Comments (33) Jump to Comments Form

1. 

   meowdam said, 3 months ago

   It would be valid but there are plenty of resources ,hospitals, doctors ,nurses and clerical staff to implement NATIONALIZED HEALTHCARE .
   Fear mongering abstraction of the issue , a ham handed attempt to play on stereotypical concepts.
   The Stories of today’s system are far more frightening than waiting a few days for an appointment.

2. 

   believecommonsense said, 3 months ago

   Ramirez continues his near-perfect batting average of sticking his head in the sand to ignore all issues not championed by the rabid right

3. 

   Dale Hopson said, 3 months ago

   I was at the DMV on West 34th Street Friday… took me 40 minutes to get my business done! Not bad!

4. 

   toasteroven said, 3 months ago

   So, this is a comment on health care as it is today, right?

   Becuase I was in the E.R. about a week back, and this is how it looked.

   I love how the opponents of government health care never seem to offer any concrete alternatives to the system we have now.

5. 

   ynnek58 said, 3 months ago

   how about trying the free market approach. Don’t kid yourself – what we got now is by no means a free market, but heavily controlled and regulated. That included hospitals that MUST treat people even if they have no money. That cost must also be borne by the rest of us. Need more doctors – AMAs got control on that. Any advertising of fees for services, so you can shop around – NONE! We have no free market, but a giant kluge of a system.

6. 

   itisme said, 3 months ago

   They tried the free market approach to health care and it didn’t work. Same with industry. That’s WHY we have regulations and controls.
   Seriously, read your 20th Century American History!

7. 

   meowdam said, 3 months ago

   What a waste of artistic talent- Micheal I love your Art- hate your political sense

8. 

   Madman2001 said, 3 months ago

   Regarding the free market, what are perceived as failures of the free market are instead almost always instances of big business screwing things up in collusion with the government – although it must be noted that the government can screw things up even without big business (witness the Great Depression - a result of the Smoot Hawley tariff and the Fed’s contraction of the money supply).

9. 

   HOWGOZIT said, 3 months ago

   Well done again Mr. Ramirez.–you have great insight and your toons are spot on. .

10. 

    cjr53 said, 3 months ago

    So, if I read your comment correctly, big business had no hand in making the great depression happen? It was all the fault of government?

    Oddly, I thought a part of it was due to the fact the farmers were unable to produce crops in bad, dried out soil, unable to pay their mortgages thus losing their jobs & homes.

11. 

    meowdam said, 3 months ago

    vacuity -wow- great word - Fox news leaps to mind

12. 

    harleyquinn said, 3 months ago

    Just saw Obama non answer the question of how private can compete with the big government in health care. What a tap dance. And this comic goes right to the heart of take a number post office DMV mentality that “can” compete against against private.
    “you have great points but I am going to show you an example that does not work…UPS is doing all right? I hope that is now clear”
    right?
    “we are going to make this new entity then set it over there to compete……”
    WHAT?????? He is going to create it but not make sure it works??? How????
    
    LOL this comic answers the question better then Obama did.

13. 

    Gladius said, 3 months ago

    The Great Depression had a number of contributing factors. Both big business and government can be faulted. The greed of everyday Americans also contributed. The correct term for the period was laissez- faire capitalism, in other words hands off. There was little government regulation and no transparency. Free market economics as it is presented, by a number of people, today does not assume a lack of regulation is good. It understands that the biggest enemy of capitalism is a successful capitalist. Unregulated capitalism turns into an oligarchy which eliminates the existence of a free market. Free market proponents want to eliminate tariff barriers and market distorting subsidies. No real free market policy has ever truly seen the light of day.

14. 

    WestTex13 said, 3 months ago

    The government could make a house of ill repute go bankrupt with mismanagement, so its hard to have faith in them doing anything effectively..

15. 

    4uk4ata said, 3 months ago

    @ HQ - you have to keep in mind that a major talking point on the right is that a government option would somehow run all the private insurers out of business. That is, after all, how a “we will give a government option” became “They will take over healthcare.”

    Obama’s example was absurd, but it DID show that this fear, at least, was unfounded.

16. 

    GNWachs said, 3 months ago

    You nay-sayers are so negative. Adding 47 million new entrants, slashing reimbursements and not adding any new physicians, nurses or hospitals will have no effect on quality of care. On top of that add QARY. A formula for disaster.

    There is nothing so bad that government can’t make worse.

17. 

    harleyquinn said, 3 months ago

    ????Obama’s example was absurd, but it DID show that this fear, at least, was unfounded.???
    huh?
    My “fear” is a basic observation of the problem.
    A “absurd” example is Panlin drawing out a example to a logical conclusion in the worst way. You give money to “A” and you are hurting for money and have to make it cost effective! Well I am sure they will make sure the cheapest option is taken. If we are talking about lives then where should the government fit into that?
    Then liberals go into a fit because she managed to get it out and kill that.
    The idea of “Death Councils” is a real good one. Between a Doc, family and the person in question. What is absurd is Palin having to bring it up and show how bad the government can screw it up. Then the Libs go into their stand by of how stupid she is. Then she beats them on that talking point and gets it thrown out. Why? not because it was a “bad” idea. But because it is a bad idea for the government to supply money for such a thing.

