There are six core reasons why Health Care is a bad bill. They are:
First, the number of Americans that need healthcare is not precise. The number of estimated Americans that need health care ranges from 30 million to 45 million. It is hard to accurately plan a bill without knowing how big the problem is you are addressing. Next, health care without going through an employer currently costs an average of $13,500 per family. This healthcare bill has not stated how much it will lower the insurance premiums. It is not a miracle bill by any means, but let’s be super conservative and assume it will reduce premiums by 50%. That will bring health insurance down to $6,750 per family. It is also relatively safe to say that the 30-45 million Americans that do not have healthcare are low income. Some are middle class people that cannot get health care because of pre-existing conditions, but by far the biggest reason for lack of insurance is affordability. Let’s take an immigrant couple making 30K a year. They make around 26K after taxes. They obviously can not afford to pay ½ of their income right now for insurance. But can they afford to pay nearly $7,000 for the new insurance? Can a family making 26K a year really afford to spend 25% of their income on health insurance, and live on the remaining $17,000? NO!! They cannot. It is tough enough living on 26K a year without insurance, but with this new bill, they will only have $17,000 to support their family. We all know this is nearly impossible. So if these people still can’t afford insurance, even after this bill, the number the Democrats advertised is clearly inflated. It IS the number of people uninsured, but it IS NOT the number of people the bill will help. The correct number is the amount of people making in between 35-50K that WILL now be able to afford health care, that pre-health care bill could not afford it. The people who still cannot afford it will end up bypassing the mandate with the tax discussed later.
Second, the cost of the bill itself needs to be touched on. The Office of Management and Budget said that the Iraq war would cost us 50 to 60 Billion dollars. How much does it actually cost? Well, so far it’s over 1 Trillion. The government can not be trusted with their numbers and projections, it cannot be argued. It happened with the bank bailout, and the auto bailout. The government has the financial discipline of Paris Hilton. It has no sense of price or value, and certainly doesn’t know when to stop.
Third, do we trust the government with this? The government takes over a failing auto company, deemed “too big to fail”. Even though its market share is at the top with 19%, followed by Toyota with 17.6%, and Ford with 16%, GM’s market share was expected to fall rapidly. Even through it was expected to fall, the government took over 80% of the company anyway. The taxpayers funded a 50 Billion dollar bailout. What has the company done since then? Nothing. Its market share still continues to plunge, while Ford prospers. That 50 Billion went really far. Social Security and Medicare are both bankrupt systems. Those programs themselves either need to be reformed, or else taxes rose for those programs, which nobody wants. If the government can’t manage these programs correctly and effectively, why do we trust them with everyone’s health care? Yes, it is still through private insurance companies, but the government has itself deeply intertwined in the industry. There is a difference between busting a couple of trusts such as in the early 20th century, and getting an entire industry wrapped around the government, catering every aspect to its laws and regulations. The government is there to provide a light framework in an industry, and let the companies then adhere, while letting them do what is in their business interests. They are not there to build a rigid structure full of rules and regulations, or new programs to govern an industry. Some of the only large companies that should cater to the government are defense companies, such as Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman. As any economics teacher would tell you, you do not mess with free trade or a capitalistic economy, and if you do, you better know exactly what you’re doing. It is hard to give a reason why we should trust the government with a trillion dollar program. IF, it in reality only costs a trillion dollars.
Fourth, the polls show that the American people do not support it. A CNN poll shows that 59% of people do not support it. Rasmussen, a very famous and reputable polling report recorded the following statistics:
1) 54% oppose and 41% support
2) 45% strongly oppose and 26% strongly favor
3) Of independents, 59% are opposed, 34% support
4) 57% believe health care costs will go up
5) 81% believe that health care will cost more than expected. No surprise there.
A FOX poll on their website shows that 65% of Americans say the bill will hurt them more than help.
If Americans will love this bill as Pelosi likes to say, why are so many state Attorney Generals challenging the constitutionality of the bill? This is only after a couple days! Sounds like America is a huge fan of the bill. (sarcasm)
With all of these stats in mind, is it worth passing the bill? Is it worth hurting 65% of Americans in order to help out 30-45 million, which we already established to be inflated?
Is health care even a human right? If it is a human right, we should be all over the glove providing people health care. Human rights are things such as right to property, right to shelter, right to equal protection under the country’s law, freedom of though, etc. We have fought for those rights in other countries for decades. We’ve heard of Containment, referring to communism and halting oppressive groups, but when did health care such a popular human, global right? The correct term would be it’s a national right. But don’t look for that in the Constitution, or the Bible, Koran or Torah, you won’t find it. It’s not a right; it’s a luxury that 90 to 95% of Americans can experience. 90% of Americans have cars. Is owning a car a “human”… I mean national right? In America, you almost need a car to get a job, have a family, buy groceries, and even go to the doctor. It wouldn’t surprise anyone if the Democratic government added a car tax to allow the “car less” 5-10% to purchase a vehicle. After all, we use our vehicles more than our health insurance, and vehicles typically cost more. Why not add a new tax and create a poorly calculated trillion dollar program to fund it? It’s identical to what we’re doing now. If we were out to spend a trillion dollars, we’d be better off giving everyone a car, than health care. I’m sure that’s what poor people would want because it provides them greater opportunities and is without a doubt more limiting. What can you accomplish without a vehicle these days?
Fifth, health care companies are losing out on customers. The whole mandate can be bypassed by paying a 2% income tax. Starting in 2015, the tax is $96 to go without insurance. In 2016 it moves up to over $100. Shortly after, the 2% tax rule is implemented. Now unless a person is really rich, they are better off paying 2% of their income and avoiding the new health insurance costs. They can go do their annual check-up and pay about $150 cash to get it done. If the Doctor tells them they are sick, they can then go buy insurance. The companies are mandated to take those patients with this health care bill. Why have insurance if you are a healthy person? We need to have insurance currently because we won’t be accepted by an insurance company if we wait until we are sick. With this bill, just wait until you get sick to buy insurance. Why waste the money? Even if someone without insurance gets into a major car accident and gets airlifted, the hospitals still have to take them. It’s unlawful for a public, or private hospital to deny someone in an emergency situation. Unless you are in a coma for a very long time, it still benefits you to buy the insurance once the incident happens, rather than the years leading up to it. All of the surgeries are not done at once; a patient has plenty of time to get covered in order to avoid the costs of the upcoming surgeries.
Health care needs to be reformed. Nobody denies that. It’s a question of funding and government involvement. Should the government wrap itself around and squeeze the health care industry like a snake and breaking and conforming it to the government’s wants? Or should the government work with the companies to create tweaks in the current policies so that the industry can restart itself in a way that accommodates as many Americans as possible?
As you can see, there are too many variable in this bill. There are far too many unknowns. It is dangerous and irresponsible to “throw darts” in politics, by passing a bill, hoping it works without calculating every variable. That would never fly in Apple, Sprint, or ExxonMobil. So why should it happen in the most important office building in the world? There’s no excuse. Congress should adopt Lockheed Martins slogan “We never forget who we’re working for”, because the have clearly decided to ignore the majority, the Americans who do not want this bill
