I never thought I’d find myself agreeing with the ultra-liberal Kos on something:
My position on #HCR — kill it if it includes mandate. Strip out the mandate, then what’s left is inoffensive. Not reform, but inoffensive.
It’s still offensive, but Kos is being reasonable. The individual mandate is basically a government-forced transfer of wealth from every American to insurance companies. The insurance companies get to tax you for being alive!
Here's what I don't get. I'm not in favor of a health insurance mandate (I'm actually in favor of outlawing all employment based health insurance) but how is that actually any different than the amount paid in to Medicare; your health insurance at retirement?
Think about it. What does the government mandate you do with that first $100 paycheck you get from Taco Bell? Keep in mind that $100 isn't enough to buy groceries, pay rent or pay utilities yet the government says you have to start kicking in to a retirement fund they run (Social Security) and a Health insurance program for you retirement (Medicare).
Keep in mind, that leaves you with even less net pay than the $100.00 you started with (you're now at $92.35). Also keep in mind, that money your employer could have paid you with just got matched to add to your retirement account and retirement health care.
Again, I understand my libertarian brethren's resistance to additional governmental mandates. But, frankly, people who question how it's constitutional to mandate health insurance need only look at how the government already mandates insurance. Somehow a Supreme court found it to be constitutional; the same guys who made McCain-Feingold, Plessy v Ferguson, and Kelo all constitutional.
In mu mind the outrage should have been 40 - 80 years ago when the Supreme Court decided it would be the arbiter of what is constitutional and not the constitution itself.
1 comment:
Plus, is the "Public Option" really an option? The label "Public Option" has such a touchy, feely, choicy sound to it. But there will be no option regarding paying for it. We will be MANDATED to pay into the public plan, per your post Gordon. The only option is whether we use it.
In the old days the mafia extorted "protection" money from shopkeepers in the neighborhood so they would not be vandalized. Now, once protection money was paid, it was the option of the shopkeepers to use the protection services. So by the democrats' defintion, the mafia offered their own version of the "public option".
Someone please tell me how one would be more of an "option" over the other one.
Post a Comment