More About Healthcare

Wow, thanks so much for the voluminous notes regarding my last entry. Since Meg’s at work and I have either the option of doing nothing useful or writing, I’ll choose the latter and continue writing about politics and healthcare.
Tomorrow Meg and I will join her parents, and her brother and his wife, in Pinetop for an extended weekend, so I’ve got to get my writing jollies while I can get them. I tend to get antsy after a few days sans computer. There’s just something so enticing with the blank page. “Come write all over me, consume me, fill me up,” it whispers, like a lover trying to draw me towards the bedroom.
Well, my lovely little white page, let’s respond to the notes.
Kimber writes:
I think that over time this will be thought of as the opening door to a better system. As for the screaming right, well, they had a fit over social security and medicare too, back when they were introduced. Rush Limbaugh threatened to move to Costa Rica if the court upheld Obamacare; be interesting to see if he carries out the "threat." Heh.
Like I mentioned in the original post, I think over time this won’t be thought of in terms of anti-Obama or anti-Democratic invective and just become accepted as the “law of the land.” I agree with you.
I don’t tend to follow Rush Limbaugh; I don’t think he has anything valuable to contribute to the conversation. It scares me that anyone listens to him, but I think it says more about the listeners than Limbaugh himself (not that I’m accusing you of being in Limbaugh’s camp, dear Kimber). So I hadn’t heard about his threat to move to Costa Rica, nor his later denial (or retraction, depending on how you read it) that he was going to go to Costa Rica. It makes me wonder why he’d go to Costa Rica (to live or to get treatment) to get away from socialized healthcare, when Costa Rica actually has one of the longest standing socialized healthcare systems in the world.
I didn’t know this until now, but everyone in Costa Rica, including resident foreigners, are required to pay into the government-run health system, whether they use it or not. Costa Rica is possibly the worst “random country I’m going to rage quit to” example that Limbaugh could have picked.
ab aeterno writes:
this is the worst bill ever. This bill is costing us 1.1 trillion dollars. Then obama says that it will reduce the budget by a trillion dollars by the year 2030. Hello, it will take to the year 2030 for the bill to pay for itself. There is no regulation what so ever in the bill. No that they can force us to buy health insurance, what is next? This bill is an invasion of personal freedom.
Ab aeterno, eh? I’m not familiar with you; to satisfy my curiosity, I looked up your name, which means “from eternity.” An odd coincidence about the Latin name, since I actually picked up my yellowed Latin dictionary to look up a Latin word earlier. Isn’t translation so much easier now that the Internet is here? I wonder how many advances the field of linguistics has made in just the last decade, with the ability to parse morphemes with a click of a button?
Anyway, I’m off-topic. Your note seems a bit caustic, so I’ll analyze it a little.
Grammar means something
If you’re trying to get your point across with reasoned argument, the first step to convincing me is to use proper grammar. Your note makes me wince nearly as much as the Romney iPhone app last month that boasted “A Better Amercia.”
Citation Needed
I’m not a fan of pulling numbers from thin air. Citations are great when it comes to arguing your point. When you say something like, “This bill is costing us 1.1 trillion dollars,” the onus is on you to support your point with evidence, and I’m seeing a shockingly paltry amount of that presented. Granted, you’ve got 400 characters to use, but that’s plenty of space to “show your work,” like my math teacher used to say.
Just to humor you, I will work the Google on the Internet machine (to quote Will Ferrell) with the phrase “This bill is costing us 1.1 trillion dollars.” I did get some results that collaborate what you are saying. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that “the ACA will have a net cost of just under $1.1 trillion over the 2012-2021 period” (CBO, Updated Estimates for the Insurance Coverage Provisions of the Affordable Care Act, March 2012).
So when you say “This bill is costing us 1.1 trillion dollars,” you really mean “this bill is projected to cost us 1.1 trillion dollars over the next 9 years.” It puts your comment about Obama saying that it will pay for itself by the year 2030. So it takes 18 years to pay for itself—but that’s only twice the amount of time it took to accrue the debt in the first place. I don’t really see this as an issue.
