success of socialism?!?

[Jeremy Kidd <jeremy.kidd@mail.house.gov>]

   I find it amusing that there are those who still cling to the belief
that universal social programs are more effective than an open market.
While I was under the impression that the forum was about social 
security, and not health care, I would take issue with some of the 
assertions that are constantly made regarding universal health care.
I have personally experienced universal health care, which most of its
proponents have not.  It may provide basic care for everyone, and no one
is considered uninsured, but the quality of care is abysmal, especially
when compared to the free-market system of the U.S.  That is my main 
concern with universal social care programs.  They sacrifice quality 
and cost effectiveness in the name of fairness.  They are the refuge of
those who refuse to address all the complexities of a problem.

   That having been said, I remain undecided regarding what the final
fate of the Social Security program should be.  I have no problem 
providing for those who have retired, but the plain fact of the matter
is that the system will not be there for me when I retire.  

   I believe that Ms. Furia's example of her family is useful, though
perhaps not entirely valid.  If a family cannot reasonably take care 
of a loved one, then 1)nursing homes exist to address that issue (note:
if the family is paying for the nursing home, they are more likely to 
demand quality care), and 2)extreme cases may require some sort of government 
help. I guess it all returns to my point that universal social care programs
attach a 'cure-all' solution to a much more complicated problem.  The
Social Security program has effected the fabric of our families, and I
am not convinced it has been a beneficial change.

   I was impressed with Ms. Furia's assertions during this forum that
everything must be open to debate, and I highly admire her assertions, but
I feel that the one thing that never seems to be included in any debate
over Social Security is whether or not the system itself could be done
away with entirely.  Has the system been entirely beneficial, or could
private investments with the same amount of money that is invested in the
Social Security Trust Fund have provided better for many individuals.
I would ask Ms. Furia, if she is serious about nothing being a 'sacred cow',
to include that premise as a debatable one.