Connect with us

Healthcare

Just when you thought that Obamacare couldn’t get any worse…

Published

on

Just when you thought that Obamacare couldnt get any worse

Leftists obsess over controlling people, what better way to do so than with devices that track everyone’s movements.

Desire for control is the distinguishing feature of the left.  However, this control is highly dependent on knowing a person’s every move as well as having sanctions on incorrect behaviour. The people wouldn’t normally accept this level of control, but wealth redistribution for the cause of ‘free-healthcare’ may just fit the bill.

Wealth redistribution in the guise of healthcare.

Back when good old Karl Marx appropriated what were already the centuries old ideas of socialism, he came up with this cute little saying: “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.” This redistribution was the perfect blueprint for enslaving people since some people could be controlled by how much of their property is taken from them by force. While others could be controlled with the doling out of this property with it depending on votes and loyalty.

In the case of Obamacare, it was only after passage that the word ‘redistribution’ was used with all of it’s socialist implications:

“Americans want a fair and fixed insurance market,” said Jonathan Gruber, a health economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who advised Mr. Obama’s team as it designed the law. “You cannot have that without some redistribution away from a small number of people.”

Translation from the Leftist double talk: Our voters want free stuff including free health care. Unfortunately, that cannot be accomplished without forcibly taking of property from ‘The Rich’ as defined by us. But don’t worry that you think you’re stealing, we’ll salve your conscience with the repetition of the lie that it was somehow your property in the first place.

Failure isn’t just an option with Obamacare – It’s a feature!

Like most socialist schemes, this will quickly fall apart because most people abhor having their property stolen from them for the purposes of buying the loyalty of Democratic voters. Obamacare was designed to implode, ushering in the worse alternative of national socialized healthcare (better know by the deceptive label “Single payer”). The abject failure of a government-run health care system will see it replaced with an even bigger failed government-run system.

Fitness trackers for healthcare rationing.

In the meantime, what better way for the nation’s Left to keep an eye on the people and under control than with the benevolent excuse of taking care of everyone? Enter the brave new world of ubiquitous ‘fitness trackers’ for the purpose of doling out Obamacare benefits.

At present, the use of this new piece of kit is  voluntary for saving on health care. However, no one should be under the illusion that with skyrocketing costs of the laughably termed ‘Affordable Healthcare Act’ that the control obsessed Left won’t want mandatory use of these trackers for the purposes of rationing health care.

So while Obamacare is bankrupting some and enriching others, it will soon inspire a whole new level of people control if it’s allowed to stand or metastasize into national socialized healthcare.

Differential equations teaches us that one can use the initial conditions of the present to extrapolate events in the near term balanced with the knowledge of the past. The interaction of technological advances and the march of history is fascinating. History can inform those willing to listen as to what will happen in the future because the laws of human natural are as immutable as the elegant equations of Newtonian physics.

Culture and Religion

Conservatives, Federalists and people of faith must be a voice for people with intellectual/developmental disabilities

Published

on

Conservatives Federalists and people of faith must be a voice for people with intellectualdevelopmen

Last year as a way to help me connect with people, a friend of mine introduced me to a group that had ties to a non-profit group called The Arc. Now the overall purpose of The Arc is to serve people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The organization’s roots go back to 1936 with the Children’s Benevolent League which was incorporated in Washington State. It would evolve into the Association for Retarded Children (or Citizens) which was the original acronym for ARC. Retarded these days is a politically incorrect term, and thus The Arc has no meaning anymore in itself anymore. I myself do fall into those with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

While I would agree that “retarded” would be a derogatory term and mental disabilities would be a more appropriate term to use, I eventually had to leave my local group of The Arc and it was strictly out of my own choice and my choice alone.

The Arc I soon found out opposed any repeal of the Affordable Care Act. One of the biggest reasons why they support the ACA (aka ObamaCare) is that the law itself allowed for Medicaid expansion, and thus bringing more people into that welfare program including people with disabilities. I also looked at their blog and they were also opposed to the recent signed Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and while I have my healthy skepticism about this brand new law signed by President Trump, I do think we need to reign in Medicaid spending cause if we don’t, it will eventually go broke and those who have depended on it really suffer.

Sadly, The Arc has been grounded in a belief that only big government can help those with disabilities. The Arc’s long standing tax policy according to them is; “that it should raise sufficient revenues to finance essential programs that help people with disabilities to live and work in the community. The Arc also supports tax policy that is fair and reduces income inequality; people with disabilities are twice as likely to experience poverty.”

