What’s interesting in the news today?
First up, I’d like to say I’m shocked. I’d like to….
From TheDailyCaller “In a stunning development, some military priests are facing arrest if they celebrate mass or practice their faith on military bases during the federal government shutdown.
“With the government shutdown, many [government service] and contract priests who minister to Catholics on military bases worldwide are not permitted to work – not even to volunteer,” wrote John Schlageter, the general counsel for the Archdiocese for the Military Services USA, in an op-ed this week. “During the shutdown, it is illegal for them to minister on base and they risk being arrested if they attempt to do so.””
__________________________________________________
Republicans are continuing their efforts to fund some govt departments. FEMA could be an important one if the hurricane in the Gulf causes widespread damage. Let’s see if the obstruction on piecemeal bills continues from the Senate and White House.
From FoxNews “The House voted Friday to fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as Republicans cast the bill as an emergency measure to help Americans threatened by the approaching tropical storm.”
The bill was one of several House Republicans have pushed in recent days to fund chunks of the government amid the partial government shutdown.
They’ve been pressuring Democrats, with little success, to support these mini-spending measures while the budget impasse drags on. Republicans upped that pressure on Friday, saying disaster response is critical as Tropical Storm Karen tracks toward the Gulf Coast and is poised to hit this weekend.
“When you’ve got a storm in the Gulf of Mexico, this is not a time for partisanship,” Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., said after the vote, flanked by Gulf state lawmakers. Scalise called on President Obama to remove his veto threat and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to pass the bill in the Senate. “
__________________________________________________
Meanwhile the firm responsible for the ObamaCare implementation has been identified. And no offense to our Canadian friends, but couldn’t we have found a US company instead of outsourcing to Canada?
From TheWashingtonExaminer “A Canadian tech firm that has provided service to that country’s single-payer health care system is behind the glitch-ridden United States national health care exchange site healthcare.gov.
CGI Federal is a subsidiary of Montreal-based CGI Group. With offices in Fairfax, Va., the subsidiary has been a darling of the Obama administration, which since 2009 has bestowed it with $1.4 billion in federal contracts, according to USAspending.gov.
The “CGI” in the parent company’s name stands for “Conseillers en Gestion et Informatique” in French, which roughly translates to “Information Systems and Management Consultants.” However, the firm offers another translation: “Consultants to Government and Industry.”
The company is deeply embedded in Canada’s single-payer system. CGI has provided IT services to the Canadian Ministries of Health in Alberta, British Columbia, New Brunswick, Quebec and Saskatchewan, as well as to the national health provider, Health Canada, according to CGI’s Canadian website.”
__________________________________________________
And the last one from me today is this. The founder of McAfee speaks out about the lack of security with the ObamaCare sites. Still needin’ that face palm smiley. 🙄
From TheDailyCaller “For starters, McAfee said the way it is set up makes it possible for fake websites be set up to fool people to think they’re signing up for Obamacare.
“It’s seriously bad,” McAfee said. “Somebody made a grave error, not in designing the program but in simply implementing the web aspect of it. I mean, for example, anybody can put up a web page and claim to be a broker for this system. There is no central place where I can go and say, ‘OK, here are all the legitimate brokers the examiners for all of the states and pick and choose one.’”
“According to McAfee, there’s not a quick fix — and as long as it set up this way, it could be a playground for computer hackers.”
““Here’s the problem: It’s not something software can solve,” McAfee continued. “I mean, what idiot put this system out there and did not create a central depository? There should be one website, run by the government, you go to that website and then you can click on all of the agencies. This is insane. So, I will predict that the loss of income for the millions of Americans who are going to lose their identities — I mean, you can imagine some retired lady in Utah, who has $75,000 dollars in the bank, saving her whole life, having it wiped out in one day because she signed up for Obamacare. And believe me, this is going to happen millions of times.”