Regarding the gist of the complaint, I think it falls neatly in my original post’s category, “More Expensive to Me.” And I don’t really see how the argument can be justified when it is weighed with the tremendous positive social benefit of having a more affordable, wider-spread health coverage for all Americans. So what if it takes a whole extra 9 years for the bill to pay for itself?
“No that they can force us to buy health insurance, what is next?”
I assume you mean “Now…” Surely this isn’t the first thing you’ve ever been forced to pay to the government? It’s part of being a grown-up. If you want to live in a completely “free” society without taxes, tariffs, or any mandatory pecuniary social contribution, then I think you’ll have to move into the hills… in Antarctica.
“This bill is an invasion of personal freedom.”
I don’t think paying taxes is an invasion of my personal freedom. Why do you?
<div style=”margin: 0in 0in 10pt”>Kimber adds:
“Yeah, so is auto insurance.”
And bleeding*star says:
I’ve always like the auto insurance comparison. Except. I can choose not to get auto insurance by not buying a car. I can’t choose not to be an adult.
That being said. I’m happier than not about the PPACA. I work 60 hours a week at jobs that pay more than minimum wage. Neither job offers health benefits and I can’t afford it on my own. I don’t drive a new car or live in a big house. In fact, I’m not sure my car would even fit in my apartment. I don’t live outside my means. But I still can’t afford health insurance. So… yah. I’m happy about this, and I really like how you laid all this out. Even if it was a little "college paper-esque." 😀
~rory
Yeah, the auto insurance comparison, while amusing which is why I brought it up, isn’t perhaps the best comparison, for the reason bleeding*star states: one you can “opt out” of by choosing other transportation, and the other is inevitable (unless you consider moving to a different country or suicide as options).
Unlike regular payroll taxes, which you don’t have to pay if you don’t… erm… actually work, the PPACA will either tax you or, more ideally, force you into getting some sort of damned healthcare already. On the other hand, the idea is that if you really can’t afford to purchase healthcare from an exchange, then you’ll probably qualify for Medicaid. Nobody should be forced to pay the penalty; everyone should be getting themselves covered, because for the first time, it will become affordable to those to whom it was too expensive before. And bleeding*star, and millions of others, will finally be able to afford healthcare. I think that’s great!
Davo writes:
I agree 100% with all of these responses to the critics (though, like you, I can’t quite accept the racism one– I mean Herman Cain and Clarence Thomas are fine with them). I fear, however, that there are many people in this country with noses firmly ensconced up Rush Limbaugh’s arse (sorry if you’re eating lunch) who, understandably, can’t hear you.

Actually, "Obamacare" was dreamed up by conservative economists like Mark Pauly in the 1980’s as an alternative to the dreaded single-payer threat. Heritage foundation loved it, as did Romney. I think, to give credit where credit is due, that it should be called "Romneycare."

Davo
Thanks Davo! Your agreement is high praise coming from you. Yes, the racism charge seems a little too strong, although there are no doubt racists of every flavor out there, somewhere, who dislike Obama because of his skin color. I don’t think they’re in the majority. If racism were to exist right now in the U.S., it’d probably be more against Latinos/Hispanics/Mexicans. It appears black people are a fairly accepted minority these days, just so long as they act “white enough.”
The history lesson is interesting. I hadn’t heard of Mark Pauly, although I had a vague idea that the single-payer system has been a Democratic ideal, and that’s why Clinton’s push for healthcare reform failed in 1994. I am amused that Romney is trying to sweep “Romneycare” under the rug because it’s “Un-Republican” and Obama is trying to sweep “Romneycare” under the rug as well because they can’t criticize the model that inspired the PPACA.
