Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

TheKentuckian

(26,314 posts)
14. This is a newer tact that seems to be trotted out by some.
Mon Jul 8, 2013, 02:49 PM
Jul 2013

I'll agree, if it cannot be restricted from combing through them looking for spooks, collect material for blackmail, and fodder for the drug war.

So, in the current environment a NHS is probably off the table so we are left with single payer so that government pays the bills but doesn't have to own much in the way of operations. The government can be cut out of the loop and blinded to which claims are attached to which person. A system can be designed that secures information at each step. Care management can be placed in other hands, just by going to a professional review.


That said, historic track records of abuse of surveillance and abuse of medical records in various government plans including those operated in the US are fairly divergent. Other than drug war abuse, the potential seems rather small anyway unless we are so far down the hole that eugenics and forced suicide are a problem to be wrestled with.
How is the government going to abuse you having a heart murmur or a bad knee? Is there some reason to think everyone with high cholesterol is going to be rounded up?

Actually, it is the employer system that seems to present the greater risk by making a person unemployable.

No, your blood pressure and cancer history are not a danger to power but your knowledge, ideas, and organization are.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Excellent article LuvNewcastle Jul 2013 #1
Always attacking people, not the issue treestar Jul 2013 #2
It's plain ridiculous vdogg Jul 2013 #28
I think it has more to do with "Pre emptive Strike" strategy. dtom67 Jul 2013 #3
That's because of idiotic phrases like this. randome Jul 2013 #5
another example of the " pre emptive strike " doctrine... dtom67 Jul 2013 #7
That's the point: there is NO EVIDENCE of ILLEGAL SPYING. Amonester Jul 2013 #31
Privacy moderates are pro security state and anti the 4th amendment as understood byeya Jul 2013 #4
As long as he has another group of people to malign. nt longship Jul 2013 #6
k/r marmar Jul 2013 #8
In other words, if you disagree with the Snowden cultists you suck no matter what. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #9
It's more the starting point than any sort of purist attitude Android3.14 Jul 2013 #11
Might as well ask if I stopped beating my wife. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #13
How about we use the Oxford English definition Android3.14 Jul 2013 #15
Is possession of or access to this information enough to be considered spying? geek tragedy Jul 2013 #16
Still ignoring the essential question Android3.14 Jul 2013 #17
Obviously, having the government create files on people and examine their geek tragedy Jul 2013 #21
Now we are getting somewhere Android3.14 Jul 2013 #22
Point 2 does not represent my thinking. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #23
Then why did you state Android3.14 Jul 2013 #30
That is a starting point. It does not follow that everything else is ok. nt geek tragedy Jul 2013 #32
Are we still trying to agree on terms? Android3.14 Jul 2013 #34
I guess I don't see a great deal of difference between geek tragedy Jul 2013 #36
Rumor? Android3.14 Jul 2013 #37
recording content or recording metadata? geek tragedy Jul 2013 #38
Not rumor Android3.14 Jul 2013 #39
That story has been thoroughly debunked. It's false. geek tragedy Jul 2013 #40
Sorry, but no Android3.14 Jul 2013 #43
Without public oversight or permission, no. nt geek tragedy Jul 2013 #44
Thank you Android3.14 Jul 2013 #45
Likewise. I think there is probably more agreement than geek tragedy Jul 2013 #46
Logic and facts do not matter... kentuck Jul 2013 #10
...yeap, don't trust the government with medical records either uponit7771 Jul 2013 #12
This is a newer tact that seems to be trotted out by some. TheKentuckian Jul 2013 #14
Unless having a heart murmur has a high correlation to domestic terrorism NoOneMan Jul 2013 #20
Sure, don't. NoOneMan Jul 2013 #19
They'll know if you've been treated for addiction. JoePhilly Jul 2013 #24
Depends on how you want to structure your claims department NoOneMan Jul 2013 #25
But why would we expect our totalitarian government to JoePhilly Jul 2013 #26
You can't if you don't demand accountability and privacy NoOneMan Jul 2013 #27
Perhaps not. sibelian Jul 2013 #42
The problem is that Snowden may be a narcissist with ulterior motives who is not championing reform NoOneMan Jul 2013 #18
K&R for attracting the tragically handicapped. n/t Egalitarian Thug Jul 2013 #29
+ + Snowden attracts the slugs doesn't he? byeya Jul 2013 #41
An excellent article! Waiting For Everyman Jul 2013 #33
an excellent article for a reality based assessment of the situation Douglas Carpenter Jul 2013 #35
The problem with the NSA Agitators is… they don't talk about the NSA in any relevant way. Nothing KittyWampus Jul 2013 #47
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Problem With the 'Pri...»Reply #14