The Obamacare Mandate and Why I Am So Pissed About It
I wrote the following as a response to a friend's inquiry about the concern over the new healthcare law/ruling. Posting it ehre as well so I don't lose track of it.
Sarah, the reason I am against this in it's current iteration (read: The Mandate) is because it is forcing everybody into a contract with a PRIVATE institution. Now, I only have a "working man's" knowledge of this issue, but the "working (wo)man" is the crowd this affects the most.
Where do I start? Let's start with something we already know for certain: Auto Insurance. In the state of Michigan, we are all required by law to purchase auto insurance from private businesses. For someone like me, on an income well under the poverty line, it hits me fairly hard every time it comes time to pay it, and I'm not even on full coverage. When I go to make a claim, you know what they do for me? They laugh at me and I end up having to cover the cost of whatever I needed anyway. So I am literally throwing away a large chunk of my income to a corporation every month to literally line their pockets.
How does this apply to healthcare? Well, the most obvious road is that now I will have to throw away even more of my money per month to line someone's pockets. And yes, 'throw away' is meant to be literal: While under this new law I cannot be denied coverage (which is about the only good thing I can see coming from this law), as far as I have researched it does not define well enough the terms of 'coverage' I will receive. On a surgical bill costing, say, $50,000, will i have to first pay a $30,000 deductible? Or on a lesser scale, maybe I have a $300 prescription, but my deductible is $1,000. How am I covered there? I am throwing money at them that I could have otherwise spent on the actual visit and medicine.
And what about health coverage conditions? Will this cover EVERYTHING health related, or will I have to spend more on a premium for "Respiratory coverage", "Skeletal Coverage", "Preventative Care", or even "Non-Lethal Care"? While this may seem absurd, this exact thing happened to my parents when our house flooded years ago. We had purchased insurance for Flood coverage, but they denied us on the base that we did not have "Sub-Pump failure" insurance. I foresee this exact same thing happening here, because as I keep stressing, we are forced to pay into a PRIVATE BUSINESS, not a government health pool, and businesses like this exist to make money, not provide easy access to recovery.
Now, I am aware that the government has offered to assist those with no or little income along with this new law and practice. But I ask you, as a country trillions and trillions in debt, where will this money come from? Nobody will just "get" Obamacare as everyone seems to suggest - There is no new source of cash we are tapping to get this going. This is all money coming from somewhere, even the 'assistance' that the government claims it will distribute. Taxes will inevitably increase somewhere on top of being mandated to pay another private sector to make up for this, and who gets taxed first? The working (wo)man. So we will be paying twice as much for a service that was once optional. The rich already have their own insurance, and lobby every year to stave off any further taxes. As far as I can see, this program does nothing but funnel money upwards.
Are you familiar with the term "household income"? That term is poison to someone such as myself who does not make enough money to live on his own, because it insinuates that I have access to they money of they people I am living with, which I do NOT, and either taxes me or charges me the full amount of a single person making the same amount as my household combined. There is no doubt in my mind that household-income will eventually become a factor in how much, if at all, the government will assist you when you apply for insurance (granted, it may not at first, but I stand by my words, give it time).
And who is to stop the insurance companies from charging whatever they want? In a free market, people can shop around if they want a lower price. But the failing of capitalism is in monopolies and unspoken alliances. Much like car insurance and gas prices, these places can band together and agree to charge a base minimum of a certain amount, and that's that. In 2014, health insurance may be affordable and lauded as a success, but what about as time passes? Once people adjust to this 'small' bill, I guarantee you that rates will rise. After another adjustment, it will rise again. In a free market, if people are upset about the price of something as a collective, they are free to simply omit themselves from the market. Not true here, you have to pay whatever they agree as a whole to charge. Again, look at where that has gotten us with other mandates. Even with car insurance and gas prices, at the very least you can sell your vehicle and get a bike or use public transit. But again, not in this case. You cannot omit 'being alive' from your life to avoid a charge.
