Health Care Reform: Immoral and Unjust

Under the government plan you would not have the option to not have insurance and you would have to pay the federal government for your coverage.

And yes, then everyone would over consume to get their money's worth.

Good blog.

Curt, you make it so clear and simple to understand. Thank you for taking the time!

I think the 40 million itself is an overstatement anyway. I wonder if they include illegals and those who don't want health insurance.

Great read here. Will you be posting if your Congressman responds? Would like to know if you get a thoughtful response or "form letter" like I always get.

Just a personal thing, this isn't about "reform," this is a "takeover" of another private sector issue. Guess those who push this nonsense don't recognize their own lack of intellectual honesty given many of the same people push "privacy" relative to abortion, etc.

Thanx for the post, Curt.

And neatly stated.

But in the Liberals eyes, your comments make too much sense. Also, the Liberals want a "Nanny State". This way the Liberals control every aspect of our lives, including who we "vote" for.

The Drug Addled, Syphilis Ridden, America Hating, Leftover Hippies KNOW that their wastrel lifestyle WILL lead to a MASSIVE die-off of their numbers SOON and this is their LAST CHANCE to enact their Socialist Commune Bravo Sierra Philosophy into Public Policy.

was the standard form letter. Sorry. He is a Republican, and says he supports Healthc Savings Accounts and a way for small businesses to pool coverage for their employees.

While those are

Ho hum.

(Sorry, I got interrupted in the middle of that comment)

While HSA's and more flexibility for small businesses are good things compared to the status quo (to which I say "ho hum"), and GREAT things compared to government takeover or mandatory insurance purchase, the politicians simply aren't facing up to the reality of the problem: the reason the "numbers don't work" (as we hear some conservatives say) is because of the way people work. We act in our own best interest, and the lazier people are, the more they succumb to that temptation: "getting their money's worth." And pooled payment of health costs is no diffeent from any other "unlimited" consumption for one price, even if the price is thought to be free (those who pay no income tax think government helath care is "free").

Like eating at an "all-one-price" buffet...I always over-consume! And health care involves choices as to how much you will consume, it is not merely a random level of need that is totally beyond your control.

taught me that those who "get" things
with little or no effort are the ones that use the most. Greed plays a big part. Many people on medicaid wants every single thing they can get, whether they need it or not; therefore tilting the scale to over consumption of services and inflated cost of same. You are exactly right, Curt. Very good post.

this country, just a shortage of people who want to pay for what they get.
It is not the cost per service that goes up, particularly, it is the cost to the "pool" of payers (whether that be premium payers in the health insurance plan, or tax payers in the Medicaid or other government-funded plan) as a whole that goes up. And it is a vicious cycle for those paying premiums: as my premiums go up (because of over-consumption by others in the pool) I feel more justified in "getting my money's worth" so I am tempted to over-consume also...which drives up the average cost in the pool, which makes everyone else want to get their money's worth, and so forth.
I am starting to believe that even private insurance should be available/used for catastrophic needs only.

Great writeup, Curt! A lot of the healthcare package is devoted to wellness. How about just staying healthy? Got a tummy ache? Take pepto bismol or alka seltzer! Got a cold? Eat chicken soup! Got appendicitis? Go to the hospital, STAT!

No one should be mandated to buy into another giveaway to the havenots paid for by the haves and the healthy. Families should not be forced to purchase coverage if they do not want it! How can prez think he can force this one people???? We must step up, put our feet on the brakes and stop this amabOtrain to destruction of our economy and our culture.

The link below you've probably seen:
http://www.breitbart.tv/pelosi-on-obamacare-we-certainly-ha ve-the-support-of-the-american-people/

Mrs.P says they "certainly have the support of the American people" (for the healthcare bill).
Are the politicians really that out of touch with us or are they just telling us what they want us to think?
I sent seven faxes to politicians Friday on this bill. I'm sure I'll get a few form letter back!
Keep telling the truth, Curt! Thanks!

What statistics did you use to form your conclusions and where is the documentation?

Do you know what is immoral and unjust, when a family loses a parent or parents lose a child because that parent couldn't afford the procedures to check for and monitor dangerous illnesses while those who have insurance claim giving such insurance is immoral and unjust. Of course, what is just under immoral and unjust when anyone promotes that. I know people who lived in countries with socialized medicine and they don't live immoral lifestyles and they were very happy with the socialized medicine.

If a woman robs her unborn child of a healthy environment inside the womb in order to have an abortion, we would rightfully call that murder. And yet when some make rob those who do not have enough money of a healthy environment in which to live, that some would call that moral and righteous, that isn't called murder. We can see which side of birth these some people are on.

Finally, since when are all causes of death due to lifestyle choices?

Welcome back, caday5.

Which of my conclusions are you taking issue with and need documentation for?

There is no cure for death, we all suffer from it. There are many health needs that are not based on choice, but I think you would have to agree that there are many, many that are based on personal choice, from reckless disregard for safety to more subtle preventative medicine to eating habits. While truly unavoidable health needs may be appropriate to "pool" it is immoral (you seem to think that word only applies to sex? right and wrong is far broader than that my friend) to force thse who choose to live healthier lifestyles to subsidize those who choose not to.

I really and sincerlly hope that your family does not have anything bad befall you but I do think it is better to have health insurance than not. If you are well off enough to have an annual physical along with proper cancer screenings and care if the worse ever happened, good enough and it's not for me to judge.

I'm generally supportive of the Obama plan but as long as your aganist SS and Medicare I can't fault your logic. That's my main problem with certain conservatives who enjoy those government programs that are being paid by young guys like me (22)who know there is 0 chance of getting those programs ourselves.

an open mind as you participate in the work force, watch human behavior, see how your opinions evolve.

Thanks for recognizing consistent logic. I am not really that much older than you--probably about half of my working years behind me since I started very young, and I am opposed to (and don't expect to get a dime from) SS or Medicare. My opposition to Obamacare is not based on what I personally will or won't get, but what I believe objectively to be just.

As a responsible husband and father, I do have my family in a form of "insurance alternative" program to protect against catastrophic health needs. But checkups? Routine illness care? Those are on me, yes, as they should be for everyone. Can't afford your own maintenance? Then you can't afford to eat out, have a cellphone, own a computer with internet access, put gas in your car, take a vacation, or have a flat-screen tv. People who enjoy those kinds of things CAN afford their own checkups; it is just a matter or prioritizing. I suspect you have bought into the idea that others should provide for your needs so you can spend on your "luxuries."

What you have (earn and can spend) is generally proportionate to what you contribute to the lives of others (that would be the value of your work, for instance). If you contribute significant value to others, then you can expect high value (pay) in return. The more you contribute to others, the better you can "afford" luxuries like internet service AFTER paying for your own basic necessities like food and routine medical.