__________________________________________________
Wandering Views 
HRW,
A quick rebuttal on your link yesterday where it’s asserted that the Heritage Foundation created ObamaCare. Another liberal myth.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/story/2012-02-03/health-individual-mandate-reform-heritage/52951140/1
“Is the individual mandate at the heart of “ObamaCare” a conservative idea? Is it constitutional? And was it invented at The Heritage Foundation? In a word, no.”
“The U.S. Supreme Court will put the middle issue to rest. The answers to the first and last can come from me. After all, I headed Heritage’s health work for 30 years. And make no mistake: Heritage and I actively oppose the individual mandate, including in an amicus brief filed in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.
Nevertheless, the myth persists. ObamaCare “adopts the ‘individual mandate’ concept from the conservative Heritage Foundation,” Jonathan Alter wrote recently in The Washington Post. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews makes the same claim, asserting that Republican support of a mandate “has its roots in a proposal by the conservative Heritage Foundation.” Former House speaker Nancy Pelosi and others have made similar claims.
The confusion arises from the fact that 20 years ago, I held the view that as a technical matter, some form of requirement to purchase insurance was needed in a near-universal insurance market to avoid massive instability through “adverse selection” (insurers avoiding bad risks and healthy people declining coverage). At that time, President Clinton was proposing a universal health care plan, and Heritage and I devised a viable alternative.”
LikeLike
The Democrats won’t stop until they see to it the shut down kills somebody, so they can try to blame it on the Republicans.
LikeLike
When Christians decide that they can no longer serve in the military without violating their faith will they bring back the draft? Because I can’t see them being able to run an effective military without them.
LikeLike
Now I know who to blame for the remarkably bad Health Canada site. Our government websites are not noted for their user-friendly set-up and I have had to navigate through the intricacies of the Health Canada site for research purposes many times – never had to use it for health care purposes, but I have fought with the data entry on other government pages. However, I fail to see any dark significance in the fact that the company set up sites for both the Canadian healthcare system and the American one. In a free market, capitalistic society, an IT company has the right to bid for and accept any contracts that are available. Outsourcing is the way of the west right now, whether we like it or not.
Now, I’m going to lose my temper…
I am frankly sick and tired of having US political problems laid on my birthplace’s shoulders, simply because it has a different system and is the next country over. I have seen everything from gay marriage (I actually saw a quote published in World from a right wing organization who claimed, falsely, that the gay rights movement started in Canada and was exported to the US) to health care. Most Canadians like to gripe about our health system, though we also see its benefits; and we certainly never put Michael Moore up to making Sicko. My experience is that most Americans, left and right, don’t understand what kind of system we have – the right wing just sees that our government is involved and declares it to be liberal socialism at work. Yet the second province to implement public healthcare was our most conservative province, Alberta, under a premier who was a Baptist lay minister.
I am also sick of seeing statements about the burden the poor and the elderly put upon the rest. Call it reverse culture shock. I am working with the miserably poor right now, and I know, first hand, that health care must be somehow subsidized. It would be ideal if it could be subsidized entirely through private donations, but not even our organization’s donors can carry the cost of certain things, like malaria treatment. We have to partner with multi-national organizations – think UN type – because we are not in the business of making money or political statements, we are working to save the lives of human beings.
Yes, there are unscrupulous doctors and nurses and manufacturers and even patients, who seek to profit from the human fact of illness and death – but that doesn’t make the grim reality of illness and death a mere matter of money. There are four principles of ideal healthcare, Non-maleficence, Beneficence, Justice and Autonomy – Finance isn’t one of them. I personally don’t care what kind of system the US has, but seeing comments about how the poor and elderly are ruining it for the rest enrages me. I can understand a pagan conservative politician saying such a thing, I do not comprehend how Christians, who know the origin of illness and poverty, can say such things.
I say these things because I like you guys and I don’t think you see what you sound like. Compassion is messy and those who practice compassion will get hurt and burned. It says in Isaiah 53 that Christ bore our infirmities – I once heard Piper talk about how each of those healings Christ performed cost Him dearly. I don’t know what the solution to the healthcare problem is, but if it does not have it’s origins in compassion for human life, then it is doomed to failure, whatever its political origins or financial backing.