The term ‘income inequality’ should be a red flag for anyone who calls themselves a conservative. What does The Arc consider ‘income inequality?” This is just one of those buzz terms that the left has thrown around for years, and The Arc while they want to give people with disabilities a voice, that voice sadly eventually will advocate for more bigger government and higher taxes and regulation. All in the name of helping the intellectual and developmental disabled. The Arc to me is just another organization that is ran by maybe well intended progressives to liberal thinking people.

I would like to ask The Arc why must people be forced to buy expensive health insurance so that they can take the money out of the consumers to spread to the mentally disabled (via government edict) so that they can be insured? The money could have gone to invest in the needs of individual families who work to the bone just to make a living. Progressives have forced people to work harder for other people that they will never meet. Yet this spreading of the wealth is supposed to make us feel good about our government helping others. Some legitimately do need help from the government and others just stay on the dole and contribute to the collapse of the welfare state.

The welfare state is a sacred cow of the progressives because it is used by progressive politicians to buy votes from their constituents. The Arc is no different as progressive politicians are buying favor with them as well. The short term might be favorable to the disabled but if the socialist scheme crashes and big government can’t help them any longer, I can only tell the disabled community to be on guard.

I am not saying that the disabled should not receive government help. What I am saying is that we need to reform welfare programs so that it does not come crashing down like a ton of rocks. I am afraid that eventually the disabled will be weeded out of the population because they are now a burden to our government. If CBS News enjoys the fact that Iceland murders the preborn that have mental disabilities via legal abortion, then that thinking is only a hop, skip and jump away from coming to America and worse.

If you are part of The Arc, and agree with me that The Arc’s advocacy of big government is wrong, we need to figure out a way to create some kind of organization that is not focused on big centralized government but rather embolden those with intellectual and developmental disabilities to be able to live not only independently but in a culture built on liberty and freedom. We now have stable organizations for senior citizens that promotes conservative values (AMAC, 60+, American Seniors Organization) and are true alternatives to the progressive AARP. Now we need conservative alternatives to The Arc.

This article was originally published in The Christian Post.

Continue Reading

Healthcare

Should CVS and Amazon replace Obamacare as the healthcare gatekeepers?

Published

on

Should CVS and Amazon replace Obamacare as the healthcare gatekeepers

There’s an interesting article over at Spectator that details how two of the big mergers initiated in 2017 – CVS-Aetna and Amazon-Whole Foods – may be the start of the re-privatization of healthcare. Both mergers seem to be betting on a future with something different from Obamacare, though it’s very unlikely the national government will get out of the healthcare industry altogether.

That’s okay, at least as far as CVS and Amazon are concerned. If things continue heading along the trajectory of Obamacarelite or an adjusted Obamacare without an individual mandate, the two giant companies are poised to do well. If the government gets mostly out of the health insurance industry through a clean repeal of Obamacare, CVS and Amazon will hit the jackpot. Even if nothing changes, the trends towards big dollars going into healthcare means they’re worst-case-scenario is still highly profitable.

Here’s the Spectator:

CVS and Amazon, Not Politicians, Best Bets to Reform Healthcare

https://spectator.org/cvs-and-amazon-not-politicians-best-bets-to-reform-healthcare/Americans spend nearly $3.5 trillion annually on health care. The number rises beyond inflation, with the figure fast approaching a fifth of gross domestic product as we grow older, fatter, and more demanding. CVS and others seek to capitalize, which generally betters attempts to monopolize or subsidize or any other “ize” one can imagine.

CVS and perhaps Amazon, whose acquisition of Whole Foods earlier this year set off speculation, believes that the free market can deliver care more efficiently than the government, which, long before Obamacare, became heavily invested in health (declining lifespans two years running suggest taxpayers do not get much back on their investment).

As much as I’d love to see DC remove itself completely from the healthcare business, I’m concerned that the market, even one as big as healthcare, will be swayed too heavily by the big players. That doesn’t mean we need to keep Obamacare or replace it with Obamacarelite to prevent big healthcare companies from running rampant, but it would be nice to see a bunch more smaller players entering the fray. Obamacare has scared many from participating. If mega-companies fill the void, we may be seeing different but equally risky motivations leading us down a dark path. It isn’t the capitalism of it all that worries me. It’s the stifling of innovation from the opposite side of the spectrum, one that’s not dissimilar from the automotive industry’s quashing of alternative energy cars for decades until the demand was too high to ignore over the last decade and a half.

We need to press DC to demolish Obamacare, but we must also keep an eye on the new gatekeepers who would replace DC once they’re out. It can’t get any worse than it is… unless it can. Still, Obamacare is so bad, it’s definitely worth the risk.

