Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Me: Small-government libertarian. I am fiscally conservative and have an extreme distaste for income redistribution and socialism.
But, I find myself supporting Obama's health-care plan. I never thought that it would come to this. Hear me out:
1. We already have socialism in American health care with the Medicaid and Medicare programs. If you are old or poor and you go into the hospital your bill will be paid for by the federal (and individual state) government.
2. When people have coverage they are more likely to go in for checkups which means that a lot of diseases will be caught earlier. Diseases in earlier stages are much easier and cheaper to treat. It is potentially cheaper to pay for people's health insurance than it is to allow them to get really sick and get on Medicaid and Medicare (which we pay for anyway).
Let me make an analogy. You have a wife and two kids and everybody in your family has a car. You are the only one who works - you are paying all of the associated costs with these vehicles. You can choose to put $75 a month into basic maintenance on these vehicles which will help prevent big problems or you can choose not to. Admittedly, the $75 a month is an expense that will cause you to lose money in the short-term. But, imagine if you don't put in monthly maintenance on the vehicles and two years down the road your wife's care engine blows up because of it. You now have an $8,000 bill. It would have been cheaper to spend $75 a month.
Of course my ideal would be the complete abolishment of Medicaid and Medicare. It view these programs to be un-Constitutional. But, this will never happen because this country does not have the political and public will to let some old and poor people die. So, Obama's plan is the lesser of two fiscal evils. The lesser of two evils sucks, but it is better than the greater of two evils.
2. When people have coverage they are more likely to go in for checkups which means that a lot of diseases will be caught earlier.
This is double edged sword because you have a lot more use of the services, some will even abuse it. Health Insurance has gone way beyond what it should be for and is why it costs so much.
This is double edged sword because you have a lot more use of the services, some will even abuse it. Health Insurance has gone way beyond what it should be for and is why it costs so much.
I admit it is possible that the whole thing might end up costing more money than envisioned and it might not work well. But, at first glance it appears as if it could.
A relative (very much against Obamacare, etc) had a 'ah ha' moment the other day about this issue.
He had occasion to go to the county hospital (taking a relative). He told me how appalled he was at the number of people waiting to be seen. He also gripped about how it costs him (through property taxes) money for these 'freeloaders' who have no insurance.
(mind, said relative is a Vet and so has access, if he wishes, to the VA clinics; he also has been on Federal disability for the past 15 years (starting in mid 30s) for depression or such (although he can work on his house, etc, when he wants) and so has Medicare coverage).
Well, of course I mentioned that if these people did have insurance through the Health Care Reform act, then 1) they would no longer have to jam the county hospital; 2) the cost of treatment would pass to the insurance companies; and 3) his property taxes could (in theory) go down.
Me: Small-government libertarian. I am fiscally conservative and have an extreme distaste for income redistribution and socialism.
But, I find myself supporting Obama's health-care plan. I never thought that it would come to this. Hear me out:
1. We already have socialism in American health care with the Medicaid and Medicare programs. If you are old or poor and you go into the hospital your bill will be paid for by the federal (and individual state) government.
2. When people have coverage they are more likely to go in for checkups which means that a lot of diseases will be caught earlier. Diseases in earlier stages are much easier and cheaper to treat. It is potentially cheaper to pay for people's health insurance than it is to allow them to get really sick and get on Medicaid and Medicare (which we pay for anyway).
Let me make an analogy. You have a wife and two kids and everybody in your family has a car. You are the only one who works - you are paying all of the associated costs with these vehicles. You can choose to put $75 a month into basic maintenance on these vehicles which will help prevent big problems or you can choose not to. Admittedly, the $75 a month is an expense that will cause you to lose money in the short-term. But, imagine if you don't put in monthly maintenance on the vehicles and two years down the road your wife's care engine blows up because of it. You now have an $8,000 bill. It would have been cheaper to spend $75 a month.
Of course my ideal would be the complete abolishment of Medicaid and Medicare. It view these programs to be un-Constitutional. But, this will never happen because this country does not have the political and public will to let some old and poor people die. So, Obama's plan is the lesser of two fiscal evils. The lesser of two evils sucks, but it is better than the greater of two evils.
Am I crazy?
Do you see forcing the American consumer to buy a product (insurance) to be Constitutional???
Do you favor the IRS controlling the administrative leg of the health care bill as acceptable???
I admit it is possible that the whole thing might end up costing more money than envisioned and it might not work well. But, at first glance it appears as if it could.
Want to know what Obamacare will look like? We already have the case study in Massachussetts. And it's not pretty.
Costs more than expected. Doesn't work well. There's little, if any, in Obama's plan to prevent the very same issues that Mass has seen. We'll simply see it on a much, much larger scale.
All one has to do is study the European system, and they can 'read the book' on this scheme. It will not work.
What is so difficult to understand about the fact that if you have more people taking from the system than are contributing to it, it will eventually fail? It is like spinning the wheel of a bicycle with all your might, it will spin, and spin fast, but it will slow down each revolution, eventually it will stop. This model that the Democrats forced on America will not succeed in the end, but will cost our children, and our grandchildren dearly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's fate is evident already
