The vote last Thursday ruling Obamacare in it's entirety was a travesty for many reasons.
The more obvious reason is that it destroys the greatest healthcare system in the world. Before you go arguing about the cost of healthcare in Sweden, or anywhere else for that matter, notice that I said the BEST healthcare system in the world, not the cheapest. Other countries may be able to fudge it so that it looks cheaper, but the fact of the matter is, that when it comes down to it, if it's an option, their citizens come here when lives are on the line.
Nobody wants to wait for their turn to get treated for a potentially fatal condition in a country with Universal Healthcare, because who knows if you can hang on long enough to get. When it takes six months to get that surgery you need, because of the lack of doctors, equipment, and money, and you've been given, say, four to six months to live, that doesn't work for you.
I realize that this isn't universal healthcare, but it's close. It's still government involved in your healthcare decisions. I've heard it pointed out that we don't want to introduce the compassion of the IRS, and the efficiency of the Post Office into our healthcare. I'd come up with my own way to put it, but I don't think there's a way to put it better. What bloated government program makes things better?
The president said that this was not going to involve a tax increase. That was said up until it's constitutionality was before the Supreme Court. Turns out it's unconstitutional to fine people for not purchasing a product, so now it is a tax. Sure, you really should have health insurance anyway. It's kind of a responsibility, for the most part. But that's not the point.
You shouldn't drink alcohol. Does the government have a place to tell you that you can't? You shouldn't eat junk food. Does the government have a place to tell you you can't have Doritos? Or have a Caramel Macchiato?
Which brings me to my next point.
Since this ruling has declared that the federal government can tax you for not purchasing a product, it now opens the door to be able to coerce you into buying pretty much anything.
I've always been against the concept of a sin tax. I think it's ridiculous to make someone pay significantly more just because they have a bad habit, and they're easy to gang up on. But this is far worse.
If they can tax you for not purchasing health insurance, then why can't they tax you for not buying a house, since home owners typically make a greater contribution to society? What's to stop them from taxing Vegans from not purchasing meat and dairy? The government already insists that it meat and cheese are good for you. What's to stop dirty politicians from making back door deals with corporations for campaign contributions, and then taxing people for not purchasing that corporations products once their in office?
A company could easily create, say, a TV that uses 3% less energy than a regular TV. The definition is about 10% lower, and the price is 10% higher, but they can claim to be environmentally friendly. They make a deal behind doors with a crooked politician, and make a large campaign contribution. Now that this politician is in office, he can push to create a tax on anyone that doesn't purchase this TV. He can have it apply even if you don't own any TV.
If you think that's far fetched, it won't be as time passes. This health care law would have been considered far fetched ten years ago. But this is the path we're on.
Consider this example. Rather than using an example with a demonstration of the wrong path, I'll use a right path, so that all of my readers can be on the same page, conservative, or liberal. The abolition of slavery. There have always been those that want to see it abolished, but because the world was so desensitized to it, these people were a minority. Abolishing it was obviously the right decision, but it wasn't something that was going to gain popularity over night. Abraham Lincoln himself said that blacks were by no means equal to whites, but should still be free. On top of that, he offered to allow certain people to keep slaves under certain conditions. This was the first step, and even as sad as it was, it was very unpopular.
Today, if I were to shout out that the abolition of slavery was wrong, and that we need to bring it back, I'd be crucified. And rightly so. Point is that we had to set out on that path to ever get there. We think now that taxing people for not buying all these different products would never fly, but if we allow one thing, we give them the power. So why couldn't they in five years? Or ten years? Or fifty years? One hundred years?
When we give up a little ground here, and a little ground there, eventually we're so off track, we can't even remember where we started.
The solution is to take that ground back, and make repairs so that it can never happen again. The first step is to repeal Obamacare, in it's entirety. After that, the commerce clause needs to be amended to specify that the government can in no way penalize a private system for not buying a product simply because he exists. We can fix this, but it's going to take action. Real action.
