|
"Health Insurance Affordability" is what's needed Posted March 1, 2010 at 9:00pm Given the recent Blair House "Summit", I want to add a few thoughts on the current debate on "Health Care": 1. We all (politicians, media, citizens) need to begin to distinguish in the language that we use between “health care” reform and “health insurance affordability” reform. The US has the best “health care” in the world. The US has very expensive and in many (but not most) instances, unfair “health insurance”. We need health insurance reform (and reforms such as tort reform to make insurance more affordable). The Republicans have been saying as much for a year; Thursday they did so more clearly and with media attention. But even the Republicans tend to revert to the vernacular of "health care reform". We all need to remain disciplined and accurate in the language we use.
2. In an effort to make health care more affordable, we should not reduce the quality of our health care (which has been the proven result in Canada, Europe and elsewhere). 3. Employer provided health care is a mid point between Government provided and Individual Pay. Companies, naturally would like to be relieved of this cost. They have made a political calculation that Government pay is the most likely. But we really should be moving towards a more individual pay model. (Actuarial pricing would still be made on groups, but not based on the arbitrary group of employees). (i.e. If you lose your job, your home and auto insurance rates don’t triple after 18 months). JerseyJD
JerseyJD is based in Southern New Jersey and expresses his thoughts and opinions about issues that affect our great nation. JerseyJD welcomes any & all comments, retorts, and challenges to his thoughts. email JerseyJD your thoughts at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Now the Left wants a "middle"ground Posted Feb. 17, 2010 at noon Ha! I love it. Chis Matthew's "Hardball" is now very concerned that there is no middle. This is so rich now that the Democrats couldn't get their own party to agree during 2009. The Left loves talking bi-partisanship when it means making the Right move to the middle. (You remember all this bi-partisan talk during 2009, don't you?) Both Olbermann and Maddow took on Beck -- in response to Beck criticizing OM's coverage of him -- to which, I'm sure Beck will respond tomorrow. In my prior industry we used to call this "Co-Marketing" JerseyJD The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen Posted Feb. 2, 2010 at 10:30pm The Californian Republicans may be interested in what California radio host, Dennis Prager, had to say to the House Republicans. A portion of his remarks are found at NRO here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/423612/what-i-said-to-the-republican-members-of-congress/dennis-prager?page=1
I recommend reading the entire piece, but quoted below is Mr. Prager's powerful closing:
"I have a motto that I offer to you because this is the ultimate moral case for us: 'The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.'
And here’s how we explain it: The bigger the government, the less I do for myself, for my family, and for my community. That is why we Americans give more charity and devote more time to volunteering than Europeans do. The European knows: the government, the state, will take care of me, my children, my parents, my neighbors, and my community. I don’t have to do anything. The bigger question in many Europeans’ lives is, “How much vacation time will I have and where will I spend that vacation?”
That is what happens when the state gets bigger — you become smaller. The dream of America was that the individual was to be a giant. The state stays small so as to enable each of us to be as big as we can be. We are each created in God’s image. The state is not in God’s image, but it is vying to be that. This is the battle you’re fighting. You are fighting a cosmic battle, because this is the most important society ever devised, the United States of America.. . . America really is the last, best hope of mankind.
That is how important I consider the fights that are going on now, especially with regard to the takeover of health care. How can they, with a serious face, tell us that Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security are going bankrupt, and therefore the solution is to take over more of health care? How does one say that with a straight face? How does one look a fellow American in the eye and say, “Yes, we have failed in almost every way that government has significantly intruded, and that’s why we need more government intrusion”?
It is mind-boggling. But that is what has happened. People get smaller, and pettier, as the government and state get bigger. That’s what you are fighting. And that’s why I came to tell you this is the proudest moment in my life as a Republican. Thank you for doing what you are doing." An additional thought: It is not merely the case that "the smaller citizen" is a by product of "the bigger government". Rather, it is the express purposeof progressives that the economic and civic interests of the individual be made subservient to those of the collective. JerseyJD President Obama tries to play nice
Posted Jan. 28, 2010 at 9:30pm Here is my favorite part of President Obama's State of the Union speech: "So no, I will not give up on changing the tone of our politics." Alright, cool, the President is tacking back to the center and wants to change the tone, like he promised during the campaign. Oh wait, that line is followed a sentence or 2 later with this bit of bipartisanship: "To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve some problems, not run for the hills." But then it really gets rich. In the same breath: "And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that sixty votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town, then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership." I'm loving the new tone already. But then he finishes his thought with a little sarcasm, just for good measure: "This week, I'll be addressing a meeting of the House Republicans. And I would like to begin monthly meetings with both the Democratic and Republican leadership. I know you can't wait." JerseyJD
|
Editorials
