Affordable Health Care is a Christian Act

[Eugenius]

How about answering my question, “What kind of social justice allows kids to throw away their only opportunity to be self-sufficient later in life?”

247:
I was hoping you would say something like that. I think your entire justification [there is poverty out there, so let’s throw money at it to assuage my conscience] for redistributing wealth is just speculation, so I guess that makes us even.

243:
I would suggest you find out before advocating the destruction of a system that 85% of those polled say they are happy with.

Hint: The reason you don’t know is that you are refusing to face the fact that socialism has never worked in its whole history, and there is plenty of evidence for that. You might also research out why there are “serious limitations” to Medicaid. You might also read QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS (On Socialism) Pope Leo XIII
ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/L13APOST.HTM

marymyheroine said in 231:Why should strangers be expected to pay for her daughter’s needs when marymyheroine and her daughter are not willing to themselves?

Let them eat cake?

 

[Eugenius]

Many of these arguments sadly center around money and making sure that people receiving health care “deserve” it, neither of which is a Christian approach. Jesus clearly told followers that they were to sell all they had and give to the poor. We aren’t doing that.

And the rich man went away sad, for he had many things.

 

[Corki]

No one on this thread has addressed the core cause of the problem with medical care in the USA. The base reason for the problem is that the Physicians, with the AMA have a monopoly on medical care and all that is related to medical care.
The fact is that Medical Doctors can charge anything they like. Insurance Companies and Medicare can limit what they will pay a doctor, but the rest of the doctors fees are the responsibility of the patient. They get away with this by disguising their fees by calling them “facility usage fees” etc.
Part of the problem, especially amongst young doctors is the exhorbatent cost of their medical education. As an example, the tuition at a prominant medical school in the North East costs close to a million dollars. Newly graduated doctors are up to their eye balls in debt. Because of this, Interns at a major NYC teaching hospital are paid a minimum of $70,000 a year-so they can make payments on this debt.
Part of the problem is that the only people who can get into medical school are those acceptable to the doctors and the AMA. By limiting the number of people in their profession, the doctors can continue charging what they will.
Of course, the public has been fed a constant diet of pro-medical profession propaganda about the selfless doctor, constantly saving lives. Wake up, after a young doctor finishes his residency and goes into private practice, most work only 4 days a week. Many specialists who teach only practice medicine 1 or 2 days a week…while earning well over $100,000 a year.
These economic facts have spread into other medical professions such as Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine. Take your cat to the vet in NYC and it will cost as much as it does to take a child to the MD. Of course, the high cost of medical care has spread to the drug manufacturers and pharmacies. Why should doctors make all the money?
To date, all the laws, rules, and regulations by the Federal Government have done nothing to curb the costs of medical care. In fact, they have driven up the costs.
Until the Federal Government makes medical schools to have open admissions and controls the cost of a medical education and restricts the pricing of medical services, we are studk with the problem.
Socialized medicine and Federalized medical insurance is not the answer. That would just continue the problem and open up the Federal Treasury for the benefit of the few.
If the doctors don’t like it, what are they going to do, quit or go to Australia or Mexico?

So you are for price controls on medical services and open enrollment for medical schools as a solution?

Price controls - so that medical research is stagnated and only the cheaper services are available?

As for drug companies, about a decade ago, the number of drugs that made a profit was under 10%. That means that those drugs that “make a lot of money” are the only thing that keeps pharmaceutical research going and that keeps the other, non-profitable, drugs on the shelf.

Like it or not, one of the things that keeps socialized medicine going in other countries is the for-profit system in countries like the US. Not only is it a safety valve for long waits for patients from Canada and other countries but the experimental or less cost-saving treatment that is available here pushes the advances in treatment world-wide. I have yet to hear anyone, in the government or the economic sector, address the question of what will be the safety valve for the US?

