I, for one, am relieved that Congress was not able to pass Obamacare before their recess. Hopefully, it's an indicator that it may not pass at all. *crosses fingers* But that doesn't mean we need to let up to prevent this from happening. In fact, it may be the BEST time to really put the pressure on our representatives. Many of them will be holding town hall meetings to find out what their people want from them. Some of them will run away to Saudi Arabia - maybe they think it's easier to deal with Saudi Arabians than their own people? I don't know, but it gives me a laugh that they are less scared of them than their own constituents. Must mean we are really putting the pressure on them.
I have been watching this issue like a hawk. And if it passes, I think I will just break down into tears. I suffer from migraines and have asthma. I don't want a government goon telling me that they aren't able to treat me because my ailments are chronic and too expensive. I actually had a liberal co-worker tell me that although my migraines were painful, they were not deadly and I was young, so it was no big deal. Granted, he had a point - painful but not deadly (directly). I could survive. But suppose for an instance, somehow I find out that it's not just migraines, but a brain tumor. I would like the ability to choose treatments if I needed. I would like that ability regardless even if it is *just* a migraine. CHOICE. That's all I want. I don't care if you think that I'm young enough that I can handle it. I don't care if you think it's just a matter of dealing with pain, nothing more. It is my choice to do something about it or not.
I have worked hard to take care of myself. I don't currently get health insurance through my job, so I bought private health insurance. There are people on the other side of this debate that say you cannot get private health insurance if you have chronic illnesses -hence, the need for reform. And I call B.S. on that argument. Yes, I had to search for one (there are search engines online to help you do this - it maybe took an hour) and yes, I have to pay a little bit more than someone else my age, who does not have asthma or migraines. Big deal. Why should we pay the same? I'm a higher risk - I go to the doctor more, and statistically, I am more likely to go to the ER. It's not rocket science, ya know?
And further more, no one should have to pay more money for ME to go to the doctor. That's ludicrous! It's my health, and therefore my responsibility. And likewise, I'm not going to pay for someone else to go to the doctor, either. And yes, you are darn right that I'm selfish and don't care about those poor, uninsured children. You have to be selfish sometimes, otherwise you'd never get anything done for yourself. It's the parents' responsibility to insure their own children. And you CAN afford it - just drop cable TV and the cellphones for everyone in the family. Or get a 2nd job. Find a way to afford it. Mine's only $90 a month.
But enough about me. If universal healthcare snakes it's way into our society, I'll be okay. I'll find some way to manage on my own, and as my co-worker said, it's not going to kill me. The people I REALLY worry about are people our parents' age. I don't want some government goon knocking on my parents' door, telling them that they have lived a long enough life and it was their "patriotic duty" to not take away health care from some younger person who "needs" it. Plus, my Dad has diabetes. He's in the same chronic illness boat, but he's in his late 60's. So not only are they going to tell him that his diabetes is too chronic and too expensive to treat, but he's also too old. Without constant treatment, monitoring and medication, you CAN die from diabetes. Universal healthcare would be a death sentence.
We can't let this happen. Everyone of us either has or knows someone with a chronic illness. And don't tell me that I'm misinformed or am fear-mongering. There's no cure for these chronic illnesses and they are costly. There are only a certain amount of doctors. If you add 30 to 80 million (depending on who you listen to) to the health care pool - how are the same number of doctors (getting paid the same or less) going to take care of more people? Physically impossible. You have to boot someone to make room for the new people. So how do you make room and keep costs to a minimum? Get rid of the costly ones - the elderly (60+, according to the gov't) and the chronically ill.
Here's an example I posted awhile back (with some tweeks and elaboration), but it bears repeating:
"Socialized Disney World"
The government takes over Disney World. The decide that it's immoral for Disney to make a profit and to charge for entrance into their park. After all, it's not fair that some people aren't included, just because they are poor. Everyone deserves to go to Disney World. So they raise taxes just a little bit to cover the costs. Doesn't matter because the people who thought they deserve to get into Disney World free don't pay taxes in the first place, so only the "evil rich" are paying anything extra and they deserve it anyways.
People head there in droves. Their daily visitor count increases four times over. Before they started letting people in for free, it was so crowded that you could only ride 5-6 rides in a day. Now, you can ride 1 ride in a day, if you are lucky. The wait time for the newer, cooler rides is much longer - it's a waiting list that you need to sign up for before you get to the park. No big deal, right? It's "free" and even though you might have to wait, it's worth it.
But there's one group left out in the cold - the people who have a season pass. They purchased it before the government took Disney world over. They bought it because it would be more cost-effective to purchase it for multiple visits, rather than just one visit. They thought they might go multiple times, so it seemed worth it. But the government decides that these passes are now illegal. After all, they can't afford to have people make multiple visits to the park in a year.
Well, now some of the rides start breaking down. Especially the newer rides, because they are cooler and more fun, hence more people ride them than they other ones. Unfortunately, Disney still has the same number of mechanics that they had before the government took over, and they aren't getting paid anymore to fix more rides. In fact, they are getting paid less than they were before because they require longer hours at the same rate. Their job is never-ending. They fix the same rides over and over, they work longer hours trying to keep up with the rides always breaking down. Plus, they cannot keep up with the demand - rides are neglected and become unsafe - they get sued more frequently.
But next door to Disney World is Universal Studios. They are still privately owned. Their workers work less hours for more pay. Disney World workers jump ship and go to work for Universal. Disney world is still over-capacity, most of the rides are not working and they are now understaffed. Increase quantity of the public leads to a decrease of the quality of the rides. Something has to give due to the increase of people. Those that can afford it, go to Universal to have fun, even if it is a multi-$100 price tag to get it.
Do you see now? It sounds heartless to exclude people, but if you don't, then everyone ends up losing and even more get excluded.
(Canada's own healthcare website - see for yourself. A few quick points I noticed in reading it (reposted from an older entry)-
1) "Canada's health care system is a group of socialized health insurance plans that provides coverage to all Canadian citizens."
Everything is distributed equally. Meaning that if one guy had had $10 and another had a million, you'd pool their money and divide it between them. Yeah, the 1st guy makes off like a bandit, but the other gets screwed. Ditto with a healthcare system like Canada's. So what? They're rich, lucky, fortunate, etc... right?
And p.s. to anyone who likes to fight over terminology-the website itself says it's "socialized".
2) "Canada's health care system is the subject of much political controversy and debate in the country. Some question the efficiencies of the current system to deliver treatments in a timely fashion, and advocate adopting a private system similar to the United States."
If their system was perfect, why would they debate over it and want to promote a system like ours?
3) "The shortage of doctors and nurses in Canada: Some feel that Canada's health care system does not adequately compensate health care providers. This has led to a "brain drain" of Canadian doctors and nurses, which have left Canada to pursue careers in the United States. Attracting and keeping skilled medical workers is a priority if Canada is to be able to provide proper medical services."
And there ya go - if we were to change our system, we would probably have a shortage of doctors too. Not only would the quality go down because suddenly everyone was allowed in, but the doctors wouldn't even stand for it and they would leave - decreasing the quality even more.
http://www.hermancain.com/news/press-opinion-072709.asp (a GREAT read! if your representatives are holding town hall meetings, print these questions off and take them with you)