Pages

September 6, 2009

Universal Healthcare is "Reverse Classicism"

Here's a wonderful guest post from an energetic and exciting blog: Conservative Black Woman



Bishop Harry Jackson Tells The Truth About Healthcare Reform, but Liberal Bloggers Are Truth-Resistant


Liberal bloggers at Huffpo and blackpoliticalthought (because we are all supposed to think the same thoughts, you see) are busy disparaging Bishop Jackson and accusing him of perpetuating "misinformation".

Matthew Palevsky (Huffington Post) writes "Bishop Jackson continued by picking up on a common misnomer that the right invented and then railed against, spending tax dollars to pay for abortions." Good grief...I guess Mr. Palevsky and "DAD" (Dumb-AZZ-Donna, the condescending elitist reader), typical Obama drones, have fallen for the semantic tricks of President Obama and the leftist demon-crats.

Yes, it is factual that the Senate's healthcare proposal does not specifically mandate abortion but what these deceptive azz-wipes fail to mention is that anytime Congress fails to exclude funding for abortion it is always included. Case and point, for the last 13 years no federal dollars were have been used to fund abortions in the District of Columbia because pro-life lawmakers specifically excluded abortion funding in the DC spending bill -- that is until this year. The demon-crats successfully removed the exclusion so now your tax dollars are being used to kill off black babies otherwise known as genocide. Yes, I'm aware that I'm not suppose to follow the ramifications of that through to the logical conclusion because that makes me a "right wing loon" or worse. It fascinates me how this is lost on the "fight the power" "power to the people" types. I guess they trust the government now....because we have a black(ish) president and all.

I wonder how many religious leaders fell for President Obama's "ethical and moral obligation" crap as he urged them to get behind this abominable plan? Too many, I fear. But Obama is right. It is a moral obligation. We are our brother's keeper -- so the government should leave it to us.

President Obama and his leftist posse should also tell the truth about the 47 million uninsured....

47 Million Uninsured: Truth or Propaganda?

President Barack Obama claims there are 47 million Americans without health insurance. A simple check with the U.S. Census Bureau would have told him otherwise.

The President said: “This is not just about the 47 million Americans who have no health insurance.” That assertion conflicts with data in the Census Bureau report “Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2007.” The report was issued in August 2008 and contains the most up-to-date official data on the number of uninsured in the U.S. The report discloses that there were 45.65 million people in the U.S. who did not have health insurance in 2007.

However, it also reveals that there were 9.73 million foreigners — foreign-born non-citizens who were in the country in 2007 — included in that number. So the number of uninsured Americans was actually 35.92 million. And of those, 9.1 million people making more than $75,000 per year did not choose to purchase health insurance. That brings the number of Americans who lack health insurance presumably for financial reasons down to less than 27 million.

The Census Bureau report also shows that the number of people without insurance actually went down in 2007 compared to the previous year — from 47 million to 45.65 million — while the number with insurance rose from 249.8 million to 253.4 million. The next Census Bureau report disclosing health insurance data, with 2008 numbers, is scheduled to be released in August, and could figure in the healthcare reform debate.

Part of the apparent over-counting of the uninsured in the Census data is likely due to a serious undercounting of Medicaid enrollees. While the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) reported Medicaid enrollment of 51 million in 2002, the Census reported only 33 million, a difference of 18 million people. This trend continues in 2003 with a .7 percentage point increase in Medicaid enrollment by the Census Bureau, putting that number at 35 million, but CMS reports 53 million enrollees. This discrepancy is, to say the least, problematic.

So what can we say about this number, that seems to have been accepted on face value without any critical analysis?

The Census Bureau data is misleading. The Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey (CPS) is a misleading measure of those who lack health insurance in America and an imprecise tool for analyzing the dimensions of the problem. Analysis of data from earlier Census Bureau and other government reports shows that roughly 7 million are illegal immigrants; roughly 9 million are persons on Medicaid; 3.5 million are persons already eligible for government health programs; and approximately 20 million have, or live, in families with incomes greater than twice the federal poverty level, or $41,300 for a family of four.

Most of the uninsured are in and out of health coverage. The professional literature also shows that, overwhelmingly, the vast majority of the uninsured are persons who are in and out of coverage, largely as a result of job changes. Only a small number of the uninsured are chronically uninsured. For most of the uninsured, the problem is fixable if policymakers simply take steps to make health insurance portable, so the insurance policy sticks to the person, not the job.

Current Federal Tax Policy Fuels Uninsurance. A substantial portion of uninsured Americans are not poor but rather middle-class working Americans who are forced to face a major tax penalty, resulting in premium increases of 40 to 50 percent, if they do not obtain health insurance through the place of work. For millions of Americans without job based health insurance, both the tax policy, and the excessive regulatory burden on health insurance in the states, prices families out of coverage. Current federal tax policy then unnecessarily drives millions into the ranks of the uninsured.

(Source)

Visit Black Conservative Woman

21 comments:

The Right Guy said...

I don't know if I would call it reverse classism, but classism that pitches to the lowest common denominator: Need. In Socialism, need is considered a virtue, where as ability and ambition are considered crimes that should be punished.

Opus #6 said...

I believe this. It is all designed to "stick it" to the rich. Meaning taxpayers. Punish us for our success. Put us all on Medicaid so we can see what it is like.

On another topic. Dames? Fun tune. And don't think I didn't always know that about you, Nickie. It is part of your charm. ;-)

LL said...

I wonder if being a member of ACORN entitles you to paid healthcare? When you note how much money they were allocated from the "stimulus package", it would be fun to see if they receive insurance and which options.

Deal Leader wants to "level society" with a power elite who are exempt. Back to Orwellian thought.

dmarks said...

The Obama people aren't against the rich. They are fine with rich people as long as they are employed by the Obama administration, or are in the private sector and make political donations to him.

As for obamacare, it is a disaster. Orwellian thought indeed.

The Right Guy said...

@dmarks:
O'Stymie needs enough rich people to pay for the needy. At some point the definition of rich will begin a downward trend...

The Right Guy said...

Is this a Reverend Jackson we could support? :) I'd like to see a debate between the two.

Matt said...

Great post. Socialism rewards failure and punished success.

Rhod said...

Socialism also incentivizes indifference because it removes the personal moral obligation to be better than we are.

The Right Guy said...

No Rhod, you are wrong. It's that they don't have the moral directive to be the best they can be. Mediocrity and excellence is an individual pursuit.

Rhod said...

I'd agree with you, TRG, if we didn't have the moral calamity of the USSR as an example. Read Solzhenitsyn. I'm not saying it happens right away, but it happens.

Opus #6 said...

TRG, I saw it first hand in my summer in Sweden as a foreign exchange student. The high school students had NO desire to try to be anything great. Nobody wanted to grow up to be a doctor. Nobody wanted to try hard in life because they knew they would be punished with astronomical taxes over 80%. It happens right away. The kids aren't stupid. There IS no American Dream in places like that. Just the opposite.

T. F. Stern said...

Why even bother, seeing as how I'm one of those right wing nut jobs everyone keeps pointing to as part of the reason we don't have heaven on earth via this new health care anti capitalism take over. Why is it abortion and the use of the politics on both sides over looks the basic evil associated with taking life? The progressive side of our society has to blind the conservative side on this issue, among others, in order to pass health care reform. The State must replace God so that God given rights vanish and are totally replaced with entitlements.

I've babbled long enough, have I shown my stupidity sufficiently?

The Right Guy said...

@ Opus and Rhod:
It still takes the surrender of the individual for that to happen. In other words they volunteer for it. If they didn't, and stood up, they wouldn't have to suffer the plague of mediocrity.

@T.F. Stern:
Why let others define you?

Opus #6 said...

TRG, When you raise your head above the crowd is when they start shooting at you.

This is particularly true in a socialist society. The kids are smart enough to want to avoid being kicked in the teeth by their government. Don't blame the victims. These children are victimized by their forefathers who sought the security of the Nanny State, and sold out their freedom, and the freedom of their children and their children's children to purchase it.

The Right Guy said...

@Opus
I am not blaming the victims, just stating a point that we all have choices. Even if you have a gun to your head, you have a choice, no matter how distasteful the outcome. At some point, for things to change, someone has to take a chance. Either that, or get out. Animals that neither run nor fight become lunch.

Rhod said...

A long time ago, I spent some time in a place that resembled your sample ruthless world.

I can tell you that the choices you present are never as clear as the way you frame them.

The human power to imagine different futures under pressure undermine the judgement of even the bravest among us, and sometimes make us look like cowards after the fact. It just isn't that easy. If it was, tyranny would be unknown.

You can't say that the guy who won't man the barricade isn't right in some long-term way, and the guy at the top isn't putting something important at risk.

The vast, coercive state is predatory in subtle ways. If the lions in the London Zoo could talk, they'd explain it.

The Right Guy said...

I'll tell you what. I work with a guy that is from Vietnam. He is in his mid 50's and he was a HS math teacher after the fall of Saigon. he was sent to a re-education camp because he was wasn't simpatico. After he went back to teaching and had party representatives in his classes every day. He knew it was a matter of time because people like him just disappeared, and he said became fertilizer. He didn't even say good bye to his family, but planned his escape and did it, finding his way out of the country through the jungle, bribing people and got to Malaysia and eventually here. To say he hates communists is an understatement. He made one possible choice out of a few. I make no judgement as to cowardice or bravery, just that you can choose something other than acceptance. Yes, I did read a day in the life some time ago...

Opus #6 said...

And the children of Iran chose to rise up. They are now being plowed under the ground.

The Right Guy said...

Like anything in this life, there are no guarantees. In the end, it's every man for himself. I will say that eventually, the Iranian people will rise up and win, as will the people of China and North Korea. You can only beat on a horse so much until it dies or stomps you. Dictators need people to rule, so chances are sooner or later, they horse will stomp. In may take 50+ years, but it will happen. In our case, we had a low tolerance for BS and a ruler half a world away. Take advantage of what you can.

The Vegas Art Guy said...

Great post and thanks for following me. I returned the favor. Now I really need to get back to planning out next week's lessons! :)

Anonymous said...

Huh,reverse class-ism, huh - that's a new one,and how original there big guy.

How about this - get a job and pay for your own dang health care.