Also, what about abuse on the public's side of things? Emergency visits for non-emergencies, over-the-counter drug addiction and abuse, turnaround black-market drug sales, international drug markets, and people who do nothing to stay healthy (Gross obesity, chain smoking, people who refuse to wear their seat belts, drunks, illegal drug abusers, etc)? Insurance companies are required to treat them, and rates will rise due to these 'unforeseen complications' (which they damn well know about but are feigning ignorance, in my opinion), all on OUR dime and backs. People by nature are greedy folks, and this opens the door to a whole new world of abuse and corruption. How is THAT fair to us honest folk?
As mentioned before by someone else, what about the long lines to visit a doctor, now that any and all ailments cannot be turned away? This bill does not generate any new doctors, and if everyone is being taxed to the dirt, nobody will be able to afford medical school to bolster those numbers. Will priority be shifted to the rich, who have better premiums, than the poor, who can only afford what will essentially be "PLPD" for health?
To me, after all these years of joking about the government introducing a tax to breathe, they've finally done it. By making it mandatory to buy into this contract I did not agree to, this is literally a tax to LIVE, and it disgusts me to my very core. Worse yet, it will only burden the poor and the proletariat in the end. I had even read a few months ago that the Obama Administration (under the impression that a mandate would be ruled as unconstitutional) had actually been making progress in a compromise with insurance companies that wouldn't cost either party much, but instead they both decided to take the "easy road" and force a mandate through anyway, even though the majority of the country does not support it.
This is all coming from someone who SUPPORTS having national healthcare. I believe all the bases of living should be, at least in some level, supported by our collective society (Safety, roads, health, disaster control). But this? This protects a few, I will grant that, but it harms many more. I may be one of the 'doomsayers' that supporters accuse me of being, but I live in the real world. I do not trust private institutions to decide where my money goes and how I live my life, and I trust my government with those issues even less. This is not a socialist law, as socialism would suggest that the benefits are spread evenly across the board, this is a dictatorial law, and as a citizen of the (supposedly) Land of the Free, I am personally outraged at this law, and very disappointed to see that the elite few have once again trumped the public with little resistance.
I fully realize a LOT of my post is speculation, but I am backing it with real-life experience and pattern observations. While I hate this law very passionately, it would please me greatly to be very, VERY wrong about this in the end. I'll keep my fingers crossed.
Sarah, the reason I am against this in it's current iteration (read: The Mandate) is because it is forcing everybody into a contract with a PRIVATE institution. Now, I only have a "working man's" knowledge of this issue, but the "working (wo)man" is the crowd this affects the most.
Where do I start? Let's start with something we already know for certain: Auto Insurance. In the state of Michigan, we are all required by law to purchase auto insurance from private businesses. For someone like me, on an income well under the poverty line, it hits me fairly hard every time it comes time to pay it, and I'm not even on full coverage. When I go to make a claim, you know what they do for me? They laugh at me and I end up having to cover the cost of whatever I needed anyway. So I am literally throwing away a large chunk of my income to a corporation every month to literally line their pockets.
How does this apply to healthcare? Well, the most obvious road is that now I will have to throw away even more of my money per month to line someone's pockets. And yes, 'throw away' is meant to be literal: While under this new law I cannot be denied coverage (which is about the only good thing I can see coming from this law), as far as I have researched it does not define well enough the terms of 'coverage' I will receive. On a surgical bill costing, say, $50,000, will i have to first pay a $30,000 deductible? Or on a lesser scale, maybe I have a $300 prescription, but my deductible is $1,000. How am I covered there? I am throwing money at them that I could have otherwise spent on the actual visit and medicine.
And what about health coverage conditions? Will this cover EVERYTHING health related, or will I have to spend more on a premium for "Respiratory coverage", "Skeletal Coverage", "Preventative Care", or even "Non-Lethal Care"? While this may seem absurd, this exact thing happened to my parents when our house flooded years ago. We had purchased insurance for Flood coverage, but they denied us on the base that we did not have "Sub-Pump failure" insurance. I foresee this exact same thing happening here, because as I keep stressing, we are forced to pay into a PRIVATE BUSINESS, not a government health pool, and businesses like this exist to make money, not provide easy access to recovery.
Now, I am aware that the government has offered to assist those with no or little income along with this new law and practice. But I ask you, as a country trillions and trillions in debt, where will this money come from? Nobody will just "get" Obamacare as everyone seems to suggest - There is no new source of cash we are tapping to get this going. This is all money coming from somewhere, even the 'assistance' that the government claims it will distribute. Taxes will inevitably increase somewhere on top of being mandated to pay another private sector to make up for this, and who gets taxed first? The working (wo)man. So we will be paying twice as much for a service that was once optional. The rich already have their own insurance, and lobby every year to stave off any further taxes. As far as I can see, this program does nothing but funnel money upwards.
Are you familiar with the term "household income"? That term is poison to someone such as myself who does not make enough money to live on his own, because it insinuates that I have access to they money of they people I am living with, which I do NOT, and either taxes me or charges me the full amount of a single person making the same amount as my household combined. There is no doubt in my mind that household-income will eventually become a factor in how much, if at all, the government will assist you when you apply for insurance (granted, it may not at first, but I stand by my words, give it time).
And who is to stop the insurance companies from charging whatever they want? In a free market, people can shop around if they want a lower price. But the failing of capitalism is in monopolies and unspoken alliances. Much like car insurance and gas prices, these places can band together and agree to charge a base minimum of a certain amount, and that's that. In 2014, health insurance may be affordable and lauded as a success, but what about as time passes? Once people adjust to this 'small' bill, I guarantee you that rates will rise. After another adjustment, it will rise again. In a free market, if people are upset about the price of something as a collective, they are free to simply omit themselves from the market. Not true here, you have to pay whatever they agree as a whole to charge. Again, look at where that has gotten us with other mandates. Even with car insurance and gas prices, at the very least you can sell your vehicle and get a bike or use public transit. But again, not in this case. You cannot omit 'being alive' from your life to avoid a charge.
Also, what about abuse on the public's side of things? Emergency visits for non-emergencies, over-the-counter drug addiction and abuse, turnaround black-market drug sales, international drug markets, and people who do nothing to stay healthy (Gross obesity, chain smoking, people who refuse to wear their seat belts, drunks, illegal drug abusers, etc)? Insurance companies are required to treat them, and rates will rise due to these 'unforeseen complications' (which they damn well know about but are feigning ignorance, in my opinion), all on OUR dime and backs. People by nature are greedy folks, and this opens the door to a whole new world of abuse and corruption. How is THAT fair to us honest folk?
As mentioned before by someone else, what about the long lines to visit a doctor, now that any and all ailments cannot be turned away? This bill does not generate any new doctors, and if everyone is being taxed to the dirt, nobody will be able to afford medical school to bolster those numbers. Will priority be shifted to the rich, who have better premiums, than the poor, who can only afford what will essentially be "PLPD" for health?
To me, after all these years of joking about the government introducing a tax to breathe, they've finally done it. By making it mandatory to buy into this contract I did not agree to, this is literally a tax to LIVE, and it disgusts me to my very core. Worse yet, it will only burden the poor and the proletariat in the end. I had even read a few months ago that the Obama Administration (under the impression that a mandate would be ruled as unconstitutional) had actually been making progress in a compromise with insurance companies that wouldn't cost either party much, but instead they both decided to take the "easy road" and force a mandate through anyway, even though the majority of the country does not support it.
This is all coming from someone who SUPPORTS having national healthcare. I believe all the bases of living should be, at least in some level, supported by our collective society (Safety, roads, health, disaster control). But this? This protects a few, I will grant that, but it harms many more. I may be one of the 'doomsayers' that supporters accuse me of being, but I live in the real world. I do not trust private institutions to decide where my money goes and how I live my life, and I trust my government with those issues even less. This is not a socialist law, as socialism would suggest that the benefits are spread evenly across the board, this is a dictatorial law, and as a citizen of the (supposedly) Land of the Free, I am personally outraged at this law, and very disappointed to see that the elite few have once again trumped the public with little resistance.
I fully realize a LOT of my post is speculation, but I am backing it with real-life experience and pattern observations. While I hate this law very passionately, it would please me greatly to be very, VERY wrong about this in the end. I'll keep my fingers crossed.