I’ll shut up now.
LikeLike
Thank you.
LikeLike
Roscuro,
You don’t have to shut up. That’s the beauty of this, we all get to speak our minds, yourself included. 🙂
And I for one value your opinion. Others do too. 🙂
LikeLike
Here is a good article that illustrates how the failed US healthcare system is not a market approach. It also shows how the fine Swiss and Singapore systems are largely free market.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2012/03/09/the-myth-of-free-market-american-health-care/
LikeLike
The federally mandated idea of “mainstreaming” special needs kids in public education always seemed asinine to me.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323309404578613532497541300.html
LikeLike
Roscuro, My ancestors were all poor and managed to pay for their healthcare before Medicare and Medicaid,
Over the last 35 years I have paid about $450,000 in taxes that went to pay for the healthcare of the poor and elderly. I am not complaining, but don’t imply we are heartless when we correctly point out that the stupidly created and administered Medicaid and Medicare programs greatly increased the cost of care for everyone in addition to being a huge tax burden.
No group of people in the history of the world have paid more for the healthcare of the poor and the elderly than modern middle-age Americans.
LikeLike
Roscuro, If you ignore “finance” when you design a healthcare system, you are living in Never-Never Land. It takes money to build hospitals, train and pay doctors and nurses, develop and produce drugs and medical equipment. Healthcare is a commodity like food, housing and other important products and services. Someone has to pay for it.
LikeLike
Also, Roscuro, we have one of your own (HRW) who regularly comes on here and explains to us how inferior we are in every way to your birthplace. It’s instinct to defend yourself from an attack.
LikeLike
I think you’re missing Roscuro’s point. She’s concerned about the attitude being expressed by Christians toward “the least of these.” I agree with her. We need to separate fiscal and political beliefs from who we are as followers of Christ.
I don’t know what Jesus would do with Obamacare, though he, obviously, would understand the attitude of the heart of those who put it together and insist everyone needs to participate except them.
OTOH, Jesus would be holding out a hand to those in need and not issuing a blanket condemnation because, again, he can see the attitude of their heart and mind.
God gave us kings because the Israelites didn’t want to do the work of staying close to their creator. They looked around at other societies and saw how they were managing with kings–how wealthy, how powerful, how healthy–and figured they’d get in on the action, too.
I guess they felt it was easier than the relationship work it took to remain close to the God they supposedly worshipped.
God gave them/us over to the desires of their hearts but warned if they complained about their kings, he would not hear them.
Paul enlarged on that, reminding us to pray for those in authority over us and submit to those who God “allowed” to become our leaders. Why should Christians be exempt from the evils being given over to those who choose not to follow our God?
We are to be salt and light in the world. If we are removed from the world, how will the world see truth?
They’ll know we are Christians by our love.
As an American, I don’t believe the Constitution sets into place a requirement that I renounce my personal beliefs to be a citizen of this nation. That’s what some of the most recent ruling indicate–the NM judge even said that.
What is my role, then, in that political situation? To pray, to vote, to speak.
I tell my Bible study ladies, the words Jesus, power and money do not belong together. Whenever you see them posited as such, you know it is not from God.
So, agitate against the Constitutional problems inherent in Obamacare, but I do not believe we should be condemning those who need it.
A review of Mark 9 and 10 may be in order. What do you do with these verses?
Starting at 9:42
Now John answered Him, saying, “Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.”
39 But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. 40 For he who is not against us is on our[c] side. 41 For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.
Jesus Warns of Offenses
42 “But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea. 43 If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— 44 where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’[d]
45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— 46 where
‘Their worm does not die,
And the fire is not quenched.’[e]
47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire— 48 where
‘Their worm does not die
And the fire is not quenched.’[f]
And over in Mark 10:42, Jesus talks about what’s required of us in serving:
42 But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, “You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. 43 Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. 44 And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”
Thanks, Roscuro, for bringing this all up.
