The Health Care Bill

Image via Wikipedia

The health care issue is an issue of freedom and respect. What one is saying when he says that the health care bill is wrong is that he thinks the government is behaving in an unfair manner, encroaching upon personal freedom. He believes he is being treated like a child who must be cared for because he cannot take care of himself. It is considered a far better thing to stand on one’s own two feet than to have to lean on someone else. Greater respect is reserved for the man who stands on his own or is “self-made.” The thought is that if one has the ambition, he can do whatever he wants. However, now if his ambition is toward getting a certain aspect his health taken care of, he must ask the government first. A certain freedom has been taken away.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

17 thoughts on “The Health Care Bill

  1. Are you speaking out against the other ways the government cares for you and makes you pay for it? Social Security that you and your employer are forced to pay for because you can’t be counted on to save money for your own retirement? Forcing employers to pay unemployment insurance so that you will get paid even if you are not working? Insisting that people who have no children pay for public education, because it is better for everyone? Having your taxes lowered because you have a mortgage, or because you have children and you can’t afford to feed them yourself?

    Are you consistently against all of these things?

      1. In each case the government requires you to pay against your will, either by forcing you to buy health care (the point of the original post), or by forcing you to pay taxes that are then used to pay for the services. Tax breaks given to other people but not given to you mean that you pay the other people’s share of the taxes. How are these services not alike?

  2. That does not answer if you are against all government enforced social programs. Are you saying that you are OK with the existing programs, but against the new one? If so, why do you think that is?

    1. Well they are alike. Just not exactly alike. And they don’t all mean the same thing either. Some of them represent good sense with restraint. Some of them represent a lack of restraint on the part of those in power. And some of them also represent a lack of interest in common American attitudes and values.

  3. Hi Tim,

    Would you feel comfortable identifying which programs fall into which categories you listed?


    1. Well, it is somewhat a matter of opinion. There are too many programs to name so I’ll cut it down to three.

      To be honest it’s hard to come up with any social programs that fit into the first category of good sense with restraint. But I think one program is probably health care for veterans. I think if you put yourself in danger for your country then it owes you a lot. I see veteran health care as paying what is owed.

      I think the recent health care bill represents the second category of lack of restraint. The democrats were put in power in answer to the perceived abuses of the previous administration. That’s understandable. But they took it as an opportunity to cast of bill that would regulate 1/7 of the economy – the health care bill. Alright fine. If they could get it done with the support of the people and in league with the democratic process, I might not like it, but fair is fair. However, the fact of the matter is they didn’t have the support of the people, which was made abundantly clear over and over again by the rise of the tea parties. And if the tea parties weren’t enough there is the fact that a died-in-the-wool blue democrat state, during the debate over health care, voted a republican into Ted Kennedy’s old seat after decades of democrat rule. Same thing happened in New Jersey if I remember correctly. And last but not least, many in the democratic party didn’t even want this bill and didn’t change their minds on it till some last second bribes and, in all likelihood, a little arm twisting and threatening too. Not to mention the attempt to enact Reconciliation in the senate which would have made it possible to pass the bill without the constraint of filibuster as a buffer against radical legislation. Which would have set a new precedent on the way Reconciliation is used.

      The third category which represents a lack of interest in common American attitudes and values, is filled by the program of Social Welfare. Talking about this one is always touchy, in part, because of the name _ Social Welfare. Even the name itself implies that if anyone is against the program, they must be in opposition to the welfare of society. Of course, this is just a clever use of rhetoric. Which is done all the time in the naming of programs and bills. The program alleges to help people get up on their feet which clearly everyone is for. It is not the intention that is the problem, it is the method. Which makes people dependent on an increasingly parental government without the necessary historically precedent of being successful in doing so. The number of poor have increased since the sixties when the Department of Welfare was created. One would think that if it was successful, the opposite would be true. But as long as they can blame it on the rich (the same people who create jobs) then they can distract people from the facts and keep receiving their government funding and politicians can keep using it as a campaign issue to get more votes.

  4. I have been a tad perplexed by all the people who are against the health care reform bill. I think a lot of those against it lack experience. I have a lot of experience.

    I spent the first 10 years of my adult life in the US military. I had great socialized health care for me, my wife, and three kids.

    When I got out of the military at age 30, my family was suddenly without health insurance. I was making barely above minimum wage. For the next three years, no health insurance. We could not afford it.

    In ’91 I got a job that had affordable health coverage ($200 a month for the family). For the next seven years we had the comfort in knowing that an injury or illness would not devastate us financially (unless it was me that got sick or injured and I could not go back to work, which would mean we would eventually lose our health coverage).

