Coming Clean

Revelation in Progess

Thoughts on Healthcare Reform

Generated in response to: http://www.mint.com/blog/trends/health-care-reform-impact/

Honestly, I don’t see how it can be viewed as fair if some tax burden is not placed on everyone to fund a universal health care option. While I understand that the wealthy have money to spare, such taxation is a punitive damage to their success on the part of the larger populace – i.e. it’s not encouraging the wealthy to continue in their success in America and/or to take it elsewhere. Likewise, when in American history have the people ever rewarded non-contribution as is being proposed here and now?! Maybe some think that such a view of fairness makes me a Republican – I hope there are other and more significant areas of debate that would define such a distinction.

There are three components that have significantly contributed to rising health care costs that are not being addressed by this new legislation:
1. Even if you have health care, it’s still an elective process. You have to choose to receive care; it can never be forced on you. Most Americans wait to see a doctor much too late, such that the cost of care resultant of undiagnosed conditions is significantly more expensive. This won’t change under the new plan.
2. Americans are unhealthy. We have a consumer culture built on unhealthy habits. Whether it be Wallstreet or McDonald’s, our culture has a premise of greedy consumption without thought to consequence. Short of using police and taxation policies to make people live healthier, general health is going to remain poor and care is going to remain high (unless this becomes a rationing criteria). Living habits between the USA and other high-income nations is stark in their contrast.
3. Americans are litigious. Health care providers deal with far too many frivolous law suits that stem mainly from complications that are more directly related to individuals not caring for themselves than any wrong doing on the part of the doctor. Given that there is no tort reform present in this legislation, that will not change, thus those costs will remain – and will likely begin to increase as new people are brought into a universal health care system.

The other thing I really don’t like about this legislation is that it places the government as the rationer of health care. The government decides what coverage a policy must have and, thus by extension, what procedures are available for you to elect. Granted, this is an improved situation for those people without health care, but for everyone else … well, it could be a bum deal and it places everyone at the mercy of the government (i.e. you can’t shop around anymore for the coverage you want). For all the valid concerns there have been raised about the loss of liberties the past 8 years, you would think this would give people – especially Democrats – more pause.

As to the numbers of who does not have health care, this article sites 1/3 of the population is uninsured or underinsured. The President the other day sited 45 million people are without insurance. I have heard it argued that he is including an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants (i.e. non-tax-paying individuals) in that figure. So depending on how you look at it, that’s roughly 10 to 15 percent of the US population without insurance. I still have not heard how many of those people have health care options they elect to not take (e.g. Waffle House employees). I don’t know what underinsured means, but with our public health system as it is, I imagine most Americans are pretty well covered, certainly by historic standards.

So, to me, it’s not about who has it or who doesn’t have it but how to drive down costs. Extending coverage to everyone that does not have insurance doesn’t seem like a plan to drive down costs. However, driving down costs under any system – private or public – opens up health care to more individuals as they can then afford it. It seems to me that this plan is treating the symptoms (not everyone can pay for health care) instead of the cause (costs are high, people are unhealthy)

The USA was founded on the principle that the populace’s then reigning government was too oppressive, and that people should be able to live largely free of government interference. It seems like we’re reversing course here by placing all our medical eggs into a government basket.

Obama: Extremist?

Fear and Suspicion

Fear and Suspicion. Something I’ve been thinking about lately.

Fear and Suspicion. They make you crazy. Make you see things that may not be there. They kind of remove you from the reality that everyone else sees.

Fear and Suspicion. It’s the motive of spies. It’s how they go about doing their work. They find out secrets because they fear and suspect everything. In concert, they can work up some pretty good conspiracy theories. Fear and suspicion is their job.

Fear and Suspicion. Is this the motive to go to war? Should it not be reserved, resolved, and conclusive? I’m guilty as the next person of being fearful and suspicious and wanting to not be, but is it right for me to decide to kill people of another land because I fear them and suspect them? Shouldn’t it be that I’m reserved in what I’m about to do, but do it with absolute resolution to rid the threat of the conclusive evidence I have?