Miss Adia says:
TL;DR lol
I work for an insurance giant and let me tell you that with a twist of some words people in America will believe that we have the best shit in the world. For instance: Fox news "OH NO! CANADA HAS RATIONED HEALTHCARE!!! BEWARE!!
um…hey Fox news, have you looked at insurance plan documents. I mean call your insurance carrier or employer and asked them for a copy of your plan documents. VERY few Americans have UNLIMITED insurance plans. If it’s not unlimited…guess what? It’s rationed!!!! But instead of saying rationed because that would piss American’s off, the insurance carrier says yearly maximums or visit limits Do you know if you need to be admitted to the hospital, the hospital has to get permission from the insurance carrier first or they will deny the claim? Instead of calling it permission, the giants call it pre-authorization. That makes it sound fancy. People need to wake up and read their insurance plan documents. I can promise you most people don’t. If they did….they wouldn’t be complaining at all about Obamacare.
Sadly, I actually had to look up what “TL;DR” meant the other day. I take it as a sign that I may be getting too old for the Internet and its memes. (Also, if the original was too long, this post replying to comments is definitely too long.)
The limits on my personal healthcare policy always made me nervous. Durable Medical Equipment is outrageously expensive, and my insulin pump supplies are considered DME. I can easily see my claims exceeding the million dollar lifetime cap and having to look for other means to maintain my health. I’m glad the PPACA is addressing limits.
And yes, I’m aware of pre-authorization. It’s crazy what needs to be pre-authorized—like my aforementioned DME, which needs to be pre-authorized annually. It’s not that the supplies have actually changed for the eight years I’ve used it, but damned if they don’t want to pre-authorize it anyway.
YAH writes:
“Where is this happy commune of libertarians who personally pay-as-they-go when it comes to defense, industry, and the common good? Are they the rich who employ tax lawyers to minimize their taxes?”
I suppose I should have expanded on that idea in my original post. Sometimes I assume everyone knows my obscure literary references. I was sarcastically referring to the idealistic community, Galt’s Gulch, at the end of Atlas Shrugged.
And finally, Infinite Ocean writes:
Very well-written. Probably the best written piece on this particular topic that I’ve seen.
I, like you, am of the middle class. My private health insurance cost has more than doubled in the last two years. So, why am I not screaming in the streets how unfair this bill is? Because I happen to believe that it’s a basic human right to have access to affordable healthcare, not a special privilege that only people above a certain income level should have.
People who refuse to carry health insurance are part of the problem. Sure, they’re mostly young adults without chronic medical problems but just who do people think pays when one of these uninsured people has a catastrophic accident or illness? Poor people have access to medicaid. Working people who either don’t have the option to buy health insurance or can’t afford it are the ones who end up in those situations.
People are required to insure their cars, their homes (if they have a mortgage, which is usually government backed) their businesses, their employees for disability and workers comp. I don’t see requiring people to carry health insurance as any different.
I pay taxes because they are required but I also realize that they are necessary in order to provide things like police and fire/rescue/etc, as well as libraries and parks and museums and public schools.
Maybe these far-right wing people should think about what it would be like if you had to pay to have the fire company protect your house and if you opted out of that payment then your house could just burn to the ground before you’d get any help. Or if you had to pay for police protection and if someone was holding a gun to your head that police officer would just cruise right by unless you had paid into it. That heart attack you’re having? Well, sorry, you haven’t been paying your abulance fees, so even though YOU have private insurance I guess you’re SOL because nobody’s gonna let their tax money cover your ride to the hospital.
So, anyway, yes. You are awesome for bringing this point out as clearly as you have. Thank you.
To which I sleepily reply, you’re welcome. I agree with you. Healthy people refusing to pay into the collective pot makes for a more expensive healthcare system for everyone, and promotes reactive rather than preventative healthcare.
Interestingly, did you know that fire insurance used to operate the way that you hypothesized? You used to have to pay the local fire brigade for fire insurance, and in return you would have a fire insurance mark nailed to your house. If your house was on fire and you were insured, the fire station would put out your fire. If your house was on fire and uninsured, they’d watch it burn.
***
All right. That’s quite enough about healthcare for two nights. Last night actually dreamt about the PPACA, if that’s possible. I think tonight I might be in for the same treatment, if I’m not too careful.