This delusion that health care is a right. You all voted for a monster that made promises he broke and unilaterally and unconstitutionally changed rules of the law. The empty suit wears no clothes and has no experience. He acts as Caesar and you seem to be okay with it; some of you champion it.
Do you not realize that this savior of health care uses as a solution the original poison? That poison is government.
The first step in destroying health care was not government monkeying around with it but with wages. Businesses used the offer of health care to gain desired employees in defiance of the government's wage controls during World War II. This masks the end consumer from the true cost which is bad; this distorts the market.
The government follows suit a couple decades later with Medicaid and Medicare. The market is further distorted, especially since accountability is lessened and fraud is easier with government programs.
So that is the short story of how the market was distorted.
Back in the 90's an unelected woman behind the man of power was to design a government solution to a "problem" that was originally caused by government; the solution was designed outside of the public eye. This man of power we learned was not just a liar but a perjurer and the woman in fact supported his lie and even accused the accusers of being the guilty ones. Thankfully, and hopefully not surprisingly, the solution failed. People of that character should not be allowed to lead or succeed.
So in the late 2000's we get the empty armour of Caesar. The people would become subject to passing of the Affordable (snicker) Care Act (ACA); supported by only one political party through backroom deals and exemptions; this is just a reworking of the 90's failure and a variant of a health care plan of his slain foe. Believe it or not, the foe did not believe the plan was good.
And so the is a recap of recent history. However, I do need to reiterate an important quote to frame the rest of this talk.
But we have to pass the bill to uh find out what is in it away from the fog of the controversy.
And so legislation is passed by the support of a single party without reading it. And none of these trolls were assassinated?
And so empty armour Caesar unilaterally and unconstitutionally gave business a free pass on their obligation when it came due; ironically Caesar did claim business the bad guy and that he would slay it, but instead indulged in its slushy compensations.
And time has come for the axe to fall on the citizens not under the protection of business; yes, business protects people due to the bizarre circumstances designed by the government in which the government would otherwise punish the people. Once again Caesar tries to dictate unconstitutional deference of law after rebuking the opposition for not supporting the law, but it is much more noticeable now that he does not have the authority because it affects the bare public.
We wait for what will happen. Will a change happen under approved processes; will change be allowed under an unconstitutional declaration from Caesar; will the law be implemented as stated?
From here we have to move on to what is next. This is the scary part. Since we needed to pass it to find out what is in it, what's next might be scary.
What of the sick? You must cover pre-existing conditions. This is bad.
Am I mean? Am I mad?
No. I am going to explain the big picture and how we might not improve health care under this new set of laws and regulations.
Normally pre-existing conditions would have a higher price if they could get a policy. If they could not get a policy due to lack of funds or unavailability how would a person get treatment?
Charity swells from those that have excess funds. Those that are in need benefit from charity. Charity picks up the slack.
But now since the law forces providers to cover all and that all buy insurance, insurance costs goes up and those that used to receive charity might be able to afford health insurance. Insurance is forced to pick up charity's tab. That hidden safety net is forced on everyone, not just those that can afford it and want to provide it.
So if that charity recipient now uses insurance instead, their care is limited by what the government allows, not what a charity will pay for. Hence, death panels.
Since we haven't read the law, do we know if charity can still give help? Or is it illegal for outside charitable functions to help people?
What about Doctors? There are Doctors that do charitable work for free. Does this law control this action of kindness? I have heard zero comment on this, but it worries me because ACA does price control; price control might interrupt charitable services.
Even worse, laws and regulations tend to only control knowns. New ideas and innovations quickly fall outside of this scope because the law does not cover the new ideas. How can people get access to new procedures if they are not legalized? Government control of health care will make only current knowns legal and new methods are unknown and hence, illegal. Hence, innovation is illegal and uncovered.
Well, you voted for this. Enjoy.