I realize this is going to fall on deaf ears, but option is defined as “the power or right of choosing” or “the act of choosing” http://www.dictionary.com if you’d like to look it up yourself. I’d also like to point out that I have waited much longer to see either of my individually selected, private insurance provided health care providers than I ever have in a government building. Of course, that’s anecdotal, but I’m not anywhere near the only person that it’s true for. And, my mom’s cancer was treated by government employees at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences and she got fantastic care, even though it was a government institution and her health insurance came from my dad’s state government job. But hey, those things don’t really matter so long as there are scathing, slanted videos like this and its opposing video from the celebrities. But it won’t be noticed that I called this video’s opposition scathing and slanted too. I just couldn’t resist trying.
The argument for requiring health insurance is similar to the argument for requiring liability insurance on cars. It’s not perfect, but requiring health insurance allows for lower rates and less backed up emergency rooms. It also is a measure to protect the rest of the public from communicable disease. It’s analogous to how your liability auto insurance protects me from being responsible for damage you do to my property.
Also, Robin, could you show me where it is in the bill that they can imprison you? I have not read that in the bills that I have perused, but it’s totally possible that I’ve just missed it.
Kristi, you are comparing car insurance to health insurance? If I don’t have a car, choose not to drive, do I HAVE to get car insurance?
Let me give you an example of Govco “competition”. Say I open a resturant then, right across the street, Govco opens one. How in the world can I compete with them when they can operate at a loss, forever? If I try to operate at a loss, I go out of business yet Govco and keep on and on and on.
THAT is not competition. That, my friend, is the death of capitalism.
You know, that would be a valid point if it were actually comparing apples to apples. See, you can choose not to have a car, but what if you damage my car with your body (I’m not making this up. A friend of mine has a very large dent in her car because of an 8th grade boy’s butt. Apparently things like that happen at the school she used to teach at all the time.) you are responsible for the damage to my vehicle whether or not you choose to have a car or drive. In the same way, I’m not responsible for you choosing to be healthy, but you shouldn’t get to infect me OR drive my costs up by having no insurance and clogging emergency rooms with non-emergent cases. And yes, I realize that perhaps you can make the point that “well, Emergency Departments shouldn’t see people who present with non-emergent cases.” The point I make to you in regards to that is that the symptoms for so many serious, emergent conditions are relatively benign. It also really is difficult for many people in many places to afford private insurance. I had private insurance for a while in grad school in Arkansas and it was relatively reasonably priced (actually, it was excellently priced) but then I moved to Oklahoma. It’s not the same set-up here and it’s extraordinarily expensive, despite my status as a single, healthy non-tobacco using female. I’ve grown bright enough to realize that just because something is affordable in one situation for one person or family, it is not necessarily that for everyone. And yes, I realize that I CHOSE to move to Oklahoma, but some people don’t ever move and have the same problems. I realize that you specifically aren’t clogging the emergency room with non-emergent conditions. I was using the general you.
It would also behoove you to not use the “death of capitalism” as an argument with me. I think I’ve made it quite apparent that I don’t believe that capitalism is always the right thing in every situation and I believe that it is in fact not the right thing when it comes to people’s lives and livelihoods. You should make arguments that will actually affect the person with whom you’re arguing.
SHOW ME WHERE. If you can’t show me, I can’t believe you. Just telling me that you say it’s true does nothing for me. SHOW ME WHERE. I took the time to show you where I got the definition of option from, you show me where you are getting this information.
Kristi, I think this is the problem with our Govt and our country. Freedom is being taken away a little each day. Take seatbelts. If I choose to be a complete idiot and not wear one, that is MY choice. I don’t need the Federal Government coming in and making my choice for me.
Now, you can use the old strawman argument that not wearing seatbelts drives up insurance rates if you want but it will not work. The fact is, the Government should NOT be in the business of regulating prices. If you use that argument, that is exactly what they are doing.
Concerning capitalism, yes, I don’t think it is a cureall for every single thing however, for 95% of things it is. I can show you example after example where, if the market was left alone, it would be correct itself or whatever is going on AND I can show you were more Govt intervention actually made things worse, not better. The fact is, the resturant example above cannot be denied. You cannot argue that the example is wrong. It’s not. It is factually correct.
Concerning Rolands point about the car insurance, if you use your example, I need to have sidewalk insurance too because I might damage your sidewalk by dropping the bricks I was holding. The fact is, why should I be required, by law, to buy something when I can just pay for it? If I choose to pay for something, I should be allowed and not fined. That is what freedom is all about.
I’ll look for that section unless Roland posts it first.
What I find amazing is that many people have no moral problem with demanding money, by force, of people so they can turn around and give it to others. How in the world can that be right? Morally or constitutionally?????
Car insurance and health insurance are two seperate things entirely so I wouldn’t argue that one. I won’t even bother with that one.
Kristi, about your moms cancer treatment.(btw i wish her and you the best of luck. It’s tough seeing someone in such a bad condition. God Bless) The fact that she received treatment in a government building by government employees means nothing as long as we remain in our current healthcare system. The doctors she was treated by aren’t currently under the same burden they would be in a socialized medicine system. Not to mention the fact that all the medications, equipment, and tools they used were most likely developed and distributed by private industry.
The name public option is just a cover. All current “public option” bills in congress and the senate have provisions that place high taxes on private insurance and pharmaceutical companies and require the immediate and unquestionable demand for medical records, with which they can mandate just about anything on the person of which the medical records apply.
Here is the URL to a page Roland posted a while back that you might find interesting: