It will create a larger government with more control. It was once said by I think Winston Churchill, but I'm not sure, ';A government powerful enough to give you any thing you want, is powerful enough to take anything it wants.'; Plus, It makes the productive pay for the lazy.What are the drawbacks to creating a government option for health care?
The government option can operate continuously in the red while private insurance cannot. That means that the insurance premiums for the government option will be lower than any private insurance. That will cause people to op for the government option which will mean private insurance will see a drop in the number of people the insure which in turn will cause them to raise rates which in turn drive more people to the government option. Over time private insurance companies will get out of health insurance leaving only the government option.
This is what Obama wants to happen. He really wants Universal Health Care with a single payer system but knowing he cannot get it up front is willing to use the government option to achieve that goal. He is also willing to bring the government option in through the back door if he cannot get it through the front door.
Have you ever seen how the post office works--the continual rate increases--lol. In fact if you can name one government project that worked well--came in within budget--and wasn't riddled with waste and fraud--please illuminate us all.
The other countries like England and France that already have universal health care as Obama would like America to emulate, those countries are going bankrupt trying to pay for it and people over there literally have to wait over 6 months for treatment. No government agency in America (or much of Europe for that matter) do well at all either. The Postal Service is in debt by Billions. Social Security is on the verge of bankruptcy. Medicare and Medicaid have so much waste spending Obama proposed paying for Gov't option health care with that waste money. Absolutely none of these programs work in real life. Only in theory.
Free market solutions have been proposed to create competition. Such as allowing companies to compete across state lines. Splitting the largest companies (95% of Alabama gets insurance from one company according to Obama). And then allowing poor and pre existing conditioned patients to jump on medicare or medicaid instead of the whole country jumping on the government plan.
Obama is ignoring lots of better options and instead wants the government to take over the industry using tax payer money. There are too many private alternatives that work much better.
Here is my opinion. After the government option is put in place, it will drive all the other plans out of the market. That will leave the gov't option and only the gov't option, guess what, doctors will retire without replacements, and there will be government medical care boards to decide what can and cannot be done. I saw it in Europe, so I don't trust any politician that says anything to the contrary. Now, if you don't mind waiting for over two years to get a gall bladder removed and you can stand the pain while waiting then go for it. Another thing, if you don't mind the doc giving you stitches without pain killers again I say go for it. We will see a loss of quality and see an increase in cost and longer waits for all types of medical processes.
A government option eventually grows to the point of eating private health care altogether - the ultimate intention of the government health care system. A government owned system then, as a single entity with no competition and no obligation to ';earn'; money for its services, has no reason to hold those services to the high standard that a private business would require. Or any standards at all, really.
This is not about your health. This is about the State *controlling* your health, and thus controlling you.
No, thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment