"After my sixth divorce, I started to wonder if it was me?" Greg Allman
Feel free to call Linda Douglass and turn me in!
The whole concept of a government "option" giving people more "choices" is the most misleading part of the Obama plan.Why? Because the government "option" is only an option to USE the plan. It is not an option to PAY for the plan. We will all be paying for this so-called "option" whether we USE it or not. That's not a pure option.This entire healthcare proposal is based on the premise that private insurance is gouging the public and that a public managed solution will be run altruistically and efficiently by government. I'm amazed that anyone with a brain believes that.But let's say the government can run the health care system more altruistically and efficiently than private insurance. I say go for it. Let people voluntarily BUY INTO a non-tax-subsidised government plan. THAT WOULD BE A TRUE OPTION. If the government would be so great at it, it would not need tax subsidies. People would be climbing over one another to use this utopian plan.But noooooooooooo! The plan the dems want would be tax subsidized. Making it non-optional IMO. It would be like the government charging $1000 tax a month from each household in Cincinnati and giving it back to each household as a $900 Kroger-only voucher. It's your right to shop at Remke's but you can only use the voucher at Krogers.People might not like Kroger's but the tax/subsidy combo would basically make the Kroger the only "option", since my grocery money has been converted to vouchers. Kroger, with a captive market could allow quality to go down and prices to rise, just enough to keep most customers, and retain a hefty profit. Remke's, even with lower prices and better service, would go out of business.THIS IS WHAT OBAMA WANTS. Don't fall for this crap.
Post a Comment