Opposing obamacare is not opposing reform!

Published on September 19, 2009 By taltamir In Politics

People who support obama-care are acting as if there are two and only two sides right now.

1. On the one hand there are those who wish to reform a broken system

2. On the other those who wish to oppose reform because they like the status quo, are stupid, evil, or just ignorant (ignorant means don't know any better; and is not an insult).

They go on and on trying to prove how "bad" things are right now by giving personal experiences, or second (or greater) hand stories of people who had bad experiences. Or just pointing out current faults.

They think "well, illegals can already get free healthcare by going to the emergency room" is a valid counterargument to "under obamacare, taxpayers will pay for illegal immigrant's healthcare"

Note: I am all for allowing healthcare to illegal immigrants... as long as they pay for it like everyone else!

What they fail to realize is that almost EVERYONE thinks that the system as is has problems and that it needs fixing, it is a question of HOW to go about fixing it.

And currently congress is pushing forth obamacare, which does NOT fix any of real issues, while causing many many more issues, and more severe issues.

It is a terrible piece of legislation, ill thought out, more than 1000 pages long (and every medical practice or facility is going to need to read it and comply with all 1000+ pages of it), will cost an extra trillion dollars per year (never liked the whole 10 trillions for 10 years nomenclature), and so on.

The very congressmen who are voting on it admit that they haven't actually had the chance to read it, nor would they get the chance to. There are many specific issues found within it (for example, on page 16 it BANS private healthcare). And it is a terrible piece of legislation that will do no good.

What we need is sensible reform, not going from something bad to something worse.

I would actually LOVE to see a government based health insurance as an OPTION... as long as it is:

1. NOT paid for by tax money, but by the income from its members

2. Optional!

Of course, pigs will fly before that will happen... And I simply do not trust the government to NOT funnel money to any such insurance company if it was created. (which brings us back to square 1)...

Comments

Nitro Cruiser

on Sep 20, 2009

It doesn't suit the Democrats to have this fought as a straight up policy issue. It has to be racial. It has to make the opposition seem less-worthy in some way, so their opinions are considered less valid.

taltamir

on Sep 20, 2009

alright, by editing the HTML source of the post, I was able to get it to properly space out lines (replaced div with p). So now it is actually readable.

CharlesCS

on Sep 21, 2009

What we need to do is make sure we make everyone understand that we are not against reform, that we are simply against what the Democrats currently consider good reform. Plain and simple.

taltamir

on Sep 21, 2009

yes. This is my new approach to the problem.

Likewise, we do not disagree that there is global warming, but that it is HUMANS that caused it, it was merely a part of natural cycles which has, btw, now passed

Nitro Cruiser

on Sep 21, 2009

Likewise, we do not disagree that there is global warming, but that it is HUMANS that caused it,

You mean cavemen didn't cause the Sahara forest to dry up into the Sahara desert?

Leauki

on Sep 21, 2009

I would actually LOVE to see a government based health insurance as an OPTION... as long as it is:

1. NOT paid for by tax money, but by the income from its members

2. Optional!

That would be a very efficient model because it uses government's already existing capabilities to organise things (no joke intended).

In that model, government's role would be to act as, how would a liberal put it, a "facilitator".

taltamir

on Sep 21, 2009

Yes... a not for profit facilitator providing a service to the population while allowing healthy competition (by not subsidizing it with tax) to allow private alternatives as a checks and balance system (if everyone opts out of the not for profit government system to go on a for profit private system, then the government system must be doing something horribly horribly wrong; which can be pin pointed and fixed).

Of course, the government has a tendency to subvert its institutions... for example the "income tax" institution has been subverted into wealth redistribution with "tax refunds" to people who pay no taxes at all.

Leauki

on Sep 22, 2009

True.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!