Putting it very nicely, indeed!
Mar. 29th, 2012 12:24 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
averygoodun42Religious freedom vs. Health care requirements...
*sigh*
All this hullabaloo about the legality of the Obamacare mandate is making me twitchy and sad. Honestly, I think the conservatives have a point about the legality of the mandate, which is why I wasn't crazy about this plan to begin with. However, I'm trying to be optimistic. Perhaps if this law does get tossed out (though please let it stand!), a single-payer system will be offered as the only viable alternative. (I do not consider rebates of a couple thousand dollars on $15,000 insurance plans as a realistically viable option.)
And it's not like it would be bad for insurance companies! After all, a government provided health insurance system (which is what "single-payer" is) would have to be pretty basic in nature, covering only basic doctor's visits and emergencies procedures/care. So, the current oligopoly of insurance providers would still be in the same business, and employers would still be able to offer "good" insurance as a perk in their benefit packages ("Our insurance covers all prescriptions!" "Our insurance offers chiropractic care!"). Who's to lose?
(The implied argument that breaking the tie between employment and health insurance will encourage layabouts is as false as "trickle-down economics." Getting everyone covered, no matter their employment status, would probably boost the marketplace because it would encourage entrepreneurialism, as people wouldn't feel tied to jobs they hate (and only put in the bare minimum of effort on)!)
Oh, and the best part about a single-payer system? None of these religious freedom claims could be made. Every single person in the world who pays taxes is paying towards something they morally oppose. Assuming they have morals at all (and if they don't, they probably aren't paying taxes). No exceptions. If an employer doesn't like the insurance options (birth control, blood transfusions, whatnot), they don't have to offer it! Their employees will still be covered! It's a total win-win situation!
However, I think that if the law gets tossed out, it's more likely to take us one step closer to revolution, simply because it will highlight even further the disconnect between the conservative ideals of "freedom" and the modern reality of living in civilization.
It will also highlight, once again, the questionable set-up of our unelected, unimpeachable "justices."
The upshot of all this is that I need to stay away from the news from now till June, if possible. I don't see that happening, but I need to make an effort. This plus the other injustices I see blaring out across the internet makes me feel very, very pessimistic about the future.
Well, that and the inevitability of a not-perfect score on my test tomorrow. It's hard to get a perfect score when more than one answer is technically correct (on a multiple choice test). *sigh* I so don't like her tests. (priorities: I haz them!)
*sigh*
All this hullabaloo about the legality of the Obamacare mandate is making me twitchy and sad. Honestly, I think the conservatives have a point about the legality of the mandate, which is why I wasn't crazy about this plan to begin with. However, I'm trying to be optimistic. Perhaps if this law does get tossed out (though please let it stand!), a single-payer system will be offered as the only viable alternative. (I do not consider rebates of a couple thousand dollars on $15,000 insurance plans as a realistically viable option.)
And it's not like it would be bad for insurance companies! After all, a government provided health insurance system (which is what "single-payer" is) would have to be pretty basic in nature, covering only basic doctor's visits and emergencies procedures/care. So, the current oligopoly of insurance providers would still be in the same business, and employers would still be able to offer "good" insurance as a perk in their benefit packages ("Our insurance covers all prescriptions!" "Our insurance offers chiropractic care!"). Who's to lose?
(The implied argument that breaking the tie between employment and health insurance will encourage layabouts is as false as "trickle-down economics." Getting everyone covered, no matter their employment status, would probably boost the marketplace because it would encourage entrepreneurialism, as people wouldn't feel tied to jobs they hate (and only put in the bare minimum of effort on)!)
Oh, and the best part about a single-payer system? None of these religious freedom claims could be made. Every single person in the world who pays taxes is paying towards something they morally oppose. Assuming they have morals at all (and if they don't, they probably aren't paying taxes). No exceptions. If an employer doesn't like the insurance options (birth control, blood transfusions, whatnot), they don't have to offer it! Their employees will still be covered! It's a total win-win situation!
However, I think that if the law gets tossed out, it's more likely to take us one step closer to revolution, simply because it will highlight even further the disconnect between the conservative ideals of "freedom" and the modern reality of living in civilization.
It will also highlight, once again, the questionable set-up of our unelected, unimpeachable "justices."
The upshot of all this is that I need to stay away from the news from now till June, if possible. I don't see that happening, but I need to make an effort. This plus the other injustices I see blaring out across the internet makes me feel very, very pessimistic about the future.
Well, that and the inevitability of a not-perfect score on my test tomorrow. It's hard to get a perfect score when more than one answer is technically correct (on a multiple choice test). *sigh* I so don't like her tests. (priorities: I haz them!)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-03-29 05:20 pm (UTC)I can't see a single-payer system getting instituted any time soon. Not when we're still talking about aspirin between the knees and passing laws that allow you to stalk and shoot unarmed teenagers first and ask questions later. When did liberal become a dirty word? (Pessimism: I haz it.)
Come on, fellow women. Redeem my lapsing faith in humanity by voting those clowns out of office!
no subject
Date: 2012-04-06 02:04 pm (UTC)No, I can't either, which is why I'm hoping like hell the entire law doesn't get thrown out, even if the mandate does. Propaganda campaigns can be used to persuade the populace to do what's right, especially with the subsidies to make it affordable.
Amen, sister! A-fucking-men!
no subject
Date: 2012-03-29 05:24 pm (UTC)I would love it if we could have a real plan created. . . the one where we don't think about what is in the best interest of the people, not the insurance companies. But, I realize that the current Congress has been more interested in blocking any idea that was viewed as Obama's (even if it was first someone else's, or even their own) than serving the best interest of the people of the country (or maybe they think that spending four years doing nothing to get Obama out of office is really in our best interest?)
Must find my inner optimist.
no subject
Date: 2012-04-06 02:07 pm (UTC)I'm trying to find my inner optimist as well, but lord, it's hard!
no subject
Date: 2012-03-30 04:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-04-06 02:08 pm (UTC)