I had a brief text session with a friend recently and it reminded me that my last post did not address the larger issue. Specifically, my last post was about politicians playing games with the sole intent of 'gumming up the works.' in Washington. What I failed to note was that it was the political drive for 'Universal Healthcare' that brought us to this point.
Ms. Fluke's testimony regarding contraception was not really about contraception. No, it was about free access to a 'service' since the service is now being provided by our government. I have heard numerous arguments regarding women's healthcare as opposed to men's healthcare and why the disparity in the services provided. This morning I stumbled across the article that highlights my concerns from the beginning. The article is all about access to men's ED medications and vasectamies.
I think the combination of Ms. Fluke's testimony and the lawmakers trying to manipulate the public's consciousness regarding healthcare is serving as the perfect example of what I feared would happen. The government is no longer talking about providing healthcare to the citizenry - instead they are focused directly on how to manipulate the masses. You don't believe me? Prior to Universal Healthcare (even though it still has not been implemented), we did not have discussions of forcing citizens to undergo additional procedures if they wanted access to a specific drug/service. Now that the government is the only supplier - we see the unintended consequences of such a plan. Unintended is being nice as I personally believe this was the plan all along.Very directly the government can tell us what steps we must take to receive the medication or service that we need. We must meet certain criteria before being allowed to have the procedure or drug and our ability to argue or disagree has been muted.
Let me be clear - I am opposed to government run healthcare. I am opposed to the government providing for ED medication and services. I am opposed to the government providing for contraceptive services. I am fully in support of private companies building products and services and inviting private citizens to purchase and subscribe to those. Please remember - the Patient Protection and Affordable Care act is not about providing healthcare it is about access to healthcare. What discussion would we be having right now if the government was not taking over access to healthcare? The economy? Education? Defense of our nation? Immigration? Drugs? Safety of our children?
Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts
Showing posts with label healthcare. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Friday, December 18, 2009
The incremental slide
The debate in Congress over the 'Health Care' bill has forced me to look at all that is and has happened in this country during my brief life. Looking at the debate and contrasting that to other differences in our society I think I have come to the simple conclusion that both sides of the aisle are more focused on incrementalism towards a goal they disagree with than the subject at hand.
On the political right, conservatives fear more than anything else that Socialism is the targeted direction and health care is just the next big hurdle. They may be right and looking back at the incremental steps made towards that end can be seen through the action of their opponents. Name a single thing that you do on a day to day basis that is not directly controlled, taxed or manipulated by the government ....
On the left, giving in on any portion of the debate will lead to safe ground where the opposition can build (or take away) from something they hold dear. Example: Covering abortion under the massive health care overhaul. Any argument about federal spending for this by the right is immediately responded to by stating that we can't interfere with a women's right to choose. After all, giving in on this topic might just lead to an overturn of Roe v. Wade.
The arguments around a single payer system are vast. The one that I continue to be amazed by is where the folks on the left are 'for the little people' and that we need to deliver services to those that can't afford to pay for themselves. I am a BIG proponent of helping out, donating time and money, looking out for those less fortunate and insuring that nothing stands in the way of someone living up to their own potential. However, the argument of taking more and more from one class of people to a different class of people with the threat of prosecution is not looking out for anyone. Plain and simple it is extortion and theft. Even if 100% of the additional money collected went directly to those less fortunate - doing so through threat of prosecution is a direct attack on the liberties of another.
On the other side of the argument.... we have some in our society who forget or fail to acknowledge that their good fortune comes by the grace of God. That their good fortune has been given to them for a reason and that we are all just here temporarily. Yes, hard work and commitment are the tools that many of them used to gather their wealth but they were given the opportunity by a power higher than themselves.
While this post is not nearly complete - I want to close with a small example of how much trouble the current direction by our government is causing us. Consider the data last reported (2008) shows that we have roughly 19.7 million government employees in the United States. This includes state and local along with military and federal. While they don't all make the > $100,000 that was recently reported .... if we estimate that each employee makes $70,000 (unburdened costs) a year. I am using simple math for estimating and the numbers could be much more extreme if we dig in to it in more detail. How many non-government employees does it take to pay their salaries? If the non-government employee made the same $70,000 and were taxed at 15% and the entirety of that tax went to pay direct salary payments to the government employee ..... it would take 131,500,000 citizens just to pay the salaries.