Continue Reading

Healthcare

3 reasons McConnell’s plan to ‘move on’ from Obamacare repeal is a huge mistake

Published

on

3 reasons McConnells plan to move on from Obamacare repeal is a huge mistake

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has a plan. He hasn’t made the plan public, but behind closed doors he’s let other Republican lawmakers know his intentions. To the discerning public ear, his plans are coming through crystal clear. He intends to play it safe in 2018 and avoid issues that may contribute to the GOP losing control of the Senate.

Last week on NPR, McConnell laid out a populist approach to the upcoming legislative year. He heralded bipartisanship while pushing away from important controversial issues such as Medicaid, food stamps, and most importantly another attempt to repeal and replace Obamacare.

McConnell Ready To ‘Move On’ From Obamacare Repeal, Others In GOP Say Not So Fast

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/21/572588692/mcconnell-wants-bipartisanship-in-2018-on-entitlements-immigration-and-moreSenate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants 2018 to be a year of bipartisanship, even if that means moving on from GOP dreams of cutting welfare and fully rolling back the Affordable Care Act.

The Kentucky Republican on Thursday broke with House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., on the approach to paring back spending on programs like Medicaid and food stamps. In an interview with NPR, McConnell said he is “not interested” in using Senate budget rules to allow Republicans to cut entitlements without consultation with Democrats.

He painted his reluctance to address the issue in terms of basic political math:

“Well, we obviously were unable to completely repeal and replace with a 52-48 Senate,. We’ll have to take a look at what that looks like with a 51-49 Senate. But I think we’ll probably move on to other issues.”

The reality is he’s not wanting to go into the midterm elections with the Democrats and their mainstream media partners complaining about lost insurance coverage in areas where seats are being contested on Capitol Hill. The two things he doesn’t want to tackle – Obamacare and welfare reform – are election losers in his opinion.

He is probably right about welfare reform, much to the chagrin of Speaker of the House Paul Ryan who has been pushing for entitlement reform since he was a freshman representative. As for Obamacare, he’s absolutely wrong. Here are three reasons why:

Following elimination of individual mandate, premiums will rise

The tax law zeroed out the tax penalty associated with not having healthcare, essentially eliminating the individual mandate for now. Republicans will herald the move while Democrats cook up numbers to show how millions “lost” their healthcare as a result, but it’s how the insurance companies react that will make the real waves.

Premiums will go up. It’s unavoidable without further action on Obamacare. The individual mandate is one of the few things keeping health insurance costs down. By forcing young, healthy Americans to pay for insurance they rarely use, insurance companies are able to mitigate some of the financial damage of other aspects of Obamacare such as mandatory coverage for preexisting conditions. By not forcing people to buy, insurance. companies will be forced to raise premiums and deductibles on everyone else.

It would be irresponsible to drop the mandate without cutting or completely eliminating Obamacare. Now more than ever, a new plan must be put into place that does not have an individual mandate but makes up the difference in ways that do not include spiking prices.

Democrats will use repeal-prevention as campaign ammunition

If McConnell thinks repealing and replacing Obamacare will cause his caucus election pains, he’s in for a surprise. The Democrats will invoke “protecting Obamacare from the GOP” in all of their campaigns. There was a time not so long ago when Americans could stomach losing Obamacare, but support for the ACA has steadily increased since the election.

McConnell will have to peel back a few more layers on his perceptions of Democratic campaign strategy if he wants to know what will hurt the GOP more : repealing Obamacare or giving Democrats the threat of a future Obamacare repeal.

Conservatives won’t stand for it

Republicans have been making the same promise for seven years: give us the House, Senate, and White House and we’ll take down Obamacare. They got their wish. Now, it’s time to deliver.

The shifting sentiment towards Obamacare might settle well with some Republicans, but conservatives won’t be as forgiving. The House Freedom Caucus is already preparing to push for it:

House Republicans reject Mitch McConnell’s plan to ‘move on’ from Obamacare repeal

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-republicans-reject-mitch-mcconnells-plan-to-move-on-from-obamacare-repeal/article/2644219Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., also said Obamacare repeal was “still on the table.” He said President Trump and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. — who helped spearhead his own repeal bill with Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La. — are still on board for repealing the healthcare law.

“I think he is probably just being pragmatic, knowing he has only got 51 votes,” said Meadows, chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, in reference to McConnell’s comments.

If McConnell wants an easy button, he’ll need to help his party earn a 60-seat majority. Otherwise, it’s time to get an Obamacare repeal on the reconciliation table and make it happen as soon as possible. Waiting until after the election may mean we’re waiting for a very long time if they lose their majority.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.