Fear and Suspicion. They continue to undermine the U.S.’s efforts. First because we went into Iraq only with Fear and Suspicion and not conclusive evidence. I think we’ve been reserved and resolved, but the lack of conclusive evidence has undermined our position in doing the right thing and is eroding the will of the people both foreign and domestic.

Fear and Suspicion. Maybe Saddam and his power-base won just by feeding us all the seeds of fear and suspicion and no one being able to tell the lie for what it is. And because we acted on it, right of wrong, we’re suffering for it because Saddam is the first man to deny credibility for the U.S. before the whole world.

Where’s the Outrage?

This is a layman’s understanding and frustration of what’s going on in the world. Maybe I’m off in my perception of things – feel free to correct me.

So, lately, all we’ve been hearing about is stimulus and bailouts and huge sums of cash. What no one seems to be taking seriously in these discussions is where the huge sums of cash are coming from. Technically, all these big organizations, and our government on top of that, are broke. So where’s the money coming from? We know there aren’t stockpiles of cash lying around that is being drawn from. So where?

In one sense, it’s coming from nowhere. In a more real sense, it is being stolen from our pockets. The Treasury department is being ordered to print new cash. Printing new cash can be a good thing, but in this case, it’s bad and immoral. All those hard earned dollars that you have saved away? Yeah, it’s becoming worth less and less. More on why that’s immoral later.

The pieces of paper we call cash symbolize a backing physical precious commodity held in trust by the government – for example, there’s a bit of gold lying around that is equitable to your dollar.

So why is printing more cash bad? Well, first, when can printing cash be good? Printing cash can be good in two instances that I can think of: (1) the government has an increase in its backing stores of precious commodity or (2) the government is trying to keep the value of its cash equitable with other places in the world that are experiencing a decline in the backing value of their cash. In this latter instance, you are devaluing your cash but for the benefit of maintaining equitable currency exchange between foreign markets. To be honest, I don’t know how useful (2) really would be and if it ever has come into play. There’s also a 3rd option – you print cash to replace cash. So you print cash, hold it in reserve, wait to reclaim cash to destroy (’cause it worn out, damaged, whatever), and release an equitable amount of cash that was held in reserve.

So those are the three instances where I think printing cash can be good. There may be others.

When is printing cash bad? In the second good instance mentioned above, I noted that the printing of cash will decrease the value of cash if there’s not an increase in the backing stores of commodity. So for example, you have a dollar bill, and its backing is a chunk of gold. The government comes along and prints some cash, and now that chunk of gold is backing two dollars. So now your original dollar is worth half of its original chunk. If the government gives you your second dollar – great! You’re breaking even. But what happens when the government gives that dollar to someone else? Well, the short version is, you’ve been robbed. And that’s exactly what’s going on today.

And thus here we are in our present situation. Our banks are failing. Economic backbones such as the auto industry are failing. And the government is printing cash (thus devaluing all of our present currency) to bail everyone and their dead great great grandfather out of debt. Does anyone else see the problem there? Debtors owe creditors money. The government is printing new money, giving it the debtors, and letting them pay off their creditors. In some sense, what debt there is should be increasing by the printing of money (i.e. devaluation caused by printing should make the value of debts owed increase), but either way, the value of your money is being decreased so that the difference can be given to someone else that has squandered the money they had away.

It’s kinda like the prodigal son, upon realizing that he’s broke and all manner of screwed up, sending a letter to his father asking for more money (“Dad, need more money”), and the father sending the prodigal son money obtained from the wealth of the responsible son. Note in this version, the prodigal son did not change his ways or return home. If you don’t think that’s occurring right now in our economy between wayward banks, institutions, and irresponsible private citizens (the prodigal son) and our government (the father) and the rest of us (the responsible son), wake up.

Let the banks fail. Let people go bankrupt. You can’t spend your way out of debt. You have to save your way out of debt. And while that may seem like a lot of inaction, it’s actually a very different form of action than what has been exercised for the past 17 years. The current form of action being proposed by Obama and his administration is just a continuation of what got us here in the first place. Obama’s not turning the country away from the cliff, he’s hitting the accelerator. The short term will make people feel good, but the long term just cannot sustain itself.

