Eviora appears quite rigid as well, and I am answering to her as well. I chose your post to quote since you seem to understand that the "edges" are not profitable to everyone, hence both liberals and conservatives need to be more flexible and go towards the centre. It has nothing to do with what my personal beliefs are.
A phenomenon and its repercussions being predictable makes it easier to plan ahead and take measures in order to slow it down or even stop it. Naturally you will deal with imminent problems (or disasters) first, but you also keep your mind concentrated to what comes next. I am well aware of what the idea behind capitalist healthcare is, and at the beginning, it works just fine. The reason a full capitalistic plan is wary lies on its long-term establishment without legislation that allows new enterprizes to work (and make profit) alongside the big ones. This in turn will limit competition among the big ones who will raise the prices, when they see that they can, especially where patents are involved. In this way, poor people have a harder time dealing with health issues, with medical costs being extremely high, especially since the country's insurance policy does not cover part of the expenses (in comparison to what happens in Europe).
Taking this thought a step further (and here I'd like your informing me of existing laws on the matter), reduced healthcare costs can be achieved by certain changes in the taxation system. As a flat tax is the most unfair form of taxation, adjusting the current into a progressive taxing system that obligates enterprizes and entepreneurs alike to provide their fair share to the government can be more profitable for the country than a high tax for all. By "fair share" I mean gradual tax increases that also bear in mind the benefits one may receive from disabilities, multiple children, company benefits etc. This way, the system stops tax evasions, makes the higher incomes pay more while still having their benefits (my aim is not to make everything flat), and at the same time allows the companies or entepreneurs to flourish in the free market. The only issue with such a system is that capital will no longer stack indefinitely. Of course I cannot provide you here the exact ways this will be applied since it will take too long and I am not an expert at this, so you may find several loopholes. However, such systems are already in place in the Scandinavian countries, and it appears to be profitable.
I am not answering in Eviora's position, and I'm not to be held accountable for anything that someone I may or may not agree with says in this topic. I am stressing a matter I think it's of high importance and believe in avoiding collateral damage, at least as humanly possible. I set a goal and then try to explain and work together with you (with whom I may disagree on a lot) in order to achieve this, since it's common. Isn't that the greater purpose of an election?
#voteforNickCrash2016