So what has happened along the way in our non-socialistic
country?
– 48 million receive Social Security checks; 70 million qualify
for Veteran Administration benefits; and 41 million receive
Medicare payments with 6 million under age 55.
Socialized medicine just another way to help Americans receive care
Dear Editor,
Have you heard the term “socialized medicine?” How about “socialized police protection” or “socialized fire protection?” Do “socialized public education” or “socialized public libraries” ring a bell? Maybe “socialized Medicare,” “socialized Veterans benefits” or “Socialized Security?”
Interesting. Though none are mentioned in our U.S. Constitution, most are now considered “rights” by all societal standards. Our country has gone from an agricultural, pull-yourself-up-by-the-boot-straps society to a semi-urban, can’t-do-it-alone citizenry.
So what has happened along the way in our non-socialistic country? – 48 million receive Social Security checks; 70 million qualify for Veteran Administration benefits; and 41 million receive Medicare payments with 6 million under age 55. There are 80 million students receiving public education and more than 8 million veterans are recipients of the GI Bills. There were 1.4 billion visits to public libraries in 2005. And, how many have paid for police and fire protection when property and lives have been at stake? Not many.
Our lame-duck President George H. Bush, who some Gilroyans consider the Greatest President of All Time, is quite unconcerned about universal health care as noted in his eloquent quote, “The immediate goal is to make sure there are more people on private insurance plans. I mean, people have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room.”
Every time an uninsured person uses the emergency room for preventative care, it costs you and me hundreds of dollars ($560 in 2004 data), and thousands ($3,300 in 2004 data) if minor surgery is required. According to an Institute of Medicine analysis (2003), the U.S. government incurs $100 billion in annual costs for the uninsured. Now that’s socialized medicine at its finest with no return on the investment.
And, the 47 million uninsured Americans (7 million new uninsured since Bush has been in office) continue to charge you and me for their ongoing, socialized medical care year after year after year.
Dale Morejón, Gilroy
No more huge trucks on highways, pack those loads on the rails
Dear Editor,
At the recommendation of San Benito County Supervisor Pat Loe, the county transportation governing board unanimously included “truck only” lanes in its approval of Santa Clara County’s Valley Transportation Authority northern most alternative for strategic improvements for regional highways, i.e., “East-West Connector.”
While the Southern California Association of Governments had previously endorsed the same concept, the nation’s commerce and industry have been using a better form of freight transport, i.e., intermodal service. The 75 percent fuel savings, lower freight rates, and highway congestion and maintenance reductions, at truck-competitive service on trans-Mississippi loads induced U.S. industry to switch from trucks to intermodal even before fuel prices reached their current levels. Even the nation’s largest truckers have been tendering truckloads to railroads for long haul moves, improving their bottom line.
So, when Robert Poole, Ph.D., from Reason Foundation, repeated his “truck only lane” strategy at last year’s think tank meeting at the Metropolitan Transportation Associations Oakland headquarters, I reminded the audience that we already have them, and their called “railroads.” Tires on concrete or asphalt cannot compete with steel wheels rolling over steel rails thanks to the coefficient of friction.
So, instead of building highway lanes restricted for truck use only, why not do as former Secretary of Transportation Norm Mineta, our Governor’s Goods Movement Plan, and Jim Nicholas, chief, highway programs for Caltrans all say: “we need more intermodal.”
Omitting presently existing technology from transport strategy is why many are calling for termination of the structure in the next highway bill (due out in 2009).
If local leaders truly want to reduce highway deaths and injuries, highway congestion and air pollution, then we must go back to the future, as I’ve been saying for more than 20 years now.
How can we justify higher taxes when we ignore private-sector options? Why are we (Silicon Valley and the Salinas Valley) the largest urban area in North America without intermodal options? If we are now quoting philosophers to local leaders, then how about, “There are none so blind as those who will not see.”
Caveat Viator!
Joe Thompson, Gilroy