LikeLike
Ricky – My ancestors were all poor too and medical care was difficult to get. My great great grandmother bled to death after childbirth, because the only available attendant was the village apothecary who didn’t know what he was doing. My great grandmother lost her youngest two children, twins, shortly after birth because of congenital medical conditions that are now routinely treated with surgery and extensive care. Both incidents were so devastating to those involved that they never forgot them, telling them and writing them down for their descendants to remember. I have little reason to be nostalgic for a return to the past of medical care.
Healthcare is not a commodity. The materials used to accomplish it are, but it is impossible to place a value on the care of a sick human being. We were told when we began nursing school that if we were in it for the money, then we would never make it – we had to care more about the patients than our personal comfort. I know a lot about the cost of healthcare – when I was training in the operating room, I used to be handed a one-use piece of equipment that was mostly plastic, and be told, “Don’t drop this, or you’ll drop a hundred thousand dollars.” The surgeons used to discuss the costs involved in surgery as they worked, remarking how a lot of things were marked up artificially because the manufacturers knew people would pay a premium for health. I see that even here, when medications that are sold at bare cost in the village are marked up 400 percent in the tourist district. I know that costs must be covered, and I think there are many ways to cover them, some better than others; but some subsidizing will always be necessary – “for the poor you will have with you always” – something that private charitable hospitals like the London in the early 1900’s, or the hospices of the monasteries in the middle ages, were founded to do.
I took special care neither to attack anyone’s character nor to endorse a particular form of healthcare. If anyone sees that in what I wrote, then they misunderstood.
KBells – People writing articles like the one in the Examiner or the person quoted in World aren’t trying to defend themselves against the opinions of a commenter on this blog.
LikeLike
Roscuro, I didn’t see anything in the Examiner article that laid anything on your birthplace’s shoulders. Canada is farther to the left and tends to try things we are trying to avoid. When those things fail, we notice and report as a warning not to go there. Also HRW is not the only Canadian I have met or read about with that attitude. Many are like the little sister of the prom queen, always jealous of the other;s success and thrilled to see them fail once in a while.
The experiences of your ancestors was pretty typical for people of that era, especially as people moved into new less developed territory. President Lincoln himself had only one child live to maturity. It also had as much to do with advancements in medical care than availability. My mother’s little brother only lived for two weeks, My mother often talked about how a neighbor’s child was born a couple of decades later with the same problem and survived.
LikeLike
[S]eeing comments about how the poor and elderly are ruining it for the rest enrages me. I can understand a pagan conservative politician saying such a thing, I do not comprehend how Christians, who know the origin of illness and poverty, can say such things.
Sorry, but bullhockey. I appreciate the rest of your post, without agreeing with it entirely, but BS on the comments from Christians about poor people ruining stuff.
LikeLike
The materials used to accomplish it are, but it is impossible to place a value on the care of a sick human being.
Is this an argument for free healthcare for everyone everywhere? If not, why not?
LikeLike
Kbells: Wow, you must really hate the place…
I grew with an equal amount of adults condemning our system and endorsing the American and vice versa. When Moore got such glowing endorsements of their healthcare out of the Canadians in the waiting room, he ignored one very important human psychological factor – the solidarity one that states, “Ain’t nobody talks trash about my family, cept’n me.” It was especially funny that he was asking about wait times – Canadians could go on forever amongst themselves about long wait times, but they weren’t about to admit that to an outsider with a video camera.
I understand that medicine has advanced since my ancestor’s time – however, there are two points:
1. With those advancements, not only has the cost of materials has increased but also the complexity of the treatments; so that to say, for example, my ancestor could pay for a home visit by the village apothecary so therefore I should be able to pay for emergency postpartum care by an obstetrician in the hospital with blood transfusion and hormonal drugs, oversimplifies the matter.
2. I am in a region where those medical advancements are known and even offered, but the cost is far more than most can pay. I have seen people die of conditions that could have been treated but they didn’t have the money.
Solarpancake – Post 1: It would be good to know that I was mistaken about what I read.
Post 2: Well, to start with, I said that it wasn’t and I meant what I said. Secondly, there is no such thing as free medical equipment or medicine. Thirdly, the labourer is worthy of his wages. Fourthly, my concerns were not about how people were dealing with the costs of labor, medical equipment and medicine, but how they perceived the patients – as nuisances and burdens or as fallen human beings in a sinful world who need help.
BTW, Canada doesn’t have universal free health care. In the long list of things that are paid out of pocket are: medications, dental work and dentures, glasses, hearing aids, mobility aids (canes, wheelchairs, etc.), procedures not deemed medically necessary, cosmetic surgery, blood sugar devices and insulin auto-injectors, travel vaccinations, optional lab tests, alternative medicine like chiropractors, physiotherapy, IVF and other fertility treatments. Funding varies by province and there are private clinics for those who have extra insurance or can pay out of pocket.
LikeLike
Just to grab one as a sample…
Thirdly, the labourer is worthy of his wages.
This Bible verse doesn’t, in any way, support the notion of government involvement in health care.
Govt subsidizing health care raises the costs of health care.
Again, baloney on the accusation that Christians here, or by and large, regard poor and old people as nuisances.
LikeLike
Roscuro, How is healthcare less a commodity than food, clothing and shelter? All are important. All must be paid for by somebody. If you are saying the wealthiest 50% should pay for the food, healthcare and housing of the poorest 20% as is done in the US, I understand your point. However, all are commodities. All cost money to produce. Someone has to pay the cost.
As I said earlier, I am not complaining about paying for the poor. I simply wish my government was intelligent enough to use our tax money to pay for the care of the poor and elderly in a way that did not drive up healthcare costs for others. Switzerland, Holland and others have done so. The US is particularly inept.
LikeLike
As a nurse, Roscuro has been taught that her field is unique because human life is so precious. I want nurses and doctors to have that attitude. I also understand that the farmer who grows our food and the carpenter who builds our homes think their jobs are the most critical. The same could be said for pilots, fireman, police, air traffic controllers, people who make clothes, etc.. All provide important services or help produce necessary commodities. As SolarPancake said, all are worthy of their wages. I would like those wages to be determined in a reasonably free market.
LikeLike
Roscuro & Anonymous (Michelle?) – On Wednesday & a bit on Thursday, I brought up my own concerns over this issue. Our current system is too expensive for those who can neither self-pay nor afford insurance, but Obamacare is not the answer many would like it to be.
On the same day, I was discussing this with a liberal young friend of mine who thinks we should have free healthcare for everyone. (The following is taken from my follow-up comment on Thursday.)
With my young friend on Facebook, I was taking more of a conservative stance. One of the things I said was similar to one of the things Ricky had pointed out – that government-run healthcare/insurance would bankrupt an already nearly-bankrupt nation. With the gov’t (taxpayers) paying all the bills, healthcare costs would probably rise even more, & eventually there would have to be some sort of rationing of services.
There seems to be no good solution at this time. We can talk about how things used to be, but they aren’t that way anymore, & insurance & medical costs are highly expensive, & out of reach for some.
My concern, & my young friend’s, is about “the least of these”, the ones who fall through the cracks.
Can you imagine, if American Christians actually tithed (I know all of you don’t believe in tithing, but the general idea of giving generously is still biblical), how much we’d be able to help those who need help? I think I’ve seen the statistic (I could be mistaken) that giving to churches averages out to about 2% of church-goers’ income. If true, that is a shame.