Open enrollment - so that getting into medical school no longer means being one of the brightest but rather just first come, first admitted? I am sure that our health care system will improve drastically once we let average students become doctors and steer those most gifted in math and science to jobs in other countries. (NOT)

 

[white_sheep]

So far, Obamacare has just made health care much more expensive. I fail to see how that is such a great thing.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Speculating on the moral deficiencies that lead the needy to be needy has long been the rationalization used by some who are materially blessed by God for why they are blessed in this way and others are not.

Define “materially blessed by God.”

I know many people who seem “materially blessed by God,” but have spent years working hard and living frugally. Why can’t others be expected to do the same?

 

[ACCT]

FAIRNESS???

The problem is defining “fairness” and “needs.” From an economic standpoint, fairness and needs are concepts that are not useful because both concepts are hard to define and compare among individuals (Sexton, 1999). “Fairness is not an objectively determined concept once it departs from identity… Fairness, like needs, is in the eye of the beholder (Friedman, 1990).”

A system based on taking from the “haves” and giving to the “have-nots” will fall apart. “Many people would perceive their needs as more urgent than other people’s needs (Sexton, 1999). “If what people get is to be determined by ‘fairness,’ who is to decide what is ‘fair?’…In addition, if what people get is determined by ‘fairness’ and not by what they produce…what incentive is there to work and produce (Friedman, 1990)?” “If all are to have ‘fair shares,’ someone or some group of people must decide what shares are fair – and they must be able to impose their decisions on others, taking from those who have more than their ‘fair’ share and giving to those who have less (Friedman, 1990).”

 

[sedonaman]

Define “materially blessed by God.”

I know many people who seem “materially blessed by God,” but have spent years working hard and living frugally. Why can’t others be expected to do the same?

Because it’s not “fair”.

 

[sedonaman]

FAIRNESS???

The problem is defining “fairness” and “needs.” From an economic standpoint, fairness and needs are concepts that are not useful because both concepts are hard to define and compare among individuals (Sexton, 1999). “Fairness is not an objectively determined concept once it departs from identity… Fairness, like needs, is in the eye of the beholder (Friedman, 1990).”

A system based on taking from the “haves” and giving to the “have-nots” will fall apart.

Indeed. “If incomes are equalized, they will be equalized at a low level.” – Economist Vilfredo Pareto.

“Many people would perceive their needs as more urgent than other people’s needs (Sexton, 1999). “If what people get is to be determined by ‘fairness,’ who is to decide what is ‘fair?’…In addition, if what people get is determined by ‘fairness’ and not by what they produce…what incentive is there to work and produce (Friedman, 1990)?” “If all are to have ‘fair shares,’ someone or some group of people must decide what shares are fair – and they must be able to impose their decisions on others, taking from those who have more than their ‘fair’ share and giving to those who have less (Friedman, 1990).”

 

[sedonaman]

…The reasons why Medicaid has these limitations are irrelevant to the point I was making,…

They are not irrelevant to the discussion. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all socialist programs. As such, they are in dire financial troubles for the same reason: we have run out of other peoples’ money. And because they are running out of other peoples’ money, the government must institute “cost containment” measures, e.g., paying less and less for medical services. The government can call it “cost containment” all it wants, but it is nothing more than an attempt at price controls which always result in shortages, in this case, shortages you call “some doctors don’t take Medicare patients.” With the failures of Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security staring them in the face, why some people want to socialize the care of their bodies further is beyond me.

Now, would you please answer my question as to why “social justice” allows kids to waste the only way they can get an education to enable them to take care of themselves later in life? Parents and others pay enormous taxes for schools, so education is a form of wealth, and kids who don’t take advantage of it can be said to have wasted their share of that wealth.

 

[davidmlamb]

Except, of course, that nobody really knows what Obamacare will or won’t do for anyone.