A Prince Without a Home

Shortly after the election last year, the Sage posted a message on the politics of Jesus entitled A King Without a Quarter.

It’s worth reading for yourself, but to summarize it briefly so you can get through the rest of this post, it asserted that Jesus was social not political. Not particularly mind blowing, but at the time when people were using religion as a means of divinely selecting a political party, it was important. There were a few other discussions on AYOR that surrounded it – especially the war – that made this whole thing particularly gut wrenching for me, but eventually I put it out of mind and got on with my life.

That was until after New Years this year. I can’t remember what prompted it, but I started to think about this essay again. The agitation and aggrevation that it caused in me earlier started to surface violently. Wouldn’t Jesus go to war? Don’t we have a just and righteous cause? …and that essay came screaming back at me: no, He wouldn’t. People are too precious to be sacrificed for causes and politics – the dealings of men. People are to be ministered to as we can – to be led to righteousness through Jesus and, in that, salvation.

What’s worse is that in all of this I found myself as a cog in the great war machine. The things I have worked on have motivated and aided the current war effort. And at the time I had nothing but pride for my work – blinded by the fact that my work, right or wrong, was justifying the death of some other human, some soul in need of redemption.

Now, I’m no commander-in-chief. The burden of what has happened is not directly upon me. Nor is the salvation of others my burden to bear directly. But my consent and participation makes me party to any soul who may be in hell right now because of my passive agreement to take their life in this time. If salvation is a communal affair… then our failure in these matters are also a burden upon us.

How am I to respond to this? What does this mean to me?

I then thought of – as I often do – the story of the rich young man. The rich young man approached Jesus asking how to find eternal life. Jesus said to obey the commandments of the Law, and the young man answered that he has kept the commandments since his youth. Then Jesus told the youn man to sell everything and follow after him, at which point the rich young man walked away dismayed because he owned a great many things.

I am a rich young man. I do my best to keep the commandments, and I have a great many things – much more by the standards of the whole world. And before I ever say that these things are of my doing, I acknowledge God’s blessing and providence in all my opportunities. I have no home – it is His before it is mine – and I gladly give it up when I should be called.

But now I find myself in a world of cognitive dissonance. I have a job under Caesar, for Caesar – an occupation of politics and not service to all mankind. The nature of how I came by these jobs is nothing short of God’s providence I do believe. They each came unexpectedly, easily, and most providentially. …but, in a world of guns, bombs, and wars… I’m working in some manner against the Gospel – against the ministry of Jesus, against seeking and saving souls.

And now, after having finished school, when my family is looking for some breathing space… I’m considering moving once again into something new… to possibly throw our lives once more into some kind of stress… I think they deserve more than that: some time to me, some time to peace, some time of stability.

The hardest part of all this for me personally, I’ve dealt with now. The hardest part was that, as far as I was concerned up until the beginning of this year, my current job is my dream job: simulation – games. And now I’m thinking of giving it up. Every thing that I had done to prepare myself for the real-world was for this specific kind of job, and now I’m going another way. It hurts. It’s disappointing. Yet it’s frightfully emancipating. It’s dying to myself and, hopefully, rising once more in Christ.

I don’t know what’s to come. As I told Sage, I think “it”, whatever “it” may be, is coming. I see two possibilities before me at the moment. I probably should look into them instead of letting them slip past me, and that’s the rub, right? If “it” is coming, you would think it would hit you over the head like a two-by-four, but I’m not certain God works so obviously – He certainly hasn’t so far in things such as these, though I see His hand guiding me in the choices I’ve had and, in part, the decisions I have made. For every opportunity I’ve had to lead me here, I’ve had other options. I think my choices, however poor, God has worked toward the clarity I have right now. And the funniest thing is that it’s not a clarity of action but a clarity of purpose. …I think, in general, we’d all prefer the former over the latter – it certainly makes things easier.

Now I wait, standing on the brink of a coming time, to more fully join the revolution of revolutions – to more properly join in and live for my Lord in pursuit of each fellow man. I pray for patience, I pray for wisdom, I pray an open heart, and above all, I pray that not my will but Yours be done. Amen.