Posted by Anon at 12:03pm Sep 20 '09Because somehow we allow ourselves to debate end trivialities that are barely more important than syntax or grammar in regard to our actual beliefs.
For an honest debate see one like abortion or perhaps gay marriage. People are honest about that. They "feel" X way because they want to see young women have control, or see a the would-be infant have a chance. Things like that are hard to obscure in the way we do it with the health care debate. For the few people who say they are opposed to gay marriage because it would be too much on insurance companies to insure gay families,, or that perhaps the nation would suffer if they were given the tax form flexibility, well they just have no credibility. These are moral and world view decisions that have to be discussed at their roots.
The real issue with the health insurance reform is actually quite a large thing. It isn't as simple as just adding another layer of insolvency to the federal budget, or giving the woefully impoverished another bone. It's really a major reform to our nation as a collective person. Sure the personality of our country is a very fluid thing that should and will change with every new day. But there are a lot of things in the core of what we are (or wish to be) that should never change.
The US respects the rights of its citizens in a way that very few nations ever have or will. There are shameful examples of disregard, but our national spirit towards this end has not faltered in keeping our overall path towards that of respecting the natural rights we possess.
I don't want to get sidetracked, but it is fairly remarkable for a nation to be as stable as we are (oldest intact government in the world if I remember correctly) while still observing, and even acknowledging further, rights for citizens. This is a high order anomaly, historically speaking.
So you have to know by know that what I'm getting at is that reforming health insurance in the way that Democrats wish to is a high order reform on our type of person the US would be. Where we stand now in with our health care approach is a disgusting hodgepodge of confusion and contradiction. Competing worldviews have each won little battles from their respective trenches, while the only real winners have been large corporations who've managed to fund both sides in to doing their bidding reliably, with examples like beneficial regulations to destroy honest competition, or even tethering insurance to employers to keep customers from being involved in choosing care and thereby eliminating market forces from the would-be market.
So yes we do stand in a position were it's time for someone to take a clear stance and stop letting corporations and the back pockets of congressmen being the only winners here. We do need a direction and I even if I do disagree on where to go I do applaud anyone who at least agrees on with me there.
So now that I've said all the stuff that most people probably will find themselves agreeing with, now lets get to the conflict.
The thing about taking a strong stance and moving us in a clearly defined direction is you can't waffle anymore. Obama's biggest problem is that he's trying to pretend this isn't a huge moment in our history, and that it's even not a big deal, like a little tweak or something. Not so.
As Four, [private], and others have pointed out, reforming the system in the way that Democrats wish to affects many things beyond just the un(der)insured. Other things will have to change to accommodate this.
We'll have to concede yet more power to the government. Even people who may be religiously or morally opposed to advance health care will be "forced" to pay for insurance. It's a major loss of liberty to not have a say in how they want to handle their personal medical business.
Once everyone is conscripted in to the system it won't just make our problems go away. It will just make it easier for politicians to play god with them. So expect constant meddling with your insurance from Washington. Once Obama and Pelosi get their program they're not going to leave it looking good to chance. They will micromanage it to death.
Once we allow for the government to set the precedent that your health is not your responsibility, but a collectively shared one, that opens Pandora's box. This is the scariest part of this to me. Once you open it you can never close it again, at least not without lots of bloodshed. Once we accept this view we allow for essentially every bad habit unimaginable to be scrutinized by health cost police. And no, I don't want to sound like I'm playing my hyperbole fiddle here, because I'm really not. We're already on the verge of taxing potato chips to pay for god knows what, and actually are highly taxing cigarettes to pay for health care for children. I say this is immoral and repugnant, but what say majority? "They haven't come for me yet, so I'm happy, plus those other guys deserve it!"
And I'm going to have to finish this later. I need to get showered. Football is on soon.
For an honest debate see one like abortion or perhaps gay marriage. People are honest about that. They "feel" X way because they want to see young women have control, or see a the would-be infant have a chance. Things like that are hard to obscure in the way we do it with the health care debate. For the few people who say they are opposed to gay marriage because it would be too much on insurance companies to insure gay families,, or that perhaps the nation would suffer if they were given the tax form flexibility, well they just have no credibility. These are moral and world view decisions that have to be discussed at their roots.
The real issue with the health insurance reform is actually quite a large thing. It isn't as simple as just adding another layer of insolvency to the federal budget, or giving the woefully impoverished another bone. It's really a major reform to our nation as a collective person. Sure the personality of our country is a very fluid thing that should and will change with every new day. But there are a lot of things in the core of what we are (or wish to be) that should never change.
The US respects the rights of its citizens in a way that very few nations ever have or will. There are shameful examples of disregard, but our national spirit towards this end has not faltered in keeping our overall path towards that of respecting the natural rights we possess.
I don't want to get sidetracked, but it is fairly remarkable for a nation to be as stable as we are (oldest intact government in the world if I remember correctly) while still observing, and even acknowledging further, rights for citizens. This is a high order anomaly, historically speaking.
So you have to know by know that what I'm getting at is that reforming health insurance in the way that Democrats wish to is a high order reform on our type of person the US would be. Where we stand now in with our health care approach is a disgusting hodgepodge of confusion and contradiction. Competing worldviews have each won little battles from their respective trenches, while the only real winners have been large corporations who've managed to fund both sides in to doing their bidding reliably, with examples like beneficial regulations to destroy honest competition, or even tethering insurance to employers to keep customers from being involved in choosing care and thereby eliminating market forces from the would-be market.
So yes we do stand in a position were it's time for someone to take a clear stance and stop letting corporations and the back pockets of congressmen being the only winners here. We do need a direction and I even if I do disagree on where to go I do applaud anyone who at least agrees on with me there.
So now that I've said all the stuff that most people probably will find themselves agreeing with, now lets get to the conflict.
The thing about taking a strong stance and moving us in a clearly defined direction is you can't waffle anymore. Obama's biggest problem is that he's trying to pretend this isn't a huge moment in our history, and that it's even not a big deal, like a little tweak or something. Not so.
As Four, [private], and others have pointed out, reforming the system in the way that Democrats wish to affects many things beyond just the un(der)insured. Other things will have to change to accommodate this.
We'll have to concede yet more power to the government. Even people who may be religiously or morally opposed to advance health care will be "forced" to pay for insurance. It's a major loss of liberty to not have a say in how they want to handle their personal medical business.
Once everyone is conscripted in to the system it won't just make our problems go away. It will just make it easier for politicians to play god with them. So expect constant meddling with your insurance from Washington. Once Obama and Pelosi get their program they're not going to leave it looking good to chance. They will micromanage it to death.
Once we allow for the government to set the precedent that your health is not your responsibility, but a collectively shared one, that opens Pandora's box. This is the scariest part of this to me. Once you open it you can never close it again, at least not without lots of bloodshed. Once we accept this view we allow for essentially every bad habit unimaginable to be scrutinized by health cost police. And no, I don't want to sound like I'm playing my hyperbole fiddle here, because I'm really not. We're already on the verge of taxing potato chips to pay for god knows what, and actually are highly taxing cigarettes to pay for health care for children. I say this is immoral and repugnant, but what say majority? "They haven't come for me yet, so I'm happy, plus those other guys deserve it!"
And I'm going to have to finish this later. I need to get showered. Football is on soon.