I can give one good example. My 22 year old epileptic daughter who could not get any health care from the time she was 18. Between the time she was 18-21 she racked up 42,000 dollars in hospital bills from having seizures and one nearly cost her life. She had to file bankruptsy at age 22 last year because it was impossible to pay the bill and no Church or charitable organization came to her aid. Now, because of the new health care act she will is covered under my health care until she is 26. No one had mercy on my daughter except the Democrats. Its easy to be pro life when it does not cost you anything. When the rich man asked Jesus what he lacked to enter the Kingdom of heaven Jesus told him to sell all his possessions and give it to the poor, then come follow HIM and he would have treasures in heaven. But the rich man chose to trade his wealth for his soul. What we have today is selfish and spoiled Americans who only care for themselves and exploit abortion to cover their selfishness. What does a man profit if he keeps a few extra dollars in taxes and forfeits his soul? Why do you think we have the example of the sheep and the goats? WOE TO YOU!

David

 

[davidmlamb]

They are not irrelevant to the discussion. Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all socialist programs. As such, they are in dire financial troubles for the same reason: we have run out of other peoples’ money…

We have plenty of “other people money” left. The United States has some of the lowest taxes in the world and the reason why these programs are in trouble is because they are underfunded. The fix is easy. Raise the limit of social security and medicare tax from 100K to 1M and than have a means test for social security and higher premiums for Medicare based on income. That would fix the problem and no one would go broke.

…And because they are running out of other peoples’ money, the government must institute “cost containment” measures, e.g., paying less and less for medical services. The government can call it “cost containment” all it wants, but it is nothing more than an attempt at price controls which always result in shortages, .

Private medical insurance does the EXACT same thing. The doctor can charge as much as he want but Blue Cross/ Blue Shield for example will only pay their rates and the doctors are NOT allowed to collect anymore money from the patient. For instance, last September I broke the humurus bone in my right arm and had to have an operation to put a rod in my arm. The total charges the hospital and the doctors charged my BC/BS insurance exceeded 20K. But BC/BS only allowed for just under 8K of those charges and all I had to pay was a 150 co-pay for the entire hospital stay (2 days). This is how insurance companies operate, by cost containment. Doctors and Hospitals come to these agreements and sign contracts all the time. It is very profitable for the hospitals because it brings in a much larger volume of patients.

David

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Now, would you please answer my question as to why “social justice” allows kids to waste the only way they can get an education to enable them to take care of themselves later in life? Parents and others pay enormous taxes for schools, so education is a form of wealth, and kids who don’t take advantage of it can be said to have wasted their share of that wealth.

I will if you show how this question refutes anything that** I** said.

 

[davidmlamb]

Are you unfamiliar with the prohibition against judging people and of the obligation of charity in interpreting their actions?

You seem to be doing a pretty good job of making judgments about the motives of the new health care law. If a woman aborts her child are we not permitted to rebuke her? Should we make no judgements on abortion doctors? The scriptures permit us to make such judgments. What we are prohibited from is judging ones soul. I can rebuke you for your actions but I cannot judge your soul. Moreover, the context of the scripture passage in question prohibited those who committed the same sins from making judgements on others who do the same thing. Hence, “judge not and you will not be judged for the measure you judge others it will be measured back to you.” Why willl it be measured back to the judge? Because he is guilty of the exact same sin!

David

 

[LeafByNiggle]

Define “materially blessed by God.”

I know many people who seem “materially blessed by God,” but have spent years working hard and living frugally. Why can’t others be expected to do the same?

Looking at the context in which I made that statement, which was in response to:

Maybe they don’t have access because they have misplaced priorities like they didn’t study in school so they could get a good job that allows them to afford it. Maybe they would rather spend their money on RVs and home theaters with expensive satellite sports packages. What kind of social justice allows kids to throw away their only opportunity to be self-sufficient later in life?

the meaning of “materially blessed by God” refers to being able to have access to health insurance. Prosperity Theology holds that having success in life, jobs, income, is a sign of and a necessary consequence of living right by God. And conversely not having these things is a sign of and a necessary consequence of living a sinful life. Therefore when you see a person who appears in need you can assume that person brought his misfortune upon himself by moral deficiencies. That is the position that sedonaman’s quote seems to promote.

