Following the (undoubtedly sponsored) comments I received on my previous article criticizing the Republican Speaker of the House of Representatives behavior, I wanted to debunk some of the myths.
“The majority of employees (people of the US) do not want to pay for a new soda machine, they already have one.” - meaning the commenter claims that the majority of the US population already have medical insurance and are not interested in changes.
Well, this one is easy: the problem is not the majority who have insurance, its the minority who don’t. What do we do about those who are unemployed, and thus cannot get insurance through employers? Those who are employed but whose employers don’t provide insurance? Those who are students? Those who have pre-existing conditions? Those who’ve exceeded their lifetime caps because they become sick with diseases like cancer, or got into an accident, or were born with some health issues, etc?
What do we do about all these? Do we, those who have insurance, let them just die untreated? This was a question asked in one of the Republican primary debates, and there were people in the crowd shouting “Yes”! I was horrified by that. None of the Republican candidates spoke against these shouters then. That was even more horrifying. Other than “Yes, kill them all”, Republicans do not provide any answer.
“If employees do not purchase sodas from the machine they will be fined 1% of their salary this year and 2.5% of their salary next year.” (Tax penalty for not signing up for Obamacare)
This is supposed to be a negative thing? Apparently the commenter thinks so. I think that 2.5% is not enough. Those who are not getting insurance will undoubtedly go to the ER when they actually need emergency care. Who is going to pay for that? The answer is the taxpayer. So for those people it is wrong to have others force them taking responsibility, but its perfectly fine to force others to pay their bills when its convenient? Conservative hypocrisy at its best. I would say they should pay even larger fines. 2.5% is not enough to cover their ER expenses when they actually do break a leg or have stage 4 cancer because it wasn’t diagnosed during the first 3 stages having them being too cheap to have coverage.
“Management will confiscate part of the employees paychecks regardless of the situation and use part of that money to pay for 75% of management’s sodas.” (Congress gets 75% of their costs for Obamacare paid for according to OMB)
Actually, my employer pays even more than 75%. But I do get the point – we’re the employers of the Congressmen. What I think is that the terms of their employment shouldn’t be set by them, but someone independent, as it is done in other countries. But ACA has really nothing to do with that, does it?
But the most ridiculous argument was this:
The employees are the people and did not get to vote on Obamacare (this was entirely left out of the original allegory). The managers (congress) are the ones who voted and did not represent the will of the majority of the people (employees).
Well, I’ve got news to you Aaron: people don’t vote on Federal laws. AT ALL. So claiming that ACA is bad because people didn’t get to vote on it is moot – people don’t get to vote on any Federal law. Ironically, people didn’t also get to vote on the recent government shutdown. Where are the polls on that? Where are the polls on all the wars the US went to? Where are the polls on the handouts to the corporations and the tax loopholes allowing the rich to pay 13% tax while the middle class is paying 25%-30%? Didn’t see anyone shouting that the people didn’t get to vote on that. Oh, wait, I did… Occupy Wall-Street movement… Where were the Republicans then? Did anyone ask the people when the Republican House of Representatives spent millions defending the unconstitutional discrimination?
No. I don’t think so.
So don’t try to defend Republicans here. No excuses for them
Your Little Advisor.