In the past months and years I have learned to love the USA. I visited many cities, I took several road trips that made me crave for more wide spaces discoveries.
I learned also about the American spirit: freedom, independence, justice, faith...
I learned about culture, too often mocked and summed up as a mix of Mc Donalds and coca cola, when it is actually so rich not only in great foods (smoked food! Cajun!! so many many more) but also in writers, cineasts, artists, speakers etc.
What I don't understand is why the health care reform is so hard to admit. Yes there is a need for health care as a basic public service. Like there is an army, police and public schools. Because this is how a society work. We are not individuals alone in the wild struggling for survival. We are together because together we are stronger. United we stand.
I can't leave with the fear that if our baby comes to soon we may go over the health care ceiling. Then what? We live on the streets with a preemie? We declare bankruptcy? I don't think that fear should exist in the XXI st century.
Also I don't understand how a country that have about 4000 abortions a day is not trying to support and encourage those who want to have children, who can afford to raise them, but can't afford the hospital stay because if all in a sudden a C-section is needed they would be in debt for years. I think it is sad that some people who would be great parents and raise wonderful, happy, balanced children on little money are held back because of medical costs for the birth.
Previously "a frog's life", we now are settled in France, probably for a few more years. We now have two kids and big plans for our little garden. A sort of old fashioned American homestead 20 miles from Paris.
8 comments:
I agree and appreciate your comments about my country.
I love it here but we are a work in progress.
Indeed.
If you were collecting signatures I would sign this.
hey i really appreciate your comments on this. you bring up a very realistic situation about young parents and healthcare. its something i think about too for our future children and how we'll pay since we're both just students on limited income. but i'll offer my perspective too and bare with me as this is my first attempt at explaining this:
the two things i think most people are afraid of about health care is the cost and the ability of other people making moral/value judgements on you directly. period. no one just wants people to suffer, but when you have a service, someone, somewhere is paying for it. america was made by a bunch of people who valued the freedom to not have limits put on them by a big government. government in their eyes should provide basic services like basic civil infrastructure and defense, but when it comes to things where value judgements must be made like healthcare, you start to get the government making decisions for you, win which they enter the realm of "telling you what to do". i think everyone will agree that health care reform is needed because our prices are outrageous, but that is different than the government providing health care for you. at that point they have the authority to set "this is what should and should not be covered" and then you get into the issue of whether or not abortion or IVF will be covered. what do you do then? clearly the public is divided on this and when you use people's money on things they find morally reprehensible, you'll have a bigger problem. it even poses an issue for smaller problems, like what surgeries they cover, what doctor they'll let you go to, what preventative care they'll deem necessary. health care reform and having a public option are two different things.
So I brought up money initially because to have a public option would be extremely expensive. today I read "$849 billion for the next 10 years". nothing is free. taxes will at some point increase. so what is better for a family, having to pay for health care but a lower cost of living because taxes aren't as high (america), or having free health care but as a result having such high taxes and having everything else be so expensive that no one can afford children either (like in scandinavia and europe)? europe is declining in population yet they have free healthcare, so I don't know if there is a direct connection between the two (on a general level, not on an individual level).
I'm honestly trying to dissect this because clearly neither health care situation is ideal right now. and if our goal is to help people form the families they want without unnecessary burdens we owe it to our societies to find the best/most moral solution.
I'll let my wife handle the response to most of this as she'll probably know how they treat the moral question in France, but I just wanted to say the following:
Our country was NOT "made by a bunch of people who valued the freedom to not have limits put on them by a big government." This, my darlings, is an attempt to re-frame the founders as being for small government as people know it today, and is revisionist history horseshit.
Sure, America in its early days stood against the monarchy of Britain, the government of the colonies. Their reasons for this were manifold, but primary among them was a lack of real parliamentary representation, especially when it came to determining taxes levied on the colonies. This is from where the famous phrase, "No Taxation Without Representation" comes. (For those of you reading who may have attended one of those giant human puddles of indoctrination and propaganda called "Tea Parties," please read this: http://www.timesnews.net/blogger.php?id=327&postid=7498)
The founders were fine with being taxed. They understood it as a societal necessity. But what they didn't want was a far-away government telling them how much they had to pay, without them having a say in it.
Moving on to health care, and its associated taxes: before I talk about this I want to say that health care as it exists in the modern world is a new thing. During the founders' time, the only people who could afford to see a doctor were the "rich elites" - the type that so many Palin-worshippers despise these days. Medicine was at a point that all you really could do was pray. Because of this, the specific idea of paying for health care was not on the minds of the founders when they were deciding things like the importance of charging taxes for the upkeep of the Navy.
With that in mind...
The principles of the American Revolution as seen by the founders were based on the philosophies of Locke, Rousseau, and Mill. I firmly believe that the idea of universal health care falls directly into the purview of the social contract (Wha??? read this: http://www.essortment.com/all/lockeandrouss_rqkw.htm). Therefore I think it's safe to say that the founders would have been shocked that people were not willing to give up a bit more of their income in order to ensure the well-being of their fellow citizens as they had already done many times - especially for so small a cost!
In terms of the numbers you provided ($849B over 10 years), the amount each citizen would need to shoulder per year in order to continue to uphold the social contract would be (drumroll please!): $283/year, or, $23/month. This number is incredibly inaccurate, however, as it does not account for the higher tax burden paid by those making more money. As a somewhat educated guess I'd say the total tax liability for the amount you mention would be $200/year for the average American, or $15/month. Of course, there are deductions and other things you can take on your regular taxes, especially if you have kids, so all of a sudden that number doesn't seem quite so bad, does it? Yes, my darlings, it's the power of putting something into perspective.
And now, for the coup de grâce, our individual tax burden for the military budget ($1.14Trillion per YEAR, not 10 years!): $3,800 per citizen. That rather puts things in perspective, doesn't it? How about another - the US budget for Education? Education is important, right? $68.6Billion per year, or, $228 per citizen per year. And that's with education in the US at the level that it's at now - not very good.
thanks for responding to my comment. im sorry if i angered either of you in anyway more than in just a discussion way. i appreciate your explanation to some of my points.
i don't have all the answers (clearly) and i don't know who does, so i appreciate civil dialogue on this subject. again, i'm sorry if my comment sounded too harsh or something, because i was just trying to further the discussion started by this thoughtful post by stating another opinion that i know some people have.
Five years of living in NYC can make me sound like I'm angry all the time, but I assure you if you heard me say my comment aloud you'd be laughing. :-)
Hi Alison, I didn't answer because I appreciated your point of view. I think it was an interesting comment and I didn't get angry or upset or offended or anything. I did not comment back because my post was mostly about feelings, I know the health care topic is really a hot one and I didn't want to start a discussion. I am also on a internet forum where a discussion about health care got me really upset, but the tone there was very different. My husband knew I was upset about that other discussion and he got all knighty defensive of me, which I think is really nice of him.. But don't take it as a personal offense. I know the "yes my darlings" was a little too much, but he said it's a reference to Churchill.. I learned things from both your comment and my husband's one. And both are interesting. Thanks for contributing!
i was kind of laughing. just wanted to make sure you guys were too. definitely trying to learn more!
Post a Comment