The more obvious reason is that it destroys the greatest healthcare system in the world. Before you go arguing about the cost of healthcare in Sweden, or anywhere else for that matter, notice that I said the BEST healthcare system in the world, not the cheapest. Other countries may be able to fudge it so that it looks cheaper, but the fact of the matter is, that when it comes down to it, if it's an option, their citizens come here when lives are on the line.
Nobody wants to wait for their turn to get treated for a potentially fatal condition in a country with Universal Healthcare, because who knows if you can hang on long enough to get. When it takes six months to get that surgery you need, because of the lack of doctors, equipment, and money, and you've been given, say, four to six months to live, that doesn't work for you.
I realize that this isn't universal healthcare, but it's close. It's still government involved in your healthcare decisions. I've heard it pointed out that we don't want to introduce the compassion of the IRS, and the efficiency of the Post Office into our healthcare. I'd come up with my own way to put it, but I don't think there's a way to put it better. What bloated government program makes things better?
The president said that this was not going to involve a tax increase. That was said up until it's constitutionality was before the Supreme Court. Turns out it's unconstitutional to fine people for not purchasing a product, so now it is a tax. Sure, you really should have health insurance anyway. It's kind of a responsibility, for the most part. But that's not the point.
You shouldn't drink alcohol. Does the government have a place to tell you that you can't? You shouldn't eat junk food. Does the government have a place to tell you you can't have Doritos? Or have a Caramel Macchiato?
Which brings me to my next point.
Since this ruling has declared that the federal government can tax you for not purchasing a product, it now opens the door to be able to coerce you into buying pretty much anything.
I've always been against the concept of a sin tax. I think it's ridiculous to make someone pay significantly more just because they have a bad habit, and they're easy to gang up on. But this is far worse.
If they can tax you for not purchasing health insurance, then why can't they tax you for not buying a house, since home owners typically make a greater contribution to society? What's to stop them from taxing Vegans from not purchasing meat and dairy? The government already insists that it meat and cheese are good for you. What's to stop dirty politicians from making back door deals with corporations for campaign contributions, and then taxing people for not purchasing that corporations products once their in office?
A company could easily create, say, a TV that uses 3% less energy than a regular TV. The definition is about 10% lower, and the price is 10% higher, but they can claim to be environmentally friendly. They make a deal behind doors with a crooked politician, and make a large campaign contribution. Now that this politician is in office, he can push to create a tax on anyone that doesn't purchase this TV. He can have it apply even if you don't own any TV.
If you think that's far fetched, it won't be as time passes. This health care law would have been considered far fetched ten years ago. But this is the path we're on.
Consider this example. Rather than using an example with a demonstration of the wrong path, I'll use a right path, so that all of my readers can be on the same page, conservative, or liberal. The abolition of slavery. There have always been those that want to see it abolished, but because the world was so desensitized to it, these people were a minority. Abolishing it was obviously the right decision, but it wasn't something that was going to gain popularity over night. Abraham Lincoln himself said that blacks were by no means equal to whites, but should still be free. On top of that, he offered to allow certain people to keep slaves under certain conditions. This was the first step, and even as sad as it was, it was very unpopular.
Today, if I were to shout out that the abolition of slavery was wrong, and that we need to bring it back, I'd be crucified. And rightly so. Point is that we had to set out on that path to ever get there. We think now that taxing people for not buying all these different products would never fly, but if we allow one thing, we give them the power. So why couldn't they in five years? Or ten years? Or fifty years? One hundred years?
When we give up a little ground here, and a little ground there, eventually we're so off track, we can't even remember where we started.
The solution is to take that ground back, and make repairs so that it can never happen again. The first step is to repeal Obamacare, in it's entirety. After that, the commerce clause needs to be amended to specify that the government can in no way penalize a private system for not buying a product simply because he exists. We can fix this, but it's going to take action. Real action.
No comments:
Post a Comment