18. 

    chromosome said, 3 months ago

    Michael Ramirez, though I rarely agree with you, I find your art magnificent.

19. 

    4uk4ata said, 3 months ago

    HQ, I did not state it was your fear in particular. However, I have heard people state the talking point that a public plan would lead to government healthcare as the public option would eventually lead to the ruin of all its competitors. You personally may or may not have claimed that, but others have. I believe Obama was trying to address that point.

    The whole talking point about “death councils” was patently untrue. Palin and the right-wing media succeeded in convincing the people who were drafting the bill that the measure would be unpopular, but that does not mean it would be “a bad idea”. It was one service that doctors sometimes provide, the question is if it should be compensated or not. Palin spun it out of any proportion and invented stuff like bureaucrats deciding who lives and who dies. That is exactly one of the thing the reform is supposed to address by trying to cut back on arbitrary claim denials - because right now it is bureaucrats (albeit ones working for private companies) who decide who gets coverage and who does not..

20. 

    ynnek58 said, 3 months ago

    When people get greedy and stupid, there is a market correction – well at least there is supposed to be… wait – don’t bother we’ll just bail them out – you can’t be too stupid but what the gov-ment isn’t supposed to bail you out. 15 and pregnant – not your fault, paid too much for that house – fogetaboutit – we got you covered. Drugging, bangin’ w/o a condom – got you a little dee-zees step right up and get your free health care! Grow up and take responsibility for your actions! Only children and Democrats think money from Washington is free (William F Buckley)

21. 

    HOWGOZIT said, 3 months ago

    Great job Mr. Ramirez–as always the truth gets to the left wingers as they cannot recognize the same.

22. 

    HUMPHRIES said, 3 months ago

    Howiee, know “truth”, where’s it in this toon ?

23. 

    WestTex13 said, 3 months ago

    Truth is point of view perception..

    Most people cannot objectively seek truth because of jaded biases.. such is human nature Humphries and having to reconcile internal conflict to accept another viewpoint often prevents truth from ever being relevant..

24. 

    DrCanuck said, 3 months ago

    Truth is that which is objectively supported by reason and empirical evidence. Those who do not understand the nature of knowledge consider truth to be subjective, undifferentiated from opinion or belief.

25. 

    HUMPHRIES said, 3 months ago

    DrC, may I save that and use it some time ?

26. 

    WestTex13 said, 3 months ago

    To DrC : Reason is deducted from observational opinion reliant of the subjectivity of fact.. In regards to politics there are no empirical truths that are irrefutable due to the nature of morality versus course of action, so therefore there cannot be an truth relation to proper way of doing things that does not derive from opinion.. Only those who do not under the nature of truth versus science versus human nature would attrempt to place an iron clad parameter upon the human condition..

    If it could be proven that a single philosophical moralistic way of life was truth then there would be no debate, but alas such is not the case..

27. 

    PlainBill said, 3 months ago

    I wish my doctors were as efficient as the DMV! I called a doctor 4 weeks ago to schedule an appointment. The earliest they had was in September.

    On August 5th I sent the DMV the paperwork to renew my handicapped placard. It arrived on the 12th.

    On the 13th I renewed my registration online. The decal arrived on the 15th.

    The last time I visited the DMV in person was when we moved to this state. it took us about an hour to take the written driver’s tests, get new drivers licenses, get the car registered in this state, and get the license plate.

    Ramirez doesn’t know much about the way a modern DMV operates

28. 

    DrCanuck said, 3 months ago

    Tex said: “Reason is deducted from observational opinion reliant of the subjectivity of fact.”

    DrCanuck responds: That sentence has no meaning; it is simply words strung together. Try again.

    Humpty: It’s all yours, no citation required (unless you can find it in my book.)

29. 

    Gladius said, 3 months ago

    DMV varies from state to state. It is usually less of a nightmare than it used to be. I remember spending 1-2 hrs per visit pre internet. Online has helped a lot.

30. 

    senorbullwinkle said, 3 months ago

    I think tex is trying to be black.

31. 

    ynnek58 said, 3 months ago

    Humpster
    You might want to understand that statement before you unleash it since, in your case, it would be self-incriminating.

32. 

    WestTex13 said, 3 months ago

    It does have meaning DrC your just failing to grasp it.. I’ll just break it down into smaller concepts for you.. We reason i.e. work through things based on our observations which is biased by our opinions. Our opinions are modified by how reliant we are on the subject matter/source/personal involvement as it affects us (whether its directly relevant to a person in the opinion) which changes our perception of philosophies which we construe to be fact regardless of the perceptions of others not impacted by the same factors. ..

    Its a basic aspect of cultural psychology which is founded upon empirical data collected from human perception studies..

    Yes it is words strung out into sentences, but they are relevant and have meaning if you stop to think about it.. but thats the problem with blogging.. Lots of typing, not alot of thinking.. Knee jerk reactions..

33. 

    DrCanuck said, 3 months ago

    Tex said: “Its a basic aspect of cultural psychology which is founded upon empirical data collected from human perception studies.”

    You do realize, of course, that this statement completely contradicts the point you’re trying to make. If you are correct in your position that all truth is subjective, then “empiricla data from perception studies” is impossible. You are basing your argument of “all truth is subjective” with objective evidence.