For those that claim the government pays the employees not Joe Public. Please remember that the government doesn't have anything. The government does make anything. The government does truly sell anything. When the government prints more money the only thing that changes is the volume of money. This in turn has the adverse affect making the money in your pocket worth less.
Back to the example - what happens if 10% of the public were to lose their jobs? In an effort to jumpstart the economy the government creates new jobs - but they are government jobs, what happens to the model. In order to pay for government employees taxes are raised to 16.7% and the government can then hire an additional 39,450 employees. All this while 13.15 million of the previous 131.5 million workers are now out of work. THIS MODEL SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK! Remember this when the Census workers are on the payroll and we are told that unemployment just dropped dramatically.
When the government takes and takes and demands more and more from its citizens it no longer works for the people. Instead the people are working for the government. Abraham Lincoln closed the Gettysburg address with "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. " Let us not forget those words and do the right thing for God, country and each other.
On the political right, conservatives fear more than anything else that Socialism is the targeted direction and health care is just the next big hurdle. They may be right and looking back at the incremental steps made towards that end can be seen through the action of their opponents. Name a single thing that you do on a day to day basis that is not directly controlled, taxed or manipulated by the government ....
On the left, giving in on any portion of the debate will lead to safe ground where the opposition can build (or take away) from something they hold dear. Example: Covering abortion under the massive health care overhaul. Any argument about federal spending for this by the right is immediately responded to by stating that we can't interfere with a women's right to choose. After all, giving in on this topic might just lead to an overturn of Roe v. Wade.
The arguments around a single payer system are vast. The one that I continue to be amazed by is where the folks on the left are 'for the little people' and that we need to deliver services to those that can't afford to pay for themselves. I am a BIG proponent of helping out, donating time and money, looking out for those less fortunate and insuring that nothing stands in the way of someone living up to their own potential. However, the argument of taking more and more from one class of people to a different class of people with the threat of prosecution is not looking out for anyone. Plain and simple it is extortion and theft. Even if 100% of the additional money collected went directly to those less fortunate - doing so through threat of prosecution is a direct attack on the liberties of another.
On the other side of the argument.... we have some in our society who forget or fail to acknowledge that their good fortune comes by the grace of God. That their good fortune has been given to them for a reason and that we are all just here temporarily. Yes, hard work and commitment are the tools that many of them used to gather their wealth but they were given the opportunity by a power higher than themselves.
While this post is not nearly complete - I want to close with a small example of how much trouble the current direction by our government is causing us. Consider the data last reported (2008) shows that we have roughly 19.7 million government employees in the United States. This includes state and local along with military and federal. While they don't all make the > $100,000 that was recently reported .... if we estimate that each employee makes $70,000 (unburdened costs) a year. I am using simple math for estimating and the numbers could be much more extreme if we dig in to it in more detail. How many non-government employees does it take to pay their salaries? If the non-government employee made the same $70,000 and were taxed at 15% and the entirety of that tax went to pay direct salary payments to the government employee ..... it would take 131,500,000 citizens just to pay the salaries.
For those that claim the government pays the employees not Joe Public. Please remember that the government doesn't have anything. The government does make anything. The government does truly sell anything. When the government prints more money the only thing that changes is the volume of money. This in turn has the adverse affect making the money in your pocket worth less.
Back to the example - what happens if 10% of the public were to lose their jobs? In an effort to jumpstart the economy the government creates new jobs - but they are government jobs, what happens to the model. In order to pay for government employees taxes are raised to 16.7% and the government can then hire an additional 39,450 employees. All this while 13.15 million of the previous 131.5 million workers are now out of work. THIS MODEL SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK! Remember this when the Census workers are on the payroll and we are told that unemployment just dropped dramatically.
When the government takes and takes and demands more and more from its citizens it no longer works for the people. Instead the people are working for the government. Abraham Lincoln closed the Gettysburg address with "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. " Let us not forget those words and do the right thing for God, country and each other.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Positive thoughts on Obama and the health care debate
Again, I have been quiet. Nothing nice to say - don't say anything.