About as far as I can go to agree with sedonaman’s posting is to say that people who have the means and at the same time are pretending to be unable to care for themselves, that these people are doing wrong and should not be treated as truly needy. But sedonaman goes further and says that if choices made much earlier in life (like not getting a better education so you can get a better job) also let us off the hook from treating these people as needy. In other words it was by their own moral depravity that they have sunk so low that they need our help now. I think all Christians should be very reluctant to pat themselves on that back and congratulate themselves for doing all the “right” things so that they are now enjoying well-earned blessings that others do not enjoy.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

You seem to be doing a pretty good job of making judgments about the motives of the new health care law. If a woman aborts her child are we not permitted to rebuke her? Should we make no judgements on abortion doctors? The scriptures permit us to make such judgments. What we are prohibited from is judging ones soul. I can rebuke you for your actions but I cannot judge your soul. Moreover, the context of the scripture passage in question prohibited those who committed the same sins from making judgements on others who do the same thing. Hence, “judge not and you will not be judged for the measure you judge others it will be measured back to you.” Why willl it be measured back to the judge? Because he is guilty of the exact same sin!

David

In all the examples you mentioned, we would not be rebuking the people for their motives but for their actions. We don’t presume to judge the motives of abortion doctors. We simply judge that their actions are wrong. Motives have nothing to do with that.

 

[garn9173]

I’m all for tweaking health care (like coverage for pre exisiting conditions), what I DON’T SUPPORT is the government taking over 1/5 of our national economy.

 

[Nate13]

Except, of course, that nobody really knows what Obamacare will or won’t do for anyone.

I can give one good example. My 22 year old epileptic daughter who could not get any health care from the time she was 18. Between the time she was 18-21 she racked up 42,000 dollars in hospital bills from having seizures and one nearly cost her life. She had to file bankruptsy at age 22 last year because it was impossible to pay the bill and no Church or charitable organization came to her aid. Now, because of the new health care act she will is covered under my health care until she is 26. No one had mercy on my daughter except the Democrats. Its easy to be pro life when it does not cost you anything. When the rich man asked Jesus what he lacked to enter the Kingdom of heaven Jesus told him to sell all his possessions and give it to the poor, then come follow HIM and he would have treasures in heaven. But the rich man chose to trade his wealth for his soul. What we have today is selfish and spoiled Americans who only care for themselves and exploit abortion to cover their selfishness. What does a man profit if he keeps a few extra dollars in taxes and forfeits his soul? Why do you think we have the example of the sheep and the goats? WOE TO YOU!

David

That is your States problem. Half the States in the U.S offer health insurance options for those with preexisting conditions. Would it surprise you to learn that the supposedly more “evil” Republican States are the ones who make up a majority of the States who have already been offering this? Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky already have State plans to offer to these individuals.

This is not a federal issue its a State issue. While I can sympathize with the predicament you described I cannot sympathize with the solution you are supporting nor the notion that all the people like your daughter are doomed if the federal government does not come in and “save us”.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner;9189180:

Except, of course, that nobody really knows what Obamacare will or won’t do for anyone.

I can give one good example. My 22 year old epileptic daughter who could not get any health care from the time she was 18. Between the time she was 18-21 she racked up 42,000 dollars in hospital bills from having seizures and one nearly cost her life. She had to file bankruptsy at age 22 last year because it was impossible to pay the bill and no Church or charitable organization came to her aid. Now, because of the new health care act she will is covered under my health care until she is 26. No one had mercy on my daughter except the Democrats. Its easy to be pro life when it does not cost you anything. When the rich man asked Jesus what he lacked to enter the Kingdom of heaven Jesus told him to sell all his possessions and give it to the poor, then come follow HIM and he would have treasures in heaven. But the rich man chose to trade his wealth for his soul. What we have today is selfish and spoiled Americans who only care for themselves and exploit abortion to cover their selfishness. What does a man profit if he keeps a few extra dollars in taxes and forfeits his soul? Why do you think we have the example of the sheep and the goats? WOE TO YOU!

David

Woe to me? I have done nothing to you. Before wishing ill on another, one might first at least want to know something about the recipient of his hatred. About me, you know nothing.

