This Post appeared originally on: January 20th, 2005
National Health Insurance? No way!
“National Health Insurance” is one of the primary tools used by a government to control her people. That alone is enough for we to be whole-heartedly against it.
Now, lets get something straight… I believe the Health Insurance Companies, in America, deserve what they get. They have been, in my opinion, abusing their subscribers for entirely too long. Rates have risen thru the roof at an undeservedly fast pace. Sure medical costs have gone up, but not at the percentages your insurance premiums have gone up. This has to stop. But National Health Care is a cure worse than the disease.
More government in our lives is more than just a little bit scary. Once National Healthcare is implemented, and don’t get me wrong, I believe some form will be, your life will be under the control of the administrators of that insurance.
For Instance, lets say you have an obesity problem. You have developed a heart problem as a result of the obesity. You need treatment for your heart. National Health Care says: “OK, we will not pay for the heart treatment until you lose weight”. Or, they provide all citizens with a chart, approved by the FDA, of the “Approved Foods” all citizens should eat. They make it clear that if you cannot show proof of having ingested those “approved” foods, on a regular basis, also decided by them, you Health Insurance is no good. You will not receive treatment.
Or, another example, you may be allowed to have one child only. It must be a boy. (See China.) If you choose to have another baby, after the approved ONE, the costs will come out of your pocket. Get the picture?
Now, this does not take into account the reduced quality of care we will receive from the medical community. Their hearts will not be it. After 8 years. or so, in school, to learn their profession and they will become “salaried government employees”. Need I say more?
The left is hell-bent on imposing such a system on the citizens of this country. That is another reason we must refuse them power, ever again, in the Congress. At least in numbers large enough to affect legislation.
National Health Care is a Socialist dream. It is also a Conservative’s worst nightmare.
We must be on our guard, for some form of National Health Care is about to raise its ugly head in the Nation’s legislature. It is time for conservatives to exercise their power and stop it in its tracks as we did the “Clinton Care” attempt in the ‘90s.
Lets get it done.
“Longstreet”
6 comments:
oh please it would help amrican companies compete globally, it would help the middle class and it would give the insuarance companies what they deserve, they would be out of the medical insurance business. You are an idiot and have no concept of how to build a better tommorrow for this country and the world. You need to be back in the 40's you moron.
Socialism has failed, and failed miserably, everywhere it has been tried. I would direct your attention to France today.
"Socialised Medicine" is just waht the name implies. Socialism. We want none of it in the US!
I take it from your post that you have not consider the differences between a national healthcare service and a national healthcare insurance. While I cannot speak on behalf of all proponents for universal healthcare coverage, I suspect that the main reason is not to invite Big government into the lives of people, but so that people, all people, will have access to healthcare. As it is now, healthcare is a commodity in the U.S. much like a car. The affluent can buy luxury cars, the poor can buy beaters. This is acceptable in our society, but what about when healthcare deals in terms of life and death? Nor can we expect that U.S. healthcare policy will continue in it's current form. Why? Because of the economic self-interest at the heart of every organization. With everyone looking out only for themselves, paralysis and malfunction result.
I do not doubt that the number of specialists would drop off. However, drug company price gouging would no longer exist (compare the price of drugs in the U.K, Canada, and the U.S. - U.S. is always at least double the amount of the same drug somewhere else). People say taxes would be so much higher, however, the premiums and copayments would disappear and if we switched to a single, payer provider than the administrative costs and overheads that each 50 states pay out would be eliminated.
I am often called a conservative, a part of the moral right because of my religious beliefs, however, I do hope and will continue to work for a national healthcare service or insurance.
Thank you, Mr. Smith, for your resoned remarks. I disagree, profoundly, with you, but I respect your belief and I thank you for commenting in the manner of a gentleman.
Your are welcome, sir, to visit this site, and comment,, at any time.
Please visit again.
Longstreet
What is wrong with the people having the same coverage as our representatives in congress or the president? If we can't have what they have Remember they work for us, why should WE pay for it for them and their families. Health coverage is right in there with promote the general welfare, it is in the nations interests to keep it's citizens healthy. As a Christian you should ask yourself truthfully what position would
Christ take on it.
I am not one for government controlling everything. However, in this case, the market has been given its chance, and failed - except in the form of extortionate insurance premiums and outrageous insurance company profits, not to mention pharmaceutical price-gouging.
Calling all forms of national health insurance "socialism" is a mistake. By definition, it is only "socialism" when the government owns all means of production. The only places I can think of that are like that are Cuba and North Korea. Not Canada, not the UK, not France, not Australia.
It is illogical to postulate that national health insurance will lead to "government" taking over all other areas of our life.
It is also illogical to believe that national health insurance in the USA must be a direct import of another country's system.
I live very near the Canadian border. I can tell you that Canadians are not coming over in droves to our two hospitals. I can also tell you that no Canadian I have talked to would trade what they have for what we (don't) have.
I am a clinical psychologist in training, and I have a personal stake in this. No way would I want a client/patient to go without services because s/he cannot afford it, nor because of arcane insurance company pre-existing condition clauses.
If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always got. We have to do something new.
Post a Comment