If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!
Should we end the employer-based health care system
Page history
last edited
by PBworks16 years, 6 months ago
Mr. Seib: Governor Romney, as you well know, health costs are a huge issue for the automakers in this city. Do you think the Republican Party should take the lead in ending the employer-based health care system we have now and replace it with something else? And, if so, what would that be?
Mr. Romney: Well, I don't believe in replacing what we have, but I believe in improving it. And the way we improve something is not by putting more government into it -- of course, that's what Hillary Clinton wants to do. "Hillary Care" is government gets in and tells people what to do from the federal government's standpoint.
In my view, instead -- the right way for us to go is to bring in place the kind of market dynamics that make the rest of the economy so successful.
So my plan gets everybody in American insured, takes the burden of free-riders off of our auto companies and everybody else and says, "Let's get everybody in the system."
Mr. Romney: And to do that, we say: Look, we're going to have states create their own plans -- we did it in our state and it's working. We're not going to have the federal government tell them how to do it.
Number two, we're not going to spend more money. Hillary Clinton's plan costs $110 billion.
Mine says, let's use the money we're already spending a little more wisely.
And number three, instead of having the federal government give you government insurance, Medicare and federal employee insurance, let's have private insurance.
But our solutions, as Republicans, have to be able to deal with the big issue of our time, economically, for the American family. And that's health care.
Get the cost of health care down; get everybody insured, but not in a government takeover, but by using the dynamics that have always made our markets -- other markets -- so successful.
And one more thing, and that is, our health care system, right now, really penalizes individuals that might want to buy their own insurance, as opposed to buying it through their company.
And that's why I propose that people should be able to get their insurance individually, and it should be that they get the same tax treatment as to whether the company buys it for them or they buy it for themselves.
And all medical expenses would be tax-deductible.
This issue, health care, is not a Democratic issue. It's a Republican issue. It's a Democratic fund-raising opportunity. They go out and use it to raise money. But the right thing for health care is for us to apply market dynamics to get people insured and to bring the cost of health care down. The plan that we put in place is doing just that.
Einstein said, “You cannot solve a problem with the same mind that created it.” Similarly, we won’t improve our country until we improve our level of public debate. On these pages I outline how we can automate conflict resolution and cost-benefit analysis and solve our problems at a level higher than how they were caused.
To start, we will break our problems down into their sub-components, including beliefs, supporting, and weakening evidence, and arguments. This will allow thousands or millions of us to evaluate each part of an argument and evidence one at a time. We will group beliefs by topic and sort them by their positivity, strength, and level of specificity. This will prevent duplication and allow us to focus on one issue at a time.
The Idea Stock Exchange (ISE) proposes a groundbreaking framework for tackling complex issues, resolving conflicts, and fostering informed decision-making. Here's a detailed breakdown of its key features:
Evidence-driven: Prioritizes verifiable data and logical reasoning, ensuring well-informed conclusions.
Dynamic Ranking System: Inspired by Google's PageRank, it evaluates arguments based on the strength of their evidence, dynamically adjusting as new information emerges.
2. Multi-faceted Evaluation Metrics:
Cost-Benefit Analysis: Assesses proposed solutions by examining potential costs, benefits, likelihoods, and impact.
Argumentative Strength Assessment: Categorizes arguments based on logical consistency, evidence, relevance, and significance.
Maslow's Hierarchy Integration: Aligns the evaluation with fundamental human needs for a broader perspective.
3. Sophisticated Scoring and Ranking Protocols:
Precision Scoring Formula: Combines argument scores with evidence assessments to determine argument validity.
Evidence-Based Ranking System: Leverages algorithms to rank solutions based on predicted costs and benefits, with dynamic updates based on new information.
4. Uniqueness and Redundancy Scores:
Equivalency Score: Identifies similar arguments using semantic similarity metrics and machine learning, coupled with community feedback, to reduce redundancy and develop unique scores.
"Better Ways of Saying the Same Thing": Helps users find alternative expressions of the same idea, enhancing clarity and reducing duplication.
5. Logical Fallacy and Argument Evaluation:
Fallacy Detection: Implements algorithms to identify and flag potentially fallacious arguments, promoting rational discourse.
User-Contributed Evidence Assessment: Allows the community to contribute evidence supporting or weakening arguments for collaborative verification.
6. Technological Integration and User Interaction:
Database Tools: Proposes building tools to map conclusions, assumptions, and their relationships for deeper understanding.
Interactive Interface: Users can actively participate by submitting evidence, voting on argument strength, and suggesting alternative viewpoints.
7. Promoting Quality Debate:
Separating Argument Types: Distinguishes between truth, importance, and relevance arguments for a more nuanced debate structure.
Encouraging Constructive Dialogue: Aims to shift focus from emotional responses to evidence-based reasoning, fostering meaningful discourse over sensationalism.
8. Community-Driven Evolution:
Open-Source Development: Encourages community involvement in refining and evolving the platform, ensuring its adaptability and relevance.
Additional Considerations:
Data Quality and Bias: Implementing robust measures to ensure data accuracy and mitigate potential biases in algorithms and user contributions.
Transparency and Explainability: Providing clear explanations of scoring methods and decision-making processes to build trust and understanding.
User Engagement and Education: Fostering active participation and educating users on the platform's functionalities and responsible use.
We are a political party that organizes all the ideas and arguments by subject, and lets them battle in a survival of the fittest death-match.
We are a political party that supports candidates that promises to make their decisions based on online cost benefit and idea evaluation algorithms. They just have to use a forum that ties the strength of their conclusion to the strength of their assumption, so that when you strengthen or weaken an assumption you also strengthen or weaken conclusions based on the assumption.
We have had the technological ability to create a world based on logic for too long. It is about time we build a rational political party based on the assumption that we support plans, conclusions, activities, and policies that can gather evidence based support, and that we don't do things that don't stand up to analysis.
We will conduct open, online, cost/benefit analysis of each issue. It is about time.
Welcome to the website for the best political party of all time, and the future of reason based decisions making.
"No concept you form is valid unless you integrate it without contradiction into the sum of human knowledge."
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.