Whether I adhere to it or not, it is typically my position that I don't know enough about the complexities of political issues to make comments without coming across as ignorant to someone... So embracing that confession, I have a genuine question.
My scouts are currently working on the Citizenship in the Community merit badge. Last night one of our requirements was to discuss the services that Government provides through tax dollars. For 12 and 13 year olds you are always trying to keep these concepts simple, and so I realize inherent in that is the potential for error and half truth, etc. We started with the idea that a "community" essentially decides that there are certain services that 1) can only really be effectively provided at a mass scale (it wouldn't make sense for all of us to own and maintain the strip of road in front of our house, so we put that power and our money in the hands of government to make sure roads are kept at a certain standard, and to ensure that we can get around), and 2) services we feel are something that a general (comprehensive)provision of makes the community a better place (parks, public safety, libraries, etc.) Our goal (and I the goal of the badge) is to try to make the point that we pay taxes for these things so that, for example, when someone needs help from the police, they don't need to worry if they can afford it or not. I think the boys were catching on.
Anyway, as the boys listed all of these government services, (police, parks, street maintenance, fire fighters, libraries, one of them mentioned "health care." I had to stop and correct him. The assistant scout master and myself started to explain to them that Health Care is a little different. Honestly the boys faces were the best indication of how well we were doing to explain that Health Care is different (not very well).
It was a poignant moment for me. The truth is, questions of quality aside, many country's do provide health care as part of the rest of the service package mentioned above, and for the reasons that we had noted.
Can those who are smarter than me give me the "boy scout" explanation of why it is smarter to keep this service out of government hands? I think I know the Rush Limbaugh type answers, and I guess I am partly wondering if we are all on board with conservative talk radio's forecast for universal health care, or if there is more to it that I am missing.
Is it the "quality" issue? I found it hard to make that argument when the U.S. doesn't seem to fair tremendously better than other nations in our overall health.
Not trying to be obnoxious, and again, I confess genuine ignorance on a lot of the matter. I am genuinely wondering what your answers would be. This health care stuff is hard for me to sift through.
Jake
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Hi Jake, Carina here. I would say that receiving something for nothing(without putting forth work in some form to earn it) discourages self reliance & personal preparedness, which I think are encouraged in boy scouting. If one isn't personally invested in their own health then what motivation will they have to take good care of themselves & keep their health as good as possible? I would liken it to Satan's plan. He said we would all make it back to Heaven, without an effort on our part-it would be provided for us. Some will try to spin this into a positive light saying it is charity. But what it really does is enslave mankind by taking away free agency.
Hey Jake this is Dan. I have a few things to add I guess. First I don't believe our health care is comparable. The free market always inspires competition, which leads to excellence rising and incompetence failing. I have seen this firsthand living for two years in European countries with "free health care". Besides the laziness and and apathy of the people, the the level of service is not comparable. I knew a 17 year old boy who only had his front teeth. Not one molar. He had got cavities so they fixed them. I guess at some point he will get some "free" dentures.
Now on a different point our elected representatives decided that we should have some form of "health care reform", which is the legal process wether I agree with it or not, but they can't make it a right. The bill of rights makes it clear that these are GOD (whatever god you believe in) given rights. Not man given. God isn't gonna give rights to someone else's service or freedom. So bottom line is if the government decides it is a right, they will be getting this right from somewhere other than where the God-given, government-can't-take away rights come from. Hope this helps, Dan
i find that i can empathize with whoever i am talking to about this issue. My friends that have spent tons of time and money to become doctors have very valid concerns about their wages and their work loads getting worse. But, when i talk to someone who is working hard to make a living and can't get reasonable insurance it just doesn't seem right. I have been through the process of trying to get private health insurance for myself and it is crazy. I am healthy and active- yet was denied by a large company. There obviously isn't any great answer, but surely someone shouldn't go bankrupt because they get really sick and their employer doesn't offer insurance. It is more than the rich vs the poor. there are a lot of people in the middle who could really benefit from some big change
i am making this comment with out having read any of the other comments, so i am not sure if this is just rehashing. here are my thoughts....
The government by design of the Constitution cannot 'force' someone to buy something that they don't want or need. you may say well what about car insurance. true, however that is for the privelege of driving a car. you don't have to buy a car or use a car if you don't want to. if you are young and healthy and do not wish to buy health insurance or want to only buy a catastrophie plan, why should you be forced to by the government. it is unconstitutional. health care is not a 'right' ..i may think somebody is stupid for not having any, but that is their choice, and why should i have to pay for their insurance through my taxes or increases in my health premiums so that they may have that 'right'.. on a side note, have you ever been to the DMV or Social Security Office? and people think the government can handle health care??
ask anybody living in europe just how much they 'love' their health care... ask the Canadians who are coming here for their medical operations how much they love their Socialized medicine...look at how bankrupt europe is, and we want to emulate that?! it is suicidal, your friend Dan said it, capitalist society will always keep the prices down through competition, keep the government out of it and stop lawyers suing the h**l out of doctors and hospitals and you will see real health reform...
Thanks for your thoughts all. Some good points made. I have to admit that I am torn on this stuff. I am such a skeptic that I have a hard time believing ANYONE. Everything we know about any of this has gone through some filter. For me it is really hard to find sources of information that don't just make me feel icky (on both sides of the fence). I find myself relying a lot on my gut instincts with political stuff. Maybe I have progressive tendencies because NPR and PBS are the only sources of info that don't give me that ambiguous icky feeling. I do enjoy listening to the well-presented and clearly stated arguments of people like David Brooks, Orrin Hatch, or Gordon Smith (former R-Senator of Oregon)
I should note, not to be obnoxious, but to be forthecoming, that in fact the only Canadians and Europeans I know have no beef with their system, and are appalled by the decisions many of us forego on receiving certain levels of health care because of the cost. We could chalk that up to good old national pride, but I myself also spent a little time in European clinics, and my experience was not only very positive, but free. In the spirit of full disclosure I did do a service project in a Hospital near the Polish border that definitely gave me the heeby jeebies.
i will say only one more thing on this subject. what ever side of the equation you fall on, the 'inspired' men who wrote the constitution, specifically wanted no governmental mandates for things not considered a 'right'. with this health care fiasco we actually have to 'buy' something for the privilege of being a citizen. this leads to socialism, communism, etc...it doesn't matter left or right. this was specifically avoided in the constitution. so take issue with the 'inspired' men who wrote it, but remember what and where they came from and were trying to avoid...if you respect the 'meaning' and take the actual words of the constitution (try actually reading it) as written there is no other conclusion that can possibly be made that this 'mandate' is anything but unconstitutional.
I too am very uneducated when it comes to political things. This is something I am trying to change. My dad was explaining the role of government to me as described in a book by Ezra Taft Benson. I don't remember the name of it right now. The short version is that the government doesn't have the right to force any citizen to do anything that another fellow citizen could not force them to do. it appears that many things we are required to do are unconstitutional, according to that description. The government forcing us to buy something (health insurance) is wrong. There is still so much I need to study and understand, but as good as the health care thing might sound, it is taking our country down a road, that in my opinion we do not want to go.
Post a Comment