LikeLike
Karen O: Do you recall if the study you saw distinguished between tithing and charitable giving? I wouldn’t be surprised is the total was still low, but it may make some difference. A couple questions that come to my mind are, “WHY aren’t Christians giving more?” and “What responsibility to individual Christians have in seeing their gifts are used properly?” I’m very interested in pursuing answers to those and other questions, but what I KNOW is that “Government needs to be more involved” isn’t any kind of a good answer.
LikeLike
The “least of these” are on Medicaid and a score of other government programs. They are treated for free at County hospitals. Their babies are delivered for free at public hospitals. The people who are really hurting right now are middle-class people like Karen’s family. They aren’t poor enough to get Medicaid or old enough to get Medicare. Their costs have been driven up by our largely socialist system. SolarPancake has described free market reforms in general terms. Singapore and Sweden are examples to examine.
I have not read anything here where conservatives are blaming the poor. I, and other conservatives, have blamed our foolish government for creating a terribly expensive and inefficient healthcare system which has produced mediocre results.
LikeLike
Solarpancake – I’m sorry, I don’t recall where I read that, but I’m pretty sure I’ve seen it mentioned in more than one article. Your questions are good ones, & I agree that the answer is not that the government needs to be more involved.
LikeLike
My bad. Sweden should have been Switzerland.
LikeLike
Roscuro, I don’t hate Canada. Saying they have an undesirable heath care system, that their government is farther to the left than I like and that some seem a little too happy about American troubles is criticism but is not hate.
LikeLike
Solarpancake: This Bible verse doesn’t, in any way, support the notion of government involvement in health care.
I agree with you. I didn’t quote it to support the notion of government involvement in healthcare.
Ricky – A commodity is a physical product, used more specifically in the markets to refer to raw materials or agricultural products, that is bought and sold. Hence, food, clothing and building material may be considered commodities. Healthcare is a service or a ministry and thus can not be considered a commodity. The idea that a commodity is any good or service offered and paid for was actually one put forward by Karl Marx in his Critique of Political Economy as a criticism of capitalism. John Stuart Mill, author of the essay ‘On Liberty’ recognized that medical care sis not exits primarily for economic reasons:
‘We have now completed the enumeration of the modes in which labour employed on external nature is subservient to production. But there is yet another mode of employing labour… of which the subject is human beings. By the individuals, this labour and expense are usually incurred from other motives than to obtain such ultimate return, and, for most purposes of political economy, need not be taken into account as expenses of production…
…The labour of a physician or surgeon, when made use of by persons engaged in industry, must be regarded in the economy of society as a sacrifice incurred… it is not principally from economical motives that persons have a limb amputated, or endeavour to be cured of a fever…This is, therefore, one of the cases of labour and outlay which, though conducive to production, yet not being incurred for that end, or for the sake of the returns arising from it, are out of the sphere of most of the general propositions which political economy has occasion to assert respecting productive labour…’ The Principles of Political Economy
My only statement upon the financing of medicine was that, due to the permanent presence of illness and poverty in society, some subsidizing of costs would inevitably be necessary. I deliberately left the method of that subsidization as an open question.
My nursing training was not the origin for my conviction that the field of medicine is based on altruistic principles. What my teachers said to me merely confirmed deeply held prior convictions, based upon the Biblical principle of acting from a motivation of love for God and one’s brother and neighbour, backed by a family culture which was content with shelter. food and raiment and shared any excess with those in need without thought of personal gain.
About the free market determining the price of medical care – what is your view of medical missions?
LikeLike
That should be – “medical care does not exist for primarily economic reasons.”
LikeLike
Karen, you raise good questions. It is undoubtedly the case that the Church is responsible for the welfare of its members. My family often has discussions about the rights and wrongs of government funding of social services. They often end with a wistful reference to the church’s role and acknowledgment that we are not, by and large, fulfilling it. I make that qualification, because the truth is, I avoided having to go on welfare or unemployment by the generosity of fellow Christians, when I was unable to get a job after graduation.