There is no end to anecdotal stories of benefit to this person and detriment to that one over there. You are invested in Obamacare because of your daughter, and I understand that.

But no matter how grateful you are to the Democrats, (and even Obama didn’t want Obamacare) one can still ask whether, on the whole, the benefit your daughter received and could not get despite ERISA requirements at work or Medicaid from not working, (you didn’t tell us anything about either thing) overbalance the program’s downsides from the standpoint of the whole society, or even of individuals within the society.

20% of seniors are going to get kicked out of Medicare Advantage. The most severely disabled are getting dumped by medical providers because their conditions are chronic and Medicaid reimbursement has been tilted against treating chronic patients. “Child only” policies are now unaffordable to many because of preexisting coverage mandates. And, of course, there is the matter of forcing Catholic institutions to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients.

There are going to be many stories of detriments from Obamacare, as well as many stories of benefit. And the balance might not be favorable, which might explain why most of it was deferred to 2014. That very uncertainty, combined with the fact that the Democrats (and Repubs) had no idea what was in the Obamacare bill and probably still don’t, does cause people concern.

But I do understand that, to you, your daughter’s need justifies all. Many people will feel the same way. Many will not.

You needn’t respond. If you wish “woe” to me, then it probably is best that you don’t.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

davidmlamb;9194080:

Woe to me? I have done nothing to you. Before wishing ill on another, one might first at least want to know something about the recipient of his hatred. About me, you know nothing.

There is no end to anecdotal stories of benefit to this person and detriment to that one over there. You are invested in Obamacare because of your daughter, and I understand that.

But no matter how grateful you are to the Democrats, (and even Obama didn’t want Obamacare) one can still ask whether, on the whole, the benefit your daughter received and could not get despite ERISA requirements at work or Medicaid from not working, (you didn’t tell us anything about either thing) overbalance the program’s downsides from the standpoint of the whole society, or even of individuals within the society.

20% of seniors are going to get kicked out of Medicare Advantage. The most severely disabled are getting dumped by medical providers because their conditions are chronic and Medicaid reimbursement has been tilted against treating chronic patients. “Child only” policies are now unaffordable to many because of preexisting coverage mandates. And, of course, there is the matter of forcing Catholic institutions to pay for contraceptives and abortifacients.

There are going to be many stories of detriments from Obamacare, as well as many stories of benefit. And the balance might not be favorable, which might explain why most of it was deferred to 2014. That very uncertainty, combined with the fact that the Democrats (and Repubs) had no idea what was in the Obamacare bill and probably still don’t, does cause people concern.

But I do understand that, to you, your daughter’s need justifies all. Many people will feel the same way. Many will not.

You needn’t respond. If you wish “woe” to me, then it probably is best that you don’t.

And of course, one can legitimately debate the best way to approach making helathcare affordable.

Also, I’d like to point out that in every system, healthcare gets rationed in some sort. It is an economics problem, sadly to say.

 

[sedonaman]

…
the meaning of “materially blessed by God” refers to being able to have access to health insurance.

I think it means a lot more than that.

Prosperity Theology holds that having success in life, jobs, income, is a sign of and a necessary consequence of living right by God. And conversely not having these things is a sign of and a necessary consequence of living a sinful life. Therefore when you see a person who appears in need you can assume that person brought his misfortune upon himself by moral deficiencies. That is the position that sedonaman’s quote seems to promote.

Although there are cases of people leading a sinful life being unprosperous, I don’t believe that’s generally true. You are putting words in my mouth.

About as far as I can go to agree with sedonaman’s posting is to say that people who have the means and at the same time are pretending to be unable to care for themselves, that these people are doing wrong and should not be treated as truly needy.

Who is going to police it? This gets back to an earlier poster who said,“What is fair?” and “Who is going to decide what is fair?”

But sedonaman goes further and says that if choices made much earlier in life (like not getting a better education so you can get a better job) also let us off the hook from treating these people as needy.

That’s not what I meant, and you know it.