Tis the Season for Government Healthcare

My best friend is constantly losing her cell phone.   She called me the other day and said, "Vanessa, since I lost my phone, I was able to get a brand new plan!  My plan will allow me to have unlimited daytime minutes for a flat rate of $49.99!"  

I started thinking about cell phones before they were the craze.  The first cell phone plan I had, I received 300 anytime minutes for $29.99.  You remember, right?   The plans became better as more and more companies began competing for the businesses of consumers like you and me.   The prices of plans went down, the quality of  cellular phones went up, as the coverage rates became more competitive. 

Ah!  The joys of the free-markets!

The free-markets drive the prices of goods/services down whenever there is an abundance of options for the consumer.  I am going to write that again to make sure it marinates.   The free-markets drive the prices of goods and services down whenever there is an abundance of options for the consumer.  This is why now, depending on where one lives, many people (like my best friend) can get cell phone plans for $49.99 for an unlimited amount of minutes.  All it took was one cell phone carrier to come up with a brilliant idea and the rest of the companies followed suit to make sure they could keep the existing consumers and solicit the business of new consumers on the markets.

I know, I know...what does this have to do with health care?

Obama and his liberal homies want to offer Americans a government "option" for health care.  Some experts believe that companies will drop the private coverage that they have for their employees, eventually forcing their employees to get the government "option" instead.  It's mind boggling.  Just last year, Medicare trustees warned about a significant dearth in funding for
the second year in a row!   Don't get me started on Medicaid.  One of my coworkers was complaining about her knee pain.  I asked her if she thought about getting surgery for it, but she said Medicaid won't cover it.  A few weeks ago one of my liberal coworkers was going through the Medicare website to help her retired parents find coverage for some services.  After being on the Medicare website for over an hour, she finally looks at me and says, "I think they make this website complicated on purpose!  They make it difficult for people to navigate and find the answers to their inquiries on purpose!"  I just looked at her and nodded my head.  I didn't say anything at the time, but I was thinking, "And this is what you and others like yourself want for EVERYONE else?"

I've been in doctor's offices where most of the patient's receive government health care.  It's not pretty.  The quality of health care and the service is different. 

You wanna know what the benefits of federalism are?   I'll tell you: If one state tries something and it fails we have the option of moving to another state.  Hence the reason why conservatives believe in limited federal government.  The states are free to govern as they wish so long as they don't contradict the laws of the constitution.  Which brings me to my next point: Hawaii tried giving Universal Children's Health care Coverage.  They dropped it after a few months.  They dropped it because the people who could afford health care for their children stopped paying for it to get the "free" government sponsored coverage.  This bankrupted the system.  You can read the article
here.

Oregon has state sponsored health care.  I promise I am not making up what you are about to read.  Conservatives such as myself don't have the luxury of making unsubstantiated claims.  Anyways, the state of Oregon cover's assisted suicide but their "health care" plan doesn't cover certain forms of "life-prolonging" cancer treatments.  Sadly, you can read the following article
here.

I think that the states should have some form of tax-payer subsidized health care coverage for children, the disabled, and other wards of the state.  However, if you are able to work and take care of yourself, our government should create incentives to drive the costs of private health care costs down so everyone can afford it.  The American people are invested in quality and affordability not another bureaucracy telling us how we can and can't receive health care.

Government subsidies don't make things cheaper.  There is a strong, positive correlation between government subsidies and an increase of prices.  When the government control's that which should be left to the private sector, and they don't allow market forces to drive prices down through free and open competition- the consumers suffer. 

Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Kennedy, Rangel and co. don't want their children on Medicaid.  So, ask yourself, why would they want that for you and your posterity?

 del.icio.us  Stumbleupon  Technorati  Digg 

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this entry.
Comments

  • 6/10/2009 1:00 PM Beri Bek wrote:
    Abortions will be covered. Planned Parenthood sat in on that, but no Pro-Life people were in attendance. I thought Birth was a part of life and should be included in Health Care.
    Reply to this
  • 6/18/2009 8:49 PM Cecily wrote:
    My son and I had Medicaid for about a year because we could only afford a single policy for my husband (through his workplace). Never again - we squeeze every penny for a family policy now. My public aid doctor prescribed me an opiate, insisting my knee pain was arthritis, which I knew darn-freaking-well it wasn't (turned out, when we got insurance, that I'd ruptured a bursa, and a week of anti-inflammatories fixed it up - I'd been in agony for almost a year). Our son's doctor wasn't incompetent, just nice and clueless - it was his staff who drove me to distraction. The worst paperwork mixup we had was when we were sent to a specialist two hours away without the CT scans the specialist was supposed to be reviewing.
    Have the whole country receiving that kind of healthcare? I guess it goes with the socialist goal of everyone being equally miserable.
    Reply to this
  • 6/18/2009 10:19 PM Cecily wrote:
    My deepest apologies if I post this comment twice - the first time I didn't have javascript enabled.
    I wish those in favor of government healthcare had to spend a year on public aid before voting on anything. And not just waiting hours to be seen for a cold, they should have some actual health problem to deal with. My son and I had Medicaid for a year after he was born because we could only afford insurance for my husband, and of course our income relied on his health. I couldn't work, we had no money, so we figured, what the heck, it won't be forever, and it can't be that bad. Can it?
    My public aid doctor gave me opiates, which are powerful nasty things, claiming my knee pain was arthritis. I knew it wasn't, every athlete friend of mine said I'd torn or ruptured something, but I couldn't get her to consider anything other than arthritis, so I juggled "do I want my knee to be able to bend, or do I want to be able to carry the baby without getting dizzy?" for eight months until we finally could afford insurance. Our NEW doctor said I'd torn or ruptured a bursa way-back-when, and it had never healed properly. No tests to figure that out, just moving my knee and asking me how it started. The previous eight months of constant pain and the opiate prescription could have been avoided with a week of anti-inflammatories if that doctor had gotten a clue. I still see red thinking about that.
    My son's doctor was nice but also clueless. My son was born three months early, and this was supposed to be a pediatrician experienced with preemies, right - who couldn't figure out why my son's swallowing problems required rice cereal in his bottles. He pretty much signed stuff for Early Intervention and stayed the heck out of the way, so he wasn't a hindrance but he wasn't a help either. The staff at the public aid clinic were the worst part - at one point, they sent us to a specialist two hours away without first mailing the CT scans the specialist was supposed to review.
    And this is the level of healthcare Obama wants for the whole country?? I have this conversation - nay, this impassioned argument - with my liberal friends every time they start talking national healthcare. Obama, Pelosi, etc, don't have a stake in this - I do. THEY won't have to make difficult decisions if their insurance rates go up - we will. Been there, done that, don't want to go back. I am not surprised to learn that Medicaid would rather cover painkillers than surgery.
    I LOVE YOUR BLOG.
    Pardon my venting.
    Reply to this
  • 7/8/2009 5:18 AM carpal tunnel syndrome wrote:
    Good post, but have you thought about Government Healthcare before?
    Reply to this
  • 7/8/2009 5:20 AM carpal tunnel syndrome wrote:
    Wow, I never knew that Government Healthcare. That's pretty interesting...
    Reply to this
  • 7/13/2009 3:37 AM carpal tunnel syndrome wrote:
    Good post, but have you thought about Government Healthcare before?
    Reply to this
  • 7/13/2009 5:04 AM carpal tunnel surgery wrote:
    Wow, I never knew that Government Healthcare. That's pretty interesting...
    Reply to this
  • 10/28/2009 6:03 AM vino biodinamico wrote:
    Wow, I never knew that Government Healthcare. That’s pretty interesting...
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments will be subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Enter the above security code (required)

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.