That has changed. The debate on health care in the United States has a tremendously positive side to it that I am thankful to those in Washington for. What could a generally conservative individual have to say about this situation that was positive? Quite simply - this single item has brought many people to the party. Yes, people are investigating the information that Washington has been putting out and they are discussing it.
For a society that was told that President George Bush was the most devisive president in recent history, the current environment which we live in has seen a new champion. I think it fair to conclude that the current elected body (House and Senate combined) along with President Barack Obama, have divided this country further and quicker than any that I can remember. This time, the people are fighting back. Not a physical fight - but a political one. People are informed at an ever increasing rate and they are discussing the topics with a renewed vigor. All the while - they are realizing that we have been lied to. Yes, lied to by our government and backed up by the media.
I also wanted to thank President Obama for showing me how to view expenses and what to do when they are not focused on what I care most about. President Obama has shared with us that 16% of our GDP is spent on health care and if left unchecked it could move to 25% very quickly. So, I went back and looked at the family funds to see where our money is spent and if it was in-line with what we want to be focused on. Not surprising - we are at odds with some expenditures and I am now looking at ways to reduce those that I don't feel are appropriate percentages of the family income. For starters - my family spends more on state income tax than car payments, car insurance and gasoline .... combined. My family spends more on Social Security (that program that won't exist when I actually get ready to use it) and Medicare than we do on food, clothing and entertainment. Can I opt out of those? The family household spends more money on taxes (not including the sales tax, property tax, gas tax, utility tax and all the other taxes that are 'built in' to the price of everything we consume) than our mortgage and private school bill - COMBINED.
Yes, my family decided to send our children to private school. This is an expense that we opted to pay and believe it is the best use of our money. Unfortunately, we don't seem to get a vote in where the majority of our money is actually going. In the end - I could choose to move to a less expensive home, drive a less expensive car, elect to purchase less expensive insurance (life, health, automobile, property), donate less to my church, use my time to make more money instead of volunteering or even contributing less to my 401K plan .... but those are my choices. With a government focused on spreading the wealth, and burdening my children and their future families with debt - I have no choice.
But then again, I do. I vote. I also will exercise my rights under the Constitution. Specifically, my right to free speech.
That has changed. The debate on health care in the United States has a tremendously positive side to it that I am thankful to those in Washington for. What could a generally conservative individual have to say about this situation that was positive? Quite simply - this single item has brought many people to the party. Yes, people are investigating the information that Washington has been putting out and they are discussing it.
For a society that was told that President George Bush was the most devisive president in recent history, the current environment which we live in has seen a new champion. I think it fair to conclude that the current elected body (House and Senate combined) along with President Barack Obama, have divided this country further and quicker than any that I can remember. This time, the people are fighting back. Not a physical fight - but a political one. People are informed at an ever increasing rate and they are discussing the topics with a renewed vigor. All the while - they are realizing that we have been lied to. Yes, lied to by our government and backed up by the media.
I also wanted to thank President Obama for showing me how to view expenses and what to do when they are not focused on what I care most about. President Obama has shared with us that 16% of our GDP is spent on health care and if left unchecked it could move to 25% very quickly. So, I went back and looked at the family funds to see where our money is spent and if it was in-line with what we want to be focused on. Not surprising - we are at odds with some expenditures and I am now looking at ways to reduce those that I don't feel are appropriate percentages of the family income. For starters - my family spends more on state income tax than car payments, car insurance and gasoline .... combined. My family spends more on Social Security (that program that won't exist when I actually get ready to use it) and Medicare than we do on food, clothing and entertainment. Can I opt out of those? The family household spends more money on taxes (not including the sales tax, property tax, gas tax, utility tax and all the other taxes that are 'built in' to the price of everything we consume) than our mortgage and private school bill - COMBINED.
Yes, my family decided to send our children to private school. This is an expense that we opted to pay and believe it is the best use of our money. Unfortunately, we don't seem to get a vote in where the majority of our money is actually going. In the end - I could choose to move to a less expensive home, drive a less expensive car, elect to purchase less expensive insurance (life, health, automobile, property), donate less to my church, use my time to make more money instead of volunteering or even contributing less to my 401K plan .... but those are my choices. With a government focused on spreading the wealth, and burdening my children and their future families with debt - I have no choice.
But then again, I do. I vote. I also will exercise my rights under the Constitution. Specifically, my right to free speech.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
