I honestly don't know how to begin this diary entry, so I will let Neal Boortz himself do it for me:
Most government-educated Americans would be shocked to hear that there is no "right" to healthcare. Tell me where in our Constitution it is written that you have a right to a portion on someone else's life .. in this case, it would be the service of providing medical care at the point of a gun.
Now, I'll admit, I'm no Constitutional expert, but I thought something like this was under "right to life" under the "rights to life, liberty and property," as well as "provide for the common welfare." But again, I'm no Constitutional expert and my interpretation should be treated as such.
Well, the Democrats are on a fast track to ensuring that Americans can claim healthcare as a "right." Under the House Democrats proposed plan, the federal government would be responsible for making sure that every person has health insurance. Did you know that if you as an individual choose not to obtain health insurance, the federal government will seize 2.5% of your income? That's right. At the point of a gun, the federal government will seize your income.
Searched article for the word "gun" - nothing there.
OK, so the government takes 2.5% of your income if you don't obtain health insurance. How much of your income is "seized" by your health insurance company? Unlike the government, the health insurance company is trying to make a profit, like any other business out there. Either way, your money's heading out the door.
Now there is one important fact to keep in mind – this assumes that you have an income. For the poor, poor pitiful poor, the federal government isn't going to come along and seize their double-wides or rent-to-own furniture. Nope. In fact, they will be getting a government handout to obtain health insurance! The same goes for employers, which will be required by law to offer healthcare benefits to employees or face stiff penalties equal to 8% of workers' wages.
....
Second, who is going to pay for this? That's also easy to answer. The achievers. The filthy, disgusting rich. The small business owners. If you are an individual making over $280,000 you will be shouldering even more of the tax burden in order to pay for this government healthcare/redistribution scheme. Don't worry, that's just a starting point. That number will slowly shift downward as Democrats realize they don't have the enough money to fund their dreams and schemes.
Is there anyone who is still reading this who didn't see this one coming?
First, for the poor: Breaks and benefits are more intense for the rich because they earn more. 4% is going to be 4% across the board. Whether it's 4 out of 100 or 40 out of 1000, it's still 4%. Yes, 40 is more than 4, and 1000 is more than 100, but it's still the same. Your tax cuts will benefit the rich more than it will for the poor. Your tax increases will punish the rich more than the poor. As for our tax system, I say let's just replace it with the FairTax.
But keeping this to health care, according to the above (where you're taxed an extra 2.5% if you don't have health insurance), if you have your own health insurance plan, who's taxes are going up? ... or are people with health insurance plans going to get taxed anyway?
Also, in regards to businesses and health insurance, while this could be a disaster, insurance companies could shell out money to employers to provide an exclusive health insurance deal to their employees. Now, I say that could be a disaster because then iron monopoly squeeze could continue to ruin the struggling employee who has her wallet thinned and her claims denied. It's also part of why I'm against this "public option" and see it nothing more than a feel good compromise.
why are the Democrats doing this? This is the easiest to answer. The Democrats want to make people more dependent on government. They are going to do this by offering something that more Americans now value above all: stability. Americans think they want freedom. What a crock. Americans will whine about their freedom to choose which sports team to root for or which Hollywood gossip magazine to buy.
OK, I can buy into this argument, but I don't think it's just the Democrat Party. I think the Republicans would like some of the same thing (dependency on and expansion of government). I know Neal is neither, but he does have a point about our people in Capitol Hill. To a degree we all have to be dependent on government, as the government is the only institution that can legally use force to achieve its means. We do need government to protect our (and our posterity's) lives, liberties and properties. I'm all in favor of having a small, limited, and effective government, but neither the Democrat or Republican Parties also share that idea. Instead, the Donkeys and Dinosaurs want to expand government and keep their voting block dependent on them to preserve their power and their way of life...
One thing that doesn't seem to be addressed in this healthcare debate are those who just don't want health insurance, because to them, the best health insurance plan is just to not get sick, and if you're not getting sick, why do you need health insurance? Right or wrong, what's what they think and that's how they choose to live their lives. These individuals would have to then sign on to some health insurance program, public or private. I could be wrong about this group, though - I've been wrong before...
