yet, and there will be a whole lot of fannagling before it’s done. Indeed, no one knows if y’all CAN afford it. But SrBull is also correct; pretty much ANY plan would be better than the mess you’re now in.

    And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, any plan patterned after Canada, Europe, or Japan would be a vast improvement. Most plans mentioned are piece-meal; none has the guts to reform the whole.

    (nope, I don’t categorize folk as far-right on the basis of whether they disagree with me, only by the ideological nature of their arguments.)

11. 

    Nurb said, 5 months ago

    yea! who need’s government when we have corporate businessmen in the driver’s seat trying not to spend money on their customers!

    YEA! WOO!

    another 300% increase in my healthcare costs please!

12. 

    David said, 5 months ago

    Directing traffic is fine. A screw-up in that department is less likely to kill me or my family than a screw-up in the medical system.