- Nov 13, 2009
- Reaction score
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
What more facts need be provided? Your thread, "A Short History on Health Care," (see post #11) provides many of the answers you seak. The additional linked articles within the OP discussing issues related to Medicaid/Medicare cost, state budgets where both of these social services/health care programs are concerned, rising health care costs within the private sector and the added cost to the insured that is attributed to emergency room care for those who can't afford health insurance should be all the counter-argument you need.
Nonetheless, my argument isn't merely about cost. It's about fair and equal access to health care. How do you provide health care to all without further infringing on the rights of others? As long as health care is viewed as personal entitlement - something that only those who can afford to obtain it are the only one's who can have it - health care will never be equally accessible or fairly administered. Dr. Johnson, for example, states firmly that only the rich can afford "the best quality health care money can buy" while everyone else is typically left with...whatever's available?
If you are employed by a major corporation, state or federal/civil service, chances are you have decent health care coverage. If you were fortunately enough to retire or are elderly, chances are you're on Medicare or COBRA. If you're poor, you likely receive Medicaid or some form of SSI-suppliment. You'd think that these options would cover all Americans. Unfortunately, there are many who fall through the cracks. What option do they have when they or a loved one gets sick or injured?
The irony here is those who, like myself, are employed and do receive health care coverage via their employer aren't the people I hear complaining the loudest against the health care mandate. It's people who can afford "the best quality health care money can buy", i.e., promiment political figures, some on talk radio, corporate CEOs, renouned figures in entertainment, etc. The health care mandate shouldn't trouble us because we have health care coverage. And should my employer drops health care coverage as an employee benefit in 2014, I can still go to my state's HIE to acquire coverage...assuming my state doesn't opt out. But what if it does? Now, where do I go?
I could pay out of pocket directly doing as CWpill suggests and buy into a health savings account which personally I think is a good idea. But even this doesn't solve the problem for those who are unemployeed or even if they are, such as young adults, whose income may not be enough to allow them to buy into such a health savings plan yet they, too, fall through the cracks. What happens to them? Many now are (or soon will be) allowed to remain on their parent's insurance until age 26. Not a bad compromise. But these are people - college students mainly - who would still be on their parent's nickle anyway because many are still in post-secondary education. Still, raising this age limit was the right thing to do. But what about the others?
What do you do to ensure everyone has access to affordable health care and that such coverage is fair and equal to all? As unfair and unconstitutional as many people believe the health care mandate to be - and to an extent I agree that it shouldn't be the government who makes this decision - until a better way is established to ensure all Americans have fair and equal access to health care, I believe the health care reform law was the best compromise we could hope to achieve...
...until a better way is implimented.
The question becomes, "What way is better?"
(BTW, you're welcome... )
It was a lousy compromise. True liberals should probably be more upset with the trash legislation that was passed than conservatives. The reason I say that is when people still find health care unaffordable, and that costs rise even faster than today what is to be done then. Obama and the dems in congress will be preening about passing transitional legislation which they know it is not. Just a couple of examples as it is getting late:
- We have never been given a breakdown of who these 30 million are. We know that some are young workers that do not feel it is worth paying the company charge. The fine of less than $700 is materially less than they would pay for insurance.
- Insurance companies will not be able to refuse people with pre-existing conditions. However this lame congress placed no limit on what a company can charge for this type of policy. So sure if you have a chronic disease theoretically you can get insurance but at what cost.
- If the numbers of uninsured are correct, this would add about 10% more demand for certain services. There is little or no provision to increase the supply of health care providers. So will there really be medical facilities for all these newly insured.
- When Bush put his medicare drug provision in their was rightful howling from the left about not making sure we competed on price. This bill for some reason failed to fix that.
If there was going to be a real health care bill that true progressives want it is a one payer system.
It is sad that progressives have to appaude something they know is junk.