That's not so rough. Dying when it is your time caused by events that you at least attempted to have some control over is far superior to having no control and the Government choosing when it is your time.
I don't necessarily have a problem with the idea of government health care. I have a problem with the execution. If anything, public education is an example of how government can't handle the oversight of something that we consider to be a universal right. Nobody questions whether every child should be able to go to school, but these days our public schools are spiraling further and further out of control. Huge student to teacher ratios and lower standards are pumping out some of the worst classes we've seen. Why wouldn't this happen with public health care? High patient to doctor ratios and poor quality of health care seems to be very likely in this scenario. When people are talking about school vouchers so they can leave public school because of a low quality of education, definitely leads me to believe that we are making the same mistakes with Obamacare and programs like Cover Oregon.
Look, I was against Obamacare for all of the reasons that you and Maxie are stating. That said, it's the law of the land...at least for now...and I don't think it's right to ding people for taking advantage of the program if they qualify. This isn't a true free market society and virtually all of us take advantage of some form of government program that saves us money. If you own a house and take advantage of the write-off for home mortgage interest to lower your taxes does that mean that people who don't own a home should get to rag on you if you spend your subsidized tax savings on a new car or plasma TV? I don't see the difference between the two situations.
I get what you're saying, Maxie, but I think the ship has long since sailed on government subsidies in their seemingly endless varieties. Now that healthcare is a part of what people expect government to provide them with, I don't know that you can push that genie back in the bottle. Of course, the bottle may eventually get smashed on the rock of government insolvency, but in the meantime the Democrats will have succeeded in buying themselves a lot of votes.
Of course it has. But I get to choose on which side I will be. I can be with the majority and accept things the way they are, or I can be a vocal minority. I am old enough, financially secure and no longer need to give a shit, so I can be part of the latter.
Far be it from me to try to deny you your right to rant. Actually, I rather enjoy your takes and generally find myself agreeing with you more often than not.
Having a kid really changed me. I used to be much more of a Hobbsian , "Life is tough; I've got mine, screw everyone else" mindset. Now, I think about the future of this country, the future my son will inherit, and I shudder. I have always wanted people to have hope, opportunity and have desired a meritocracy. However, what I see now is two worlds: A world where people are connected, that can obtain benefits based on who they know and the assets their previous generations have garnered; and a world where that is impossible. It was difficult to make the jump from one world to the other, but it was possible with enough hard work. That bridge no longer exists. If I'm honest, I was born in one world and now live in the other. My son will be just fine. But I find the idea that future generations won't have the same opportunities I had--no matter their abilities--intolerable. Bottom line, I want back the America in which I was raised, not this bastardized version of sclerotic Western Europe. And I will fight for it the rest of my days.
Myself, having just spent 6 weeks in England I was pretty surprised at how many small-business types I met. Two of my wife's best friends' husbands were successful small business owners, and they seemed pretty optimistic about the future. Both had two kids under the age of 10. It never even occurred to either that this was somehow an impediment to them starting a business. Meanwhile, my brother, who is very similar to these two guys, would never think of starting his own business because he's so desperate for health care for his own kids. He's a smart guy, but he works a pretty lowly job because it offers a decent health care plan. I asked these guys (one owns an ad agency, the other a wedding photo business, both started about 10 years ago) if they thought it was particularly onerous to start a business there in terms of regulation. They shrugged and didn't really seem to understand the question. Obviously, this is a small anecdote and hardly concrete proof. But I could definitely see myself starting a business there, just as I did here. And frankly, it might be less stressful.
I don't think anybody will argue with you that the cost of healthcare makes starting your own business or keeping your small business and employees more risky and difficult. Unfortunately, the ACA doesn't help in this regard.
I get what you're saying. But on the other hand, I don't think we should just accept something because it's been made law. Since you asked about the mortgage interest deduction... I personally think there is a big, big difference between having my effective tax rate reduced on the money that I worked during the year to earn, compared to the government giving me somebody else's money. Some think that the government reducing tax rates is the same as increasing government spending. I don't believe that. Using your food stamps example... does it bother you if / when you see somebody buying beer with cash and then using food stamps for their groceries?
That commercial is a hipster annoying piece of shit. Why not just fucking explain what the fuck you do. Nobody understands this and you spend the entire minute saying nothing but the website name. Some marketing genius thought "brand awareness," which is why I often hate marketing geniuses. Everybody is aware Obamacare is coming. A useful commercial would try to explain what will happen.
I'm not sold on the ACA, but it can't be worse than what we have now. My hope is that both parties can iron out the problems with it. It was never meant to be the Final Finished Product, but a starting point for a more sane system. Much like Medicare and Medicaid have evolved over time. I guess we'll see.
I'm not convinced that the ACA won't be worse than what we have now. Obviously it depends on how you value the different aspects such as cost, performance, wait times, etc, etc.
[video=youtube;43R_7UKvy2Y]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43R_7UKvy2Y[/video][/QUOTE] Based on this video, one would have to assume that only black people are going to benefit from Obamacare, but maybe that was the point?
Thank you for providing links that agree with my thesis. We used to be the more mobile society. Gee? What has changed? And for the record, the jump between classes isn't quite as far in Western Europe, as there isn't much difference between poor and middle class. However, almost no one is born poor and becomes wealthy in Europe. It used to be a fairly typical story here, now it's becoming more and more rare.
I can virtually guarantee health outcomes will be worse than what they are now. Fewer physicians, higher costs for administration and bureaucracy, more time spent doing paper work all equals to less time administering medicine and more time and money dealing with the system.
