Why I'm Getting Sick of Defending Obamacare

National Journal ^ | Feb 11, 2014 | Ron Fournier

[SoConPubbie]

You lose your job, you lose your coverage.

We don’t get our car insurance at work, why get our health insurance there?

Those are your reasons for using the government to remove a perk given to someone in a private contractual relationship between an employer and an employee?

Do you consider yourself to be a limited-government conservative?

Or do you always look for the government to meddle in your life?

[TurboZamboni]

I’d rather have the employer pay me the money as salary and I find and buy my own insurance than have the mployer ‘meddle in my life’ finding my the company they think I should buy from.

[TurboZamboni]

IRS code (the government) currently gives the write-off to the company .

It could just as easily give it to the individual employee.

[SoConPubbie]

I’d rather have the employer pay me the money as salary and I find and buy my own insurance than have the mployer ‘meddle in my life’ finding my the company they think I should buy from.

Great!

I agree that you should have that right.

I also demand my rights, as an individual, not to have the Government meddle in the relationship between my Employer and I concerning my Insurance.

Recent polling, as mentioned by Rush Limbaugh, tells us that 69% of Americans are happy with their insurance as it is RIGHT NOW.

The government has NO BUSINESS telling me how I get my insurance, who gives it too me, or how much coverage I get.

Don't tread on me!

[TurboZamboni]

If individuals purchased health insurance directly, the U.S. would move closer to a market-based healthcare economy, which could start containing healthcare costs.

Until the CONSUMER of health care is the person bearing the responsibility for costs of both insurance and health care, we will have a system that is unsustainable.

[SoConPubbie]

If individuals purchased health insurance directly, the U.S. would move closer to a market-based healthcare economy, which could start containing healthcare costs.

Until the CONSUMER of health care is the person bearing the responsibility for costs of both insurance and health care, we will have a system that is unsustainable.

The only way you are going to enforce your "Free Market" solution is by involving enforcement by the government on an issue that is none of the damn business of the Government.

Government is not the solution to the problem, IT IS THE PROBLEM!

[TurboZamboni]

IRS code ( “the government”) currently gives the write-off to the company .
It ( “the government”) could just as easily give it to the individual employee. Which one is the smaller government solution?
Would this increase choice or limit it? Would it increase individual freedom or limit it?
Are individuals too stupid to choose from 20 self-purchased plans as opposed to the 3 offered at work?

How about no deductions at all for individuals or companies ? That would be truly free market . (and keep the government out of healthcare)

[SoConPubbie]

How about no deductions at all for individuals or companies ? That would be truly free market . (and keep the government out of healthcare)

I'm all for that, AS LONG AS, you don't try to involve the Federal Government in between the relationship between my Employer and myself.

Which means, don't use the Federal Government to enforce your solution. Don't use the Federal government to tell my employer, that as a part of my employment package, my employer CANNOT provide me with insurance or subsidize my insurance.

[TurboZamboni]

So you’re an employer who likes subsidies.

I get it now.

[houeto]

Your post made me go look. Wow! They’re on his a$$ like white on rice.

[SoConPubbie]

So you’re an employer who likes subsidies.

I get it now.

No, I'm an employee who, because of his experience and education, receives the added benefit of insurance coverage.

And yes, I do like my insurance subsidy.

Please refer to my previous post, I am ok with removing ALL Federal interference. However, I don't see how having a tax credit for providing insurance harms you or anyone else.

It's not a mandate.

You apparently aren't getting it yet.

[RipSawyer]

Some people just don’t understand what is really going on. I have often told people that I cannot understand why they keep on looking to the government to solve a problem the government created in the first place. It is like expecting the guy who just pulled a gun on you and took all your money to offer to take you to dinner.

[RipSawyer]

I think a lot of people need to be taught the actual meaning of insurance, it seems obvious that many do not understand what it is all about. They seem to think there is something magical about it but at the very best all insurance can do is allow people to agree to pool their risks, they agree to pay out a certain amount every month even when they are NOT suffering any losses so that when they do have a loss A MAJORITY PORTION of that loss will be paid on their behalf by the pool. This necessitates that the insurance company MUST take in more money than they pay out and no amount of government finagling can change that, if the government takes over the function of the insurance company they will simply operate far less efficiently than the private insurance company does simply because government does not have to show a profit to survive. I know I am stating the obvious but I have come to realize that a lot of people apparently are not able to comprehend the obvious. People who understand these things which should be so obvious do NOT vote for government schemes and they do NOT vote for politicians of any party who PROMOTE government schemes.