Healthcare deform

I'm reposting some comments I left at Darrel Bock's blog:

**********************************************************

Of course, Beck is Mormon,
Submitted by steve hays (not verified) on Fri, 2010-03-19 09:43.

Of course, Beck is Mormon, so we wouldn't expect him to have any grasp of the Gospel.


LL: "I shudder to think what
Submitted by steve hays (not verified) on Fri, 2010-03-26 15:06.
LL:

"I shudder to think what we would see if not for Social Security and Medicare, programs that many have criticized as socialism."

Both of which are going broke. Moreover, the health care bill slashes Medicare. So how does this prove your point? Doesn't it disprove your point?

"Health insurance related horror stories and bankruptcies are numerous."

It's easy to cite horror stories for every position. There are horror stories for Canadian healthcare, British healthcare, Dutch healthcare, &c.

"The conservatives typically aren’t addressing the real issues."

What conservatives do you read or listen to?

"I have no doubt that God is concerned, and yes offended, with the painting with a broad brush the concepts of social justice and economic justice, supported by churches, as one and the same with communism or an ungodly agenda."

You paint conservatives with a broad brush.

Lynn: “Considering that my
Submitted by steve hays (not verified) on Sat, 2010-03-27 19:38.
Lynn:

“Considering that my address wasn’t an endorsement of any specific health care bill, the fact that a bill may slash Medicare doesn’t disprove my point.”

The immediate context was clearly the debate over Obamacare.

“My point was simply that these programs--which many have criticized as socialism and therefore should not exist--have been indispensable to the lives of countless people who have relied on them for basic survival over the decades.”

That ignores the alternatives. For example, what if the income which gov’t garnishes in payroll taxes had been invested by wage-earners in compound interest-bearing accounts?

“The fact that these programs are in need of an overhaul, doesn’t make a case that they should never have been created in the first place.”

“Overhaul” is euphemistic. These programs are demographically doomed: too few workers to support too many retirees.

Moreover, as long as the gov’t controls the money, the so-called trust-fund will simply be a cash cow for politicians to raid and squander on their pet projects.

“It is best to leave well enough alone, because the wealthy are doing fine in America. Feel free to correct me, but you seem to be supporting the status quo.”

Since Nancy Pelosi is one of the wealthiest members of the Senate, your class warfare rhetoric is oddly misaligned. Moreover, I was simply making the point that anecdotal horror stories cut both ways. Answering you on your own terms.

“As to the conservatives’ addresses of the issue, I mentioned two: One was a well-known, and respected by many, televangelist, and the other was an anonymous, ordinary person, claiming that we can take care of ourselves. I haven’t heard everything that has been said in the public arena, but in my experience, the conservative position doesn’t address the full scope of the issues; they speak of how nice it currently is for the well off, as compared to other systems, and how that would supposedly be taken away from them if all people are considered. They seem to avoid most of the discussion on the need for a change, because they do not want to appear to be on the side of the Democrats. This is how it has come across to me, and pitifully so. I haven’t heard much open and honest discussion, only what has seemed to me to be self-serving.”

I don’t see any evidence that you have made a good faith effort to seek out conservative intellectuals who speak to these and other issues. For example, Albert Mohler is a far more reputable spokesman for the religious right than Pat Robertson. In addition, we have Christian and/or conservative bioethicists like Francis Beckwith, Robert George, and Wesley J. Smith.

On a related note, OT scholar James Hoffmeier wrote a book last year (The Immigration Crisis) in the course of which he discusses the Biblical notion of charity and how that could be applied to public policy today.

On the immediate point at issue, here are two discussions which present a conservative alternative to Obamacare:

http://www.aei.org/docLib/ABetterPrescription.pdf

http://www.house.gov/ryan/PCA/PCAsummary15p.pdf

“But I do stand by my statement, that I believe it is the typical conservative position to blatantly avoid the key elements of the issues, in all different areas of discussion.”

Your impressions of conservative thought seemed to be filtered through secondhand sources in the liberal media. What comes across is prejudice.

“Steve, do you believe it is accurate to address the health care issue in the context of whether we are to give our tunics ‘voluntarily’ or ‘by force’?”

That was addressed to Jews living under Roman occupation. Have you even considered the historical setting?

And I don’t see Nancy Pelosi, Barack Obama, or Michelle Obama sharing their wardrobe (or any of their other personal effects) with the poor, do you?

“Is it possible that we need to become a more giving people, in terms of what the government can do to insure support regarding the massive costs of health care that is needed by many of our citizens?”

That’s an ironic question since you’re taking the status quo for granted vis-à-vis the cost of healthcare. Conservative reformers have proposed various initiatives to make healthcare more affordable and thereby more accessible.