Here’s the article that sparked our discussion: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/09/10/obamas-health-care-speech-in-plain-english/

*It’s important to note that Old Friend started with pleasantries, and I’m only using pieces of his email.

People see what they want to see, not necessarily the reality of the situation. Is that a accurate depiction of the market since January 20th? No, the Dow is up over 14% since then. Photo Credit: George Bentley

The first thing he writes is pretty much par for the course. For some reason, many conservatives are just AGAINST the current administration. Before they say anything else, they will let you know they just don’t approve of anything Obama is doing, no way, no how.

Old Friend: I am strongly opposed to the direction this administration is taking the country . . . I’m wary of federal officials trying to leverage their authority to expand government intervention.

Me: Regarding the direction the Obama Administration is taking this country, what direction is that? From where I’m sitting that direction is out of a recession, towards a positive opinion of the USA on the global political level, towards significant positive action on climate change, and generally leaving the country in a better place than it was when he came into office.

I try not to react to individual details of any plan. I read and understand details, but then put them into a little formula in my head. My calculations on recent contentious issues have usually resulted in a “this is generally better than what we had before” conclusion, in favor of the current administration. That said, I think most of the plans presented by Dems start out way too far left, and I’m glad we have the Republicans there to call out and eliminate the crazy parts of these bills.

The second point he makes is also a conservative status quo argument. He picks out a detail that might look like an egregious omission or oversight on the part of the Obama Administration and then proceeds to ask a number of questions that try to further prove that ‘Obama doesn’t know what he’s getting himself into here.’ Honestly, I feel that there are a number of good reasons to take issue with the proposed legislation, but this isn’t one of them.

Old Friend: How many people are truly uninsured because they can’t afford it?  I’ve heard Obama say 30 million and 60 million, which is a significant difference.  How much coverage does each uninsured individual need?  How do they calculate how much insuring 30 or 60 million people with different needs would cost (an elderly woman on food stamps with heart trouble vs. a recent college graduate with no major ailments, for example)?  Government officials can’t really know the answer to either question, it’s impossible for them to–how could they possibly make an accurate count?

Me: To your concern over accurate count, I’m not sure I understand why that’s particularly important, even from a cost calculation standpoint. The proposed system is supposed to be self contained from a cost perspective. When we put the uninsured and underinsured into health insurance plans from the government the coverage is supposed to pay for itself. The premiums collected are meant to cover the costs of treatments. If they can’t afford the coverage it comes out of their taxes (tax rebates to pay for their premiums). [Currently] if you don’t have insurance and you can afford it, you’re part of the problem because when you go to the emergency room the rest of us are paying for you, that will no longer be an issue.

From a personal perspective on this, I work for a small company (3 employees) and my wife is self employed. We’re healthy and fairly young. My employer doesn’t pay my health insurance because I chose a compensation plan that allowed me to make more dollars in exchange for not being covered. We buy our own basic health insurance, but it’s the cheapest we could find because we’re only concerned with covering ourselves for a catastrophic injury or condition. We pay all other medically related costs out of pocket (doctor visits, prescriptions, etc.), so we’re pretty much getting screwed out of over $2,000/year by our insurance company. Now I’m not complaining, we could choose to pay $4K/year and have our visits and prescriptions covered, but we would lose financially in that scenario too.

Insurance companies employ teams of people to find reasons to deny claims and increase profits. Photo Credit: UN1SON

The problem with current costs is lack of competition and insurance company profiteering. There really isn’t much difference in premiums between what we would pay for checkup and prescription coverage and what an unhealthy 50 year old couple would pay, and that’s just wrong. I think the proposed legislation would provide for many levels of coverage (from both government and private insurers) that aren’t currently available. Now I’m not saying we would definitely switch to a government plan if one was available, but I sure would take a hard look at the cost/benefit analysis and take advantage of covered preventative doctor visits if I could get them for what I’m paying currently. And that’s where I see a real benefit, making preventative health care more affordable will mean less catastrophic health issues for everyone in the country. Less catastrophic issues means less money spent on them by insurance companies which means lower premiums for everyone.

What I’m not in favor of is government handouts that don’t produce some sort of return on investment. Welfare for instance, is a total joke. Yes there are people out there that truly need it, but for the most part our welfare system provides an incentive for people to not work. Our unemployment system is also heavily abused, we need to do something to clean up the corruption and abuse in those types of systems because they don’t do much to provide a return on the investment so the money goes in and never comes back out. Health care is different, if it’s done correctly it will pay us back.

Opposition to Obama & Healthcare Reform is a post from: Tim Staines' Weblog