Text 11246, 132 rader
Skriven 2013-11-12 17:53:34 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
     Kommentar till en text av Y'all
Ärende: "We have to do something"
=================================
"Hey, we have to do something." by Kelly Colby

"We have to do something." This or some similar refrain is at the core of
poor decision making more often than not. I see it in almost every
intractable political argument I have ever had, with both liberals and
conservatives, and it is a clear indication that the person presenting the
argument hasn't thought this through. I was saddened to see Carol from The
Walking Dead fall back on such intellectual sloth to defend her own hasty
overreaction in this week's episode. (Don't worry, it's not another The
Walking Dead column.)

"We have to do something" is a harbinger of doom in the world of public
policy. "We have to do something" is how we were sold Obamacare. It's the
reason we are being told that the flubbed Obamacare rollout is not the
fault of the law's planners. And, be sure to prepare yourself for the next
step. "We have to do something" will be the reason we are told Obamacare
must be abandoned in favor of a single-payer system. It's all dreck, of
course.

"We have to do something" is generally used as a justification for "we
have to do something stupid." The argument itself is absurd on several
levels. "It's raining outside, we have to do something." While rain may be
irritating, not only is no particular action called for, no specific
action (short of an umbrella) is going to make any positive difference. No
one with half a brain would support the idea, "it's raining, so we should
burn the house down." Likewise, when you hear a click after your latest
step in a minefield, "I have to do something" may be factually accurate
but not immediately prudent.

Waiting for someone else to do something might be a better plan. And,
don't get me started on my neighbor with the machete trying to help me out
with my spider-on-my-arm problem. Suffice it to say, when I hear "we have
to do something" my immediate reaction is almost always "I would prefer
that you didn't."

As I said, "we have to do something" was the very premise behind
Obamacare. We were told that our healthcare system was broken, that
millions were without insurance and that this was costing everybody money
needlessly. Insurance companies had lifetime caps and could discriminate
against people with pre-existing conditions. As a result, emergency rooms
were absorbing the cost and being loaded beyond their capacity. If only we
would pass Obamacare, the great technocrats in Washington could fix all
this. We were told repeatedly that the opposition had no plan (not
actually true) and that doing nothing was not a plan - in other words, "we
have to do something."

We were told that Obamacare would save us money, that we could keep our
healthcare plans if we liked them, and that we could keep our doctors. We
were told that the plan was fiscally responsible and would decrease the
budget deficit.

So, how's that working out?

We have millions of new people who are without insurance. We have an
exchange to offer insurance to all, but it appears that "affordable" is
going to be something of a misnomer. Many are seeing doubling of their
healthcare premiums or more. Those engaged in healthcare through their
work have been, for the most part, given a pass for a year, but you can
expect many of those plans to go away next year as well, and you can be
certain that they will be more expensive in any case.

Most of those signing up through the exchanges are actually being
transferred to Medicaid, a program already overloaded and going broke, and
the implementation costs for Obamacare have already begun creeping up
(even with the fishy accounting where you count years where there are no
actual costs but only revenues). With the higher prices and the very low
penalty, there is no particular reason for many of the originally
uninsured to get insured, so we can expect them to use emergency rooms in
the meantime and sign up for healthcare only when they have expensive
medical treatment that they need (now that insurance companies have no
caps and must accept them).

If you've been paying attention, you'll notice that the past tense is now
being employed: "We had to do something." This is the only reassurance
we'll get now that Obamacare has proven not only to be ineffective, but
also detrimental. We will be expected to factor in effort and good
intentions to our grading of their dismal performance, and forget that
these surprising setbacks had been predicted by detractors all along.

They will ask us to remember, too, that Obamacare will end insurance
companies dropping you for no reason, as they now drop us because of
Obamacare. They will point out that everyone will now have access to
insurance - insurance that we can't afford because of Obamacare. They will
insist that pre-existing conditions must now be covered; even though our
deductibles will make this a moot point because of Obamacare. The very
people that have made a mess of things are now expecting accolades for
stepping up to the plate, as though we should be thankful that they have
solved our cold and fever with a single gunshot to the head.

Make no mistake, though, the nightmare's not over. You see, if you felt
like you had problems before, there can be no question that you have
problems now, and "we have to do something." This rallying cry is about to
return to the present tense to address the problems created by Obamacare.
There is already a good deal of finger-pointing at insurance companies in
this fiasco. Expect that to be part of the new "we have to do something"
movement. "We have to do something" about the ridiculous rates that
insurance companies are now charging. "We have to do something" to force
doctors to take Medicaid and Medicare. "We have to do something" to be
sure that everyone is covered. "We have to do something" to take profit
out of the system...

"We have to have a single-payer system."

This has, of course, been the plan all along. They didn't come to fix our
healthcare system; they came to bury it. The problems you see from
Obamacare are not glitches in the system; they're a feature. The
healthcare system was already regulated to the extent that it could not
work effectively. All that Obamacare was designed to do was to finish the
job. Now we have a healthcare system that won't work at all, and in very
short order it will become unprofitable to boot. When that happens, the
government won't have to take over healthcare; they'll just have to come
in and pick up the pieces.

Single-payer will be a disaster as well, but once it has been implemented
there will be little chance of ever removing it. The government rarely
gives up power. It won't matter that the quality, cost, and speed of the
system are all dismal because there will be no other system to go back to.

"We had to do something."

You can read more from Kelly Colby at yourfirstshrug.blogspot.com.


         R\%/itt - K5RXT

 Reminder: "On Friday September 8th 2006, Mike Godwin's 16 year experiment
 was concluded and Godwin's Law was officially repealed by a MAJORITY vote
 among millions of individuals." http://repealgodwin.tripod.com/

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
--- D'Bridge 3.92
 * Origin: Lone Star Hub - San Antonio, Texas - USAian, American (1:387/22)