As of right now I am fairly indifferent toward the idea of a socialized health care program and socialized medicine. I would point out that my stance in this area is subject to change as I become more educated on the issue. It is possible to make several arguments both for and against universal health care.
President Obama, who I happen to support, recently claimed that if something is not done about health care the United States may follow in the footsteps of the bankrupt automotive company General Motors. My reaction: What the hell is this guy talking about. Upon reading further I still am not quite sure I can draw the connection. Obama claims that doctors need to cut the costs of healthcare by reducing the number of unnecessary tests run on patients. Are you drawing the connection yet? Me neither. This is problematic because it may lead to restrictions on malpractice liability. Such limitations would basically limit what doctors can do to help you, since they would have to worry about lawsuits resulting from everything they do.
Obama goes on to make the claim that America "might go the way of GM, paying more, getting less, and going broke."
On second thought, maybe malpractice restrictions would be a good thing. Holy shit!I think I am on to something here. We just offer no protection to the doctors. Think about it, this is truly ponderous. Doctors get sued because they have no malpractice protection, and this puts them out of business. The benefactor of the money then has more than enough to pay for future medical attention that they may need. This is a double edged sword though, and any idiot can appreciate this. With as sue happy as people are today, it won't be long before pretty much all doctors are sued out of business, thus eliminating the need for health care in the first place. Need I say brilliant!?! Under my plan America no longer runs any risk of going broke, because we can't be overcharged for health care, because there will be nobody to take care of us.
Actually what the Dems are hoping to do is create a competition for the private health care companies, that would leave them with no other choice than to lower the cost of health care. Those who aren't covered by their employer or can't afford their own coverage will have the public plan as an option. In premise this is not a terrible idea.
One idea that I do like comes from Senator Kennedy, a Democrat from Massachusetts. His plan "includes a public option as one choice for consumers. The measure also would mandate coverage for all people, either at their own cost or supplied by employers."
The Republicans have argued that any form of public health care will eventually force these private companies out of business, claiming that it would eventually lead to a complete government takeover of the health care system.
With both of these arguments in front of me, I still am drawing a blank on the argument that health care as it stands and has stood for decades is going to cause the company to go bankrupt like General Motors. Obama does not make a strong argument for this, but that is the title of the article I linked above, so I figured it would be doom and gloom about how we are financially in trouble, but instead got an article full of bullshit relating to health care and why it is wicked awesome, and heinously evil. So, to sum up both sides, here are the basic arguments.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment