Remember when we attacked the American Lumber Industry? Remember when we made it dam near impossible to cut down a tree in America?
I believe we were trying to save the "spotted owl." (Which I think was a GREAT idea because I LOVE spotted owls. I will go to my backyard and whistle. My spotted owl comes flying to me, wagging its tail feathers. I taught my spotted owl to roll over..!!)
After placing a halt to the American Lumber Industry, it wasn't more than a year later that we began to hear about the South American Rain Forest being chopped down.
The Rain Forest was being cut down, and we couldn't stop it because…
Well, we don't own South America. We cannot pass a law to stop them from selling their trees.
In America, we thought it would be "nifty" to save all of our trees. But we never stopped using paper and wood. (So we still needed trees.)
Today, we have a much better system in place. We only remove "old growth trees." (Which actually helps new trees grow because the seedlings are not competing with old trees for sunlight and soil nutrients.) Removing old growth can help lower the amount of forest fires. Trees are actually a renewable source. With tree farms, we can have a never-ending supply of wood.
We seem to have this "all or nothing" mentality in America. It stems from our two-party system of government.
No one wants to find the solution that is in the middle. It must always be "my way, or no way at all."
Every time the government forces a radical set of laws to fix something, they CAUSE an undesirable effect that was unintended.
Health care is a great example.
In this election, it has been tossed around that 50 million Americans are without access to health care. This is, of course, a lie. All Americans have access to health care by walking into an emergency room. It is possible that about 50 million Americans do not have health insurance.
But who are these 50 million Americans..??
It is estimated that 15 million of these people could actually qualify for Medicaid, Medicare, CHIP, WIC, or HUD. Why don't these people sign up for the services we already have? Maybe it is pride? Maybe they just do not want to take money from the taxpayers? Maybe they do not know that they could qualify?
Out of the 50 million uninsured Americans, another 15 million COULD afford health insurance, but they have chosen to buy something else. An expensive car, when a used car would have lowered their monthly payments. An expensive house, when less costly housing was available.
Hey, in a free country, if someone chooses to buy a big house, a big car and go without health insurance, why should I force him or her to buy insurance? If they have children they are being very greedy by not insuring the kids.
The remaining 15, to 20 million uninsured Americans do fall into a "blind spot" that sometimes gets overlooked. Some of these people could be college students who no longer qualify under their parent's policy. They cannot pay for schooling and health insurance. They are too proud to walk into the Welfare Office and see if help is available. (Or they believe that they are invincible and will not get sick.)
Some uninsured people could be part of a two-parent household where both parents work low paying jobs and they cannot afford health care, but they make just enough money to not qualify for our current services.
Yes, there are people who do not have health insurance in America.
But poverty and an "uncaring nation" are NOT the only reasons we have 50 million uninsured.
Is there really a health "CRISIS" in America? The system hasn't changed much in the thirty years since Sen. Kennedy penned the HMO bill. Medical care was expensive in the old days, and it remains expensive today.
Insurance has gotten out of hand.
Ever since that fateful day when a wise business man said: "Hey, I could make money selling people insurance..", the price keeps going up.
I tell this story every time I talk about health insurance, but it is so true. I remember talking to an old timer. He said: "..Hospitals are all screwed up today. In the old days, the only time you paid the doctor is if you went to see him. He handed you a bill and you paid what you could each month. If you got really sick, then you paid for the rest of your life on that bill. But if you were healthy, you never paid the doctor anything. Today, you pay a doctor bill regardless if you are sick, or healthy."
There is much truth in that wise old man's statement. Would you pay a plumber a monthly fee for the rest of your life because someday your water heater might break..??
The solutions offered today: "Hillary Care" would force people to buy health insurance, (at a lower rate.) Hillary would offer tax incentives to health insurance providers, (tax breaks for the rich) so they would lower their rates, (hopefully). She would use tax money to fund the rest.
Obama doesn't want to force anyone to buy insurance, however he wants to create a system that covers all 50 million uninsured. Both Hillary and Obama want to create a new multi-billion dollar government system.
Why must we always go from one extreme to the other..??
Why can't we beef up Medicaid and Medicare to include more people? Why must we create a new system?
In an editorial I did called: "The Democratic Debate", I went into detail on what can happen if we over tax small business to pay for health care. Small business will drop employee health care and the amount of uninsured Americans will double. Both Obama and Hillary are NOT prepared for that increase in uninsured Americans.
Just like with the lumber industry; with health care, when we create a "crisis" and rush into government control to fix the "said crisis", we CAUSE an unintended effect. Which in this case will be more uninsured Americans. Businesses that are already struggling to provide health insurance to their employees will DROP the insurance and tell the employees: "Hillary and Obama created a health system. Go down to the welfare office and sign up.."
When an employer drops your health insurance, you will loose money. The employer was paying anywhere from $200 to $600 a month to cover you. Technically, that is your money. You earned it. But you will not receive it in cash because it was considered a "benefit." You will lose that money- PLUS, you will have to pay something into the Hillary and Obama system.
You will lose money.
When the government CAUSES a crisis. Then promises to fix it, they create an effect that is sometimes worse.
Let's look at one more example…
I fell victim to the bio- fuel ideal. I do not believe I ever wanted the government to subsidize bio-fuel, because I have never cared for the government artificially inflating anything. But I felt that more research is needed in bio-fuels. There are some promising ideas with using "weeds" to make a bio-fuel. Weeds will grow anywhere.
However, we rushed into bio-fuel. Granting money to process this mixture. This caused corn to become MORE valuable than the market had set. Farmers started growing "fuel corn" instead of sweet corn or wheat, and now we have a "food crisis."
Why must we always swing from the extreme right to the extreme left..?? Can't we ever trek slowly towards a "centered goal?" A well thought out moderate goal.
This year, because we have democrats wanting to take over the presidency, we have a "global warming" crisis and a "health care" crisis.
I am sure that in the next decade; the republicans will have some "crisis" that only THEY can fix.
Almost every "crisis" in America, was caused by the government.
Do we really want these people to "fix" it..??
After all, I elected republicans to cut spending, lower taxes, and get Osama bin Laden. (They did lower taxes.)
You elected the Clinton's in the 90's to create a national health plan, help with the poor and minorities like the gay community. (Well, the Clinton's did create that "don't ask, don't tell" policy.)
I'm not sure we are getting our monies worth.
Do we really want these people fixing anything..??
Written by AR Babonie for The Angry Republican
"… The law that will work is merely the summing up in legislative form of the moral judgment that the community has already reached…" — Woodrow Wilson, American president (1856-1924)
