Friday, August 28, 2009

Rebuttal

In the spirit of open-mindedness, I watched the following video to get the other side's take on the healthcare debate:



There's so many things to say-for now I'll just tackle the first 50 seconds or so.

First, it's a fallacy to think that everyone needs insurance. I personally am on a high-deductible plan with my insurance, so I am almost someone who self-insures. There are plenty of people, though, who deliberately choose to not have health insurance. They save up their money and they pay for their health costs themselves. There are people in the world who can't afford big operations, though, definitely. That's why they invented payment plans. We couldn't pay for our c-section this year by just handing the hospital a $5000 dollar bill. We've had to make payments, which we do tax-free via our HSA account.

So this argument just becomes a moral argument, that because we need the fire department we also need health insurance.

I've heard this argument before. But there are few, if any people, who would argue that the government should not pave roads, establish laws, enforce justice, provide for the common defense, and put out fires. There are plenty who say it should not teach our children, pay our social security, run the only postal letter system in the country, give away money to NPR, PBS, the NEA, and so on etc.

If all the government did was pave roads, fight crime, kill terrorists, and put out fires, I'd be all for it. But health care is not more necessary than a paved road. Everyone uses roads. Not everyone uses health insurance. I also think that there's no reason private industry couldn't do these things and do them better than the government. If your house burns down and you don't have fire insurance, then too bad, you should have bought fire insurance.

'Free' health care is something liberals want conservatives to help pay for. So what if we wanted liberals to help pay for something we wanted, such as, say, shutting down and paving over abortion clinics. Would they be for it? It saves lives, and saving lives is a right. Right?

2 comments:

Kevan said...

Why no comments on this most excellent rebuttal? Everyone must either agree or just don't care. I do hope they agree........these are troubled days but now isn't the time to give up.

Artsy Irene said...

I do not think the government should be in charge of health care at all. I also don't think they should educated our children. And, I do think they should not pave so many roads so often. But, health care is absurdly high and without insurance many people would not get the help they need. If you are lucky enough to get a doctor who will work out payments with you, then great, but not all doctors or practices will do this! So, what do people suggest then? I think if we don't want government involved with our health care, then we better come up with a way to DRASTICALLY reduce health care cost. If doctors didn't charge such insane amounts of money, yeah, we wouldn't need health insurance to help pay for it. Also, if health insurance itself didn't cost so much in the first place, more people might be able to afford it themselves and not have to rely on their employer or the government to help them out. I see no solution. Just get rid of the government, get rid of health insurance, get rid of doctors. Lets just medicate ourselves with Herbal remedies and the internet.... :)