Healthcare

The Anti-Free Healthcare argument is bullshit. It is like any other conservative argument...hypocritical, unsympathetic, irritating and just un-American. There are many more reason FOR it than against. So, let's take a look.

First, the conservative argument. Apparently, the United States is a "capitalist" country that shouldn't look to help the "lazy." If we look to define these terms, here's what we'll get: a capitalist system is "an economic system based on private ownership of capital" (capital=wealth in the form of money or property owned by a person) and lazy is "Unwilling to do work or make an effort." So, the question here? Does having healthcare 1) jeopardize American capitalism or unfairly help the "lazy?"

Here's the bullshit-free response, quoted directly from the bill itself. Under Sec.100(3)(b) "Insurance reforms-this division creates a new Health Care Insurance Exchange, with a public health insurance option alongside private plans" What's this mean? There will be public healthcare AND private healthcare. So, will private persons own their own companies, clinics, and for that matter, places of business? YES! So, as for the other question...who's actually eligible for the public option?


According to the bill, all those who are NOT eligible "for the benefits under title XVIII, XIX, or XXI of the Social Security Act," have no insurance with their employer (COBRA not included), are children, are sick (as per I 101(d)), or a spouse of someone who qualifies is eligible for public healthcare. Before we break this apart, let's look at the various titles from the SSA(1935, 1965). Title XVIII says all legal residents, citizens and aliens, who have "attained age 65" qualify for SS. Title XIX allows care for "a pregnant woman," "a child...under the age of 19...family income...does not exceed applicable income level," and " certain breast or cervical cancer patients." This doesn't mean these people don't have the right to public healthcare, but rather that there are no bullshit strings attached. 


So, are "lazy" citizens allowed free healthcare? The answer to this question is complicated...how "lazy?" Don't forget the tremendous amount of paperwork involved in filling for this kind of service. But, seriously, how can someone (like all my conservative friends) call others, who they don't even know, "lazy." Sure, you can have a dictionary definition like the one I shared with you, but how can you define it legally to apply it to the bill...I have no idea. You could say unemployed, but then an unemployed person, by the legal definition, must be looking for a job, so doesn't that mean he/she is NOT lazy, by the conventional definition? But, you could use the more obvious description and say that a lazy person is someone who doesn't work and is not "job-hunting." Do these people deserve healthcare?


Obviously, aren't they still American? As per the Constitution, this country was created to, in addition to other reasons, "promote the general Welfare." What does this mean? It is the responsibility of the American government to look after its people's welfare. Conservatives put all kinds of words into this, one being that it promotes a more socialist-type of economy and not a capitalist one. But, unfortunately, this should NOT hold any water. Sure, our system has developed into a non-socialist system, but here's the truth: our system must follow the Constitution before it listens to any type of change. Welfare should come before preserving a capitalist government. Also, economically speaking, I'm sure leaving these "below average incomes" to their facilities, our economy as a country will suffer. There won't be any difference between giving them aid and not giving them aid. Besides the obvious fact that their offspring will have the OPPORTUNITY, a very American thing, to succeed. And, yet, here's another thing: the government is supposed to be a Republic. Meaning the government is supposed to MEDIATE public opinion, not to reflect it. In other words, the government must look above our fleeting obsession with what the conservatives illogically call "capitalism." It should do what's constitutionally correct.


But, won't we have to pay taxes to support this bill? Sure, and this is a bullshit reason to oppose the bill. Just like we pay taxes to help unemployed people, we should pay taxes to support public healthcare-- you don't know when you'll be in that tight spot.


Here's some more irony. Socialized/free/public healthcare is such an American thing, except all the countries in the world have it, all but the one true Democracy: the United States of America. Damn conservatives!