Connect with us

Healthcare

John Stossel on single-payer healthcare

Published

on

There’s all kinds of buzz lately about how single-payer healthcare is the wave of the future for America. Politicians like Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) have been pushing a Medicare-for-All concept that would cost Americans $32 trillion over a decade to implement.

The argument is that people should not have to go without healthcare, but here’s the question that none of them are answering. Is it really a problem that needs fixing in this manner or is it a solution in search of a problem? Obamacare is broken, but making an even more obtuse centralized, government-controlled healthcare system doesn’t seem to be a very good solution, especially with the price tag that’s attached.

One of the biggest fears outside of the tremendous cost is that those with single-payer healthcare or different variations on the theme seem to have deteriorating healthcare systems overall. Yes, people are “covered” for their healthcare needs, but are those needs being met properly? Invariably, the answer is “no.”

In this video, John Stossel probes the question and tackles some of the common talking points associated with Medicare-for-All. Does it work? Can it give everyone healthcare without making that healthcare worse?

In a prime example of “be careful what you wish for,” so many proponents of Medicare-for-All have been saying we need single-payer healthcare to fix our problems. But what problems will arise if they get their wish? We should all fear those prospects.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Democrats

OTC birth control: An issue radicals on both sides can (almost) agree on

Published

on

OTC birth control An issue radicals on both sides can almost agree on

There are few issues in which the far-right and far-left normally agree. But one issue in particular makes so much sense, one has to wonder why those in the mushy middle are so opposed to it. The issue is over-the-counter birth control, and the solution is simple: allow it.

Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) are in near-agreement on an issue for the second time in two weeks. Both sides want birth control easily acceptable, and others are joining in on the bipartisanship.

The only issue seems to be cost. Cruz wants a “clean and simple bill” while Democrats are pushing for full funding, either mandated in healthcare plans, cost-subsidized by the government, or both. This is, of course, a huge sticking point as it’s very unlikely many Republicans would vote for subsidies or mandates and it’s unlikely Democrats would vote for a bill that excluded them.

It seems bipartisanship stops at the wallet.

As Beth Baumann noted at Town Hall, this impasse isn’t new.

Republicans introduced a bill back in 2014 that would make birth control available over-the-counter. They didn’t include a provision that required health insurance to cover it though. And that was an issue for Democrats.

Pressley’s bill would make birth control available over-the-counter, without a prescription from a doctor, but there would be a requirement for health insurance to pay for it.

These are two separate issues. Making birth control available over-the-counter should happen with or without the insurance mandate. Then, the can debate funding for birth control in a future healthcare debate. There’s no need to keep it locked behind the counter while politicians debate costs. Availability and cost are completely different aspects that shouldn’t be tied together by artificial bonds.

It’s ironic far-left Democrats are holding birth control access hostage while pushing to add health insurance mandates. One might start wondering if they really care about women’s rights outside of the political implications.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Bernie’s insane disconnect from economic realities and the way Americans view them

Published

on

Bernies insane disconnect with economic realities and the way Americans view them

Senator Bernie Sanders is detached from reality. I didn’t realize it until today when I learned he told CNN’s Anderson Cooper that a lot of people would be “delighted” to pay more in taxes if it meant free healthcare.

Here’s the full quote:

“Yeah, but I suspect that a lot of people in the country would be delighted to pay more in taxes if they had comprehensive health care as a human right. I live 50 miles away from the Canadian border. You go to the doctor any time you want. You don’t take out your wallet. You have heart surgery, you have a heart transplant and you come out of the hospital and it costs you nothing.”

Let’s break that down. Bear with me, as there’s a lot to cover.

First, no human alive, regardless of how they feel about government programs, is delighted when forced to pay more in taxes. Nobody gets their tax bill and says, “Oh, my lucky stars! I got to pay more taxes than I did before. This is wonderful! I’m delighted!”

Next, we get to the qualifying caveat, “if they had comprehensive health care as a human right.”

As caveats go, it’s one that can seem appealing on the surface. It has the two important phrases used by progressives across the board now: “comprehensive health care” and “human right.” There has been an indoctrination that has spread throughout a large portion of the population from progressives to moderates to conservatives. This indoctrination has made people believe they do not have comprehensive health care and it’s somehow their right to have it as a human.

Today, we have that right. Whether through the state, their employer, or paying as an individual, every American has access to comprehensive health care. It is too expensive for some, but again the state has inserted itself into the equation already with Obamacare. The horror stories of people losing their access to health care are overblown and oftentimes demonstrably false.

As far as it all being a right, that’s debatable. Many conservatives like to point out it’s a commodity and that emergency care is already guaranteed to everyone. But I do not believe that’s the right approach to argue against the current push for programs like Medicare-for-All. Those who choose to not pay for their health coverage and who refuse to go through the steps to get their health coverage given to them by the state are making a concerted effort to deny their own access to health insurance. It’s not something we go out and buy on a whim, so labeling it as a commodity is misleading. It is a commodity by definition, but as we try to win the narrative battle, ignoring the inherent differences between health coverage and gold or orange juice is a mistake.

Rather than view it as a right, it should be viewed as a privilege made available in varying degrees to every American, even those who cannot afford to pay for it. That just makes more sense in winning hearts and minds than calling it a commodity.

Now, we get to the juicy fallacies in the Senator’s argument. He lives close to Canada. Great! That means he likely gets to see Canadians in his neck of the woods coming to America to have procedures done. Why? Because of the demonstrably false claim that “you go to the doctor any time you want.” No, Senator. They don’t. They are extremely limited in when they can go to the doctor, how much time they can spend with their doctor, and what their doctor can offer them at that moment. They don’t have the same luxury we have of wanting to have procedures like elective knee surgery without being forced to suffer through the pain for months or years before they can get on the operating table.

That’s one reason so many from Canada, the United Kingdom, and other “single-payer utopias” are coming here. They don’t want to wait. The other reason is they’re learning the quality of care is deteriorating as it is wont to do whenever government pushes aside the free market to make everything they touch mediocre.

The last part is the one that would make most conservatives chuckle if we weren’t so worried about it becoming a reality. He said Americans would get all sorts of health care from checkups to major operations and it wouldn’t cost us anything. Actually, Senator, that’s not true. It would cost us everything.

What Bernie Sanders fails to realize is his plans would reduce quality of care, increase overall costs through taxation, and drive our problematic healthcare system to the edge of collapse. Then again, maybe he does realize this.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Jessica Biel goes anti-vaxxer and Twitter goes nuts

Published

on

Jessica Biel goes anti-vaxxer

If you want to get scorn from both sides of the political aisle, come out against vaccines. Progressives, conservatives, and everyone in between seems to have a majority of people in favor of laws that would force parents to get their children vaccinated.

California is currently debating legislation that would eliminate many of the exemptions currently used by parents to prevent their children from being vaccinated. Actress Jessica Biel met with lawmaker to discuss it, and suddenly Twitter is loaded with hate for the Total Recall reboot star.

When it comes to healthcare issues, the debate normally rests around costs. Healthcare rights of parents are ignored, pushed into the trash bin of “settled science” that makes many go completely unhinged when skeptics voice their concerns. Google has gone so far as to “educate” the population; you won’t find videos attacking vaccines without a clear warning by YouTube attempting to debunk their concerns.

For some reason, it’s been turned into a conspiracy theory when in reality it comes down to the rights of parents. But don’t call it that in the wrong crowd. You’ll be labeled an anti-vaxxer like Jessica Biel.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending