Is This Really the Deepest Level of Moral Analysis Most Americans Are Capable Of?

Sunni's picture

In keeping with my attitude of “I don’t invite Ebola into my house, so why treat the USSA gov any differently?”, I tend to explore its doings only to the depth of the headlines on the Google News page. However, with the current “shutdown” continuing, discussion of it and the reasons behind it have seeped into a lot of usually less-political commentary I regularly peruse. As a result, I’ve encountered a particular line of reasoning—truly, only for very large values of same—for which I cannot contain my ire any longer.

The argument typically goes like this:

Whether you like it or not, Obamacare was made law and has withstood challenges both in Congress and with the Robed Nazgul. So sit down, shut up, and take it.

For political partisans, I honestly expect nothing better than this kind of response. It’s finding this argument (huge eyeroll) put forth by others whom I had come to consider more intellectual that is so disturbing. Perhaps it reveals nothing more than those individuals’ political persuasion; but even so, that isn’t a reason to ease up on thinking about the issues involved. If anything, one should be more critical and probing of the ideas with which one agrees. That’s the best way to find logical faults, inconsistencies, etc.

But that isn’t my point. What I find utterly baffling in this situation is how these otherwise intellectually engaged writers are able to overlook how fundamentally different this piece of legislative excrement is. It mandates that US citizens purchase a product that they may not want, need, and/or may not be able to afford. (The fact that it doesn’t provide the services it’s claimed to is standard operating procedure for federal law.) This huge insinuation of the federal government directly into each American’s life is apparently not an issue at all ... perhaps because the goal is so laudable?

Well, I take issue with that too. As I have written before (and I’d link to it if the gorram search function here worked—sigh), health insurance ≠ health care. A moment’s reflection on what the concept of “insuring” health means should be sufficient to highlight how risible it is. It’s a waste of money to “insure” against what is a fact of living. Health insurance is not necessary to get health care. The only party that is served by its insertion in the healthcare process is the insurance sector—and it’s precisely that sector that has so bloated healthcare costs in this country.

Anyone who wants to try to persuade me that Obamacare—or any other legislation of its ilk—can actually improve the utterly pathetic state of getting medical care in this country needs to take his argument up a few levels. At a minimum, I want to know specifically how and why a third-party-payer structure is superior at delivering actual care. Also, I want evidence that it reduces costs without decreasing quality and quantity of services rendered. Most important: justify its provision mandating that the insurance policy contains certain kinds of coverage that not all individuals need (seriously, I need maternity coverage like I need more mosquitos in my life) for every person—even when said person is barely earning enough money to cover his current obligations.

How does it benefit a healthy adult to pay for health insurance instead of rent, or nutritious food, for example? The bit of investigating I’ve done on proposed health insurance costs for me would put me precisely in that position. I don’t have disposable income to cover my estimated insurance costs. Therefore, the onus is on proponents of this kind of law to convince me that it’s in my best interest to divert money from such luxuries as feeding, clothing, and sheltering myself and my children to a service of dubious quality that I do not need nor want.

With the issues thus laid bare, anyone who wants to try—and despite the semi-ranting nature of this piece, I am serious: I will give my full attention and consideration to a rebuttal that addresses my concerns detailed above—had better not even start down the “It’s the law!” path. At this point, all that’s missing from those statements is the “Neener, neener, you can suck it!” type stuff kids used to tack on. It’s an extremely weak, morally stunted, and intellectually indefensible argument; if it’s in your repertoire, you can sit down and shut the fuck up right now.

And if this really is indicative of the level of moral development at which American adults max out, we are so hosed that it isn’t even funny.

You rant well ;)

No rebuttal to that is possible. The best anyone could do is just go on a rant because they don't like what you said. And that would just show them to be a moron.

And, as I have seen pointed out elsewhere, just because something has been made "law" doesn't mean congressvermin are required to fund it. They hold the purse strings to the stolen money, and it is up to them to decide how to spend it (not that they should spend it at all)- it is within their "authority" to refuse to fund anything they want, I guess. "Law" or not.

A silver lining....

There is no merit or rational excuse for this bogus "law," simply because it can only be enacted/enforced through theft and other aggression. It is null and void on its face for anyone who is the least interested in non-aggression or freedom.

The consequences of any attempt at enforcement will be massive and very bad for all of us, obviously, and what was left of honest western "medicine" will probably pretty much vanish for a while. Many, if not most of the best health care professionals are fighting this, and many have simply dropped out as I did. More will follow, so the incompetent or unscrupulous will eventually be all that's left.

And don't forget that Obummercare was never intended to "work" in any case. From the beginning it was intended to fail spectacularly, in the expectation that the population would rise up and DEMAND the absolute socialized "medicine" that has been the wet dream of the government and socialists everywhere for a very long time.

Me thinks they have seriously miscalculated, however. That remains to be seen...

But there IS hope. This whole insanity may be the catylist that drives a change sorely needed, seemingly stalled in the backwaters for decades now. Many people will simply be driven to take more responsibility for themselves and their families. Alternate forms of medicine, better understanding of nutrition and other wellness practices are blooming all over the country and Obummercare is certainly one of the things that fuels this new energy. (Unfortunately, a good number of people who do NOT accept that responsibility and do not seek wellness will suffer, and many will die. There is nothing any of us can do about that, and nothing that government or "insurance" can do about it either. Never has been.)

We will certainly still need a way to access at least some form of modern medical care for surgery and trauma, but there is no reason that can't be included among the alternates. We may be forced to deal with a truly "black market" or leave the country for care for a while, but more and more there will be viable alternatives.

The Surgery Center of Oklahoma is an excellent example of the kind of medicine and the quality of professionals we can actually expect, and even find now if we look. Visit Dr. Smith's blog for excellent commentary on this and other free market issues.

You raise very good points

Perhaps the most important of which is that not only is health insurance ≠ health care, health care ≠ medical care. The latter is what one needs when an injury has occurred or a system or systems have become dysfunctional, whether through genetic causes, abuse, disuse, or simple aging. Health care is what one does to maintain (or attain or re-attain) a healthy, optimally functioning self. It begins with sound nutrition and hygiene, adequate sleep and rest, helpful ways of dealing with stress, and supportive social networks.

Absolutely!

Health is far more than the absence of injury or disease, and wellness is more a state of mind than of bodily function. And, as always, it begins with self ownership and responsibility. :)