    I left that job to pursue a venture in self employment. We purchased a decent family plan for about $400 a month. We really could not afford this, but with three growing kids, all with asthma, we had to make the extreme sacrifice.

    Over the next 6-8 years, our health insurance premiums would rise annually, $50, $75, $100 a month. Since we could not afford the increase, we opted for reduced coverage.

    About 6 years ago, my marriage fell apart. On my income alone, health insurance was impossible. I now had the mortgage and utilities all to myself. I canceled my policy.

    I am now 52. I (and two of my adult children who still live with me) have been without any health insurance for 5 years. In my little county we have an unemployment rate of 20%. For the past 5 years, our unemployment has been the highest in the state.

    In 2006 my income was the highest it has been. I netted about 40k. In ’07 it fell 5k. In ’08 it fell another 5k. In ’09 it fell almost 11k.
    My income now is back to where it was 20 years ago.

    I have no idea how this health care reform will affect me. I hope it will make health insurance affordable, but I am not holding my breath (I can’t afford to do that to long). I suppose I could take a part time job working in the grocery store just so I can afford some kind of health plan, but at 52, with my back and knees hurting (and with 20% unemployment, there are NO jobs in my area).

    I guess I just don’t understand the mentality behind this attitude – “…the government is behaving in an unfair manner, encroaching upon personal freedom.” and “…being treated like a child who must be cared for because he cannot take care of himself.” and “It is considered a far better thing to stand on one’s own two feet than to have to lean on someone else.”

    What an extremely naive viewpoint. You do realize, Daniel, that there are children “… who must be cared for because he cannot take care of himself”, don’t you? There are children of poor, unemployed parents…?
    And there are people who can’t “…stand on one’s own two feet…” because they lost them in a car accident or to diabetes.

    Obviously, your “personal freedom” and pioneering spirit is far more important to you than the sufferings of a child with a severe ear infection. And I say “obvious” because it is just that – OBVIOUS.

    The prospect of suffering and / or dieing because I can’t afford to get treated is something I live with every day now.

    In my mind, my health is far more important to me than your “perceived” loss of freedom.

    Honestly, if (and this is a big IF) health care reform makes health insurance affordable for me, I doubt it will affect your life (in a negative manner) one bit. If it does, please accept my apology in advance.

    1. Heath care is a good thing. I just don’t agree with the way they’re going about it. I also don’t agree with who is in charge of health care, and I don’t like the idea of penalties for not having health care. Socialism’s goal is good, but it should originate from the people, not from government.

  5. “Heath care is a good thing. I just don’t agree with the way they’re going about it.”

    I agree.

    “I also don’t agree with who is in charge of health care, and I don’t like the idea of penalties for not having health care.”

    Who should be in charge, hospitals, insurance company’s? That’s who is in charge now – those who’s only goal is profit. The people who are in charge of it now, to put it simply, make boat loads of cash off of the misery and suffering of others. It is not working.
    As for penalties, the only way for health care reform to work is if everyone is covered and no one can be dropped. I don’t like penalties either, but like traffic, the only way it can work is if everyone follows the rules. And for some people, without penalties, they won’t follow the rules.

    “Socialism’s goal is good, but it should originate from the people, not from government.”

    I don’t disagree at all…in a perfect world.

    1. Hey Bob,

      Sorry to hear about the long rough patch you are going through. I just got a job after 6 months without one, and supposedly 290,000 jobs were created last month. Good luck.

  6. Thanks PiP. I have been managing to treed water but that gets emotionally exhausting after a while. Would be nice to have to turn down jobs for a change.

    Daniel, I think it is entirely possible for the new health care reform to work, and work well. What I don’t like about what has gone on is the lack of a public option, a non profit insurance plan.

  7. As a Canadian who is privileged to be covered under so-called socialist healthcare, I’d say Americans would be so much better off if you just get the new system in.

    I’m not one with many health problems, but I love the fact that, even though I am very low income, if I suddenly have some major health problem, I all I have to do is call for help, and almost all the costs are covered (maybe not ambulance fees). It is a very fair system that takes care of those who cannot take care of themselves, and also helps those who are in good health when things turn for the worst.

    Maybe a two-tier system might be nice, where if you can afford it you get faster service, but the free-health care is majorly beneficial.

    Why not ask more people from countries that have this system? I’m so grateful we have this in place in Canada.

  8. Note:

    I think politicians who label this as “socialist medicine” are really discrediting the idea. It’s really all propaganda. It’s not that bad! It’s great!

    Don’t be deceived by fear-mongering – just because you may get a new health-care system does NOT mean you’re getting more socialist or communist!

    Think of it this way: yes, the bill of rights may give you freedoms, but if you’re not ALIVE to exercise your rights, what good will it do you? Universal health-care helps more people live longer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s