About the low levels of tithing, I came across this article which quotes the statistics but doesn’t provide any links for them: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/08/12/tithing-canada-church_n_1703526.html
LikeLike
Interesting thread this weekend……
kbells — I’m not sure how I left you that impression. I tried to avoid blantant US-Canada comparision precisely to avoid creating that impression. I usually comment here to leave an alternate explanation for today’s events, create what I think are errors, and stimulate debate. I think nationalism is a silly concept and one not important to any debate.
AJ — the commenter from the Heritage Foundation is trying to weasel out of responsibility. He held the view as a “technical matter” that a mandate of some sort was needed to pay for the system. When Clinton proposed a universal system, HF felt they needed to provide a different option as a means to opposing Clinton’s proposal. I don’t think they were quite prepared for someone to actually take them seriously (other than Romney in Mass.)
McAfee is hardly a reputable source of criticism. He was recently arrested for murder and from what I understand his lawyers are using an insanity defense.
Rickyweaver — thank you. First you embraced the Marxist position that capitalism commoditifies everything. Capitalism is a virus which places a value on everything even that which should not be priced. A socialist position would be to recognize this commodification and insist that we should resist this process in certain areas such as utilities, health care, etc. The extent of resistance depends on a personal viewpoint.
Secondly, you seem to embrace the Swiss solution. The ACA is based on the Swiss system. There is an individual mandate, insurance exchanges, and subsidies from the gov’t to those to poor to afford insurance. (see your own linked article).
Many Americans are in the same position; surveys indicate that when asked about certain components of the ACA, people even Republicans approve. Even stranger, when asked if they approve of the ACA the majority say yes but when asked if they approve of Obamacare they say no. The crashing of the website indicates either it was shoddily built or the ACA is extremely popular or both. Its highly likely the site has some bugs to work out … almost all websites tend to have that problem. Its also highly likely that people are trying to see if they will save money (and with a subsidy I can’t help but think they will save)
I pretty much agree with roscuro. And I think she is voicing the confusion, frustration, and difficulties non-American Christians have with the evangelical American position. There’s no debate in the conservative Christian political parties of Europe that health care is a right and the state should be involved. Even in Canada whose Conservative party is far more in tune with conservative American values there’s very little debate on health care as a right (but some argument on the means of delivery).
LikeLike
oops freudian slip there … it should “correct what I think are errors” not “create what I think are errors” although I’m sure some of you think the latter is correct.
LikeLike
HRW, I would be happy with the Swiss or Dutch models, both of which foster competition and efficiency. My problem with the ACA is that it does not dismantle Medicare, Mecicaid and the scores of other federal healthcare programs.
LikeLike
I still have not seen any argument as to why healthcare should be taken out of the free market while food, clothing and shelter should be subject to the free market. All are very important. However, since I am neither a communist, a socialist or a Democrat, I do not believe anyone has a right to any of them in a free society.
Roscuro, The free market is not inconsistent with private charity. The free market promotes the delivery of goods and services of high quality at low prices. Charity gives to the poor what they have trouble affording. A free market makes charity more efficient. A given contribution will go further in a market system like that of Singapore than it will in an inefficient, socialist system like that of the US.
LikeLike
The Dutch model is extremely expensive even more then the US. It also features compulsory insurance premiums ie an individual mandate. I would agree one overall health program is far better than the piecemeal program in the US but then again that would be socialism now wouldn’t it.
As I said, a socialist resists commodification. Some promote social housing thinking that shelter is far too important to be subjected to the open market. Even “capitalist” parties think its important to get involved ie mortgage insurance etc. During emergencies and wartime, capitalist parties and gov’ts will regulate and ration food. To think of commodities as rights is not unusual.
LikeLike
I can’t sign in, so this is roscuro here.
HRW – I would say my concept of healthcare is not so much a right to receive it, but a responsibility to give it.
RIcky – I am not arguing for the removal of healthcare from the free market, I’m saying healthcare is not in the sphere of the market. Yes, the price of medicine and medical supplies, as commodities, will generally be subject to fluctuations of supply and demand. However, the demand for medical labour has never relived the worldwide shortage of physicians and nurses,. Economic factors alone cannot make someone into an effective medical worker. Furthermore, the state of human health fluctuates wildly. Illness and injury do not follow widely predictable patterns and anyone can at any time can suddenly be in need of medical care. Financial structures move too slowly to be able to respond to those constant fluctuations.
I would go further than you and say nobody has a right to anything in any kind of society; rather we all have responsibilities – to God and to our neighbour. That is why we give food to those who are hungry and clothes to those who are naked and help to those who are sick. A free market is a good tool but a bad master, because it is driven by the desires of fallen human beings. Pure capitalism is as much based on agnostic and evolutionary concepts of humanity as communism is. The Christian author, G. K Chesterton put it better than I could, in a quote from one of his short stories:
‘Communism is a heresy, but it isn’t a heresy that you people take for granted. It is Capitalism you take for granted; or rather the vices of Capitalism disguised as a dead Darwinism. Do you recall what you were all saying about life being only a scramble, and nature demanding the survival of the fittest, and it doesn’t matter whether the poor are paid justly or not? Why that is the heresy that you have grown accustomed to… That’s the anti-Christian morality or immorality that you all take quite naturally.” – from ‘The Crime of the Communist’
LikeLike
HRW, So the Dutch model is “extremely expensive”. The Dutch spend a smaller percentage of GDP on healthcare than you do in Canada. They spend about 9% of GDP. The US spends 18% and gets worse results. Passing the ACA without greatly reforming Medicaid and Medicare is like putting a skin graft over a malignant tumor.
LikeLike
Roscuro, I really don’t disagree with anything in your last post.
When a nation decides that “healthcare” is a right without regard to cost and requires virtually no copayment from large segments of society, you get the following results (which I have seen on a regular basis in the US):
1. 90 year olds are given double knee replacements at a cost to the government of $250,000.
2. $350,000 is routinely spent on complicated surgeries to extend the lives of 85 year olds for a matter of months.
3. Doctors in small rural hospitals struggling to survive remove the gallbladders of a high percentage of Medicare patients, regardless of the symptoms of the patients.
Our healthcare system is the furthest thing on earth from unbridled capitalism. It could better be described as demented or perverted socialism. Fortunately, many Christians and others give generously pay for healthcare for the poor of other countries. Even more importantly, medical professionals like yourself forego sizable salaries in rich countries to become medical missionaries.
LikeLike
HRW, Here is a graph to support my earlier point:
https://www.google.com/search?q=spending+on+healthcare+gdp&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en&client=safari#biv=i%7C0%3Bd%7CWk9TWlu8WgcJrM%3A
LikeLike
Here is another chart that shows Holland fractionally above Canada in healthcare spending but well below the US. Interestingly, all of my new favorite countries (Chile, Russia, Poland, etc) seem to be coming in at from 6% to 8% of GDP. 6% was where the US was before Medicare and Medicaid. Maybe you can go home again.
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.XPD.TOTL.ZS
LikeLike
When you have rights you have responsibilities and when you are responsible you secure rights.
ricky …. my comment regarding expense was based on your Forbes link in which there is a graph showing spending per capita and the netherlands is higher than the US. As a percentage of GDP, its in the middle of the pack and close to Canada, which has higher labour cost (doctor’s salaries) due to its proximate to the US. Due to labour costs, the Canadian system is expensive.
LikeLike
How the Amish do it:
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/10/05/us-usa-healthcare-amish-idUKBRE99404D20131005
LikeLike
Donna, that way (of the Amish) is similar to the principle behind Christian health-sharing ministries like Samaritan Ministries, from what I understand, with the biblical idea of bearing each other’s medical burdens in the Christian faith community. Routine care or inexpensive treatment isn’t shared. Neither are medical ailments stemming from immoral activity, of course, so members do not wind up paying for the illicit lifestyles of others, like we’re doing in the insurance world.
LikeLike