&
Advertise Here with Today.com
 

Oct 16 2009

Two Trillion: The real number behind Health Care Reform

Published by dfallis at 9:41 am under Health, Humor, Living, News, Politics Edit This

Harry Reid, the alter to Speaker Pelosi, says that $54 billion will be saved annually, but that’s small pickings when the bill, itself, will cost $2 trillion-don’t you feel that when a number is that large, the first letter should be capitalized?

Dick Morris, former Clinton advisor and Fox News contributor, has been an outspoken opponent of the health care reform bills. Why? His reasons are very much like my own; it’s what it will do and how unhealthy the proposals are for the elderly and the potentially disabled new born. While talking with Bill O’Reilly, Wednesday night, he brought up the little known but much suspected policies that will be leveled against the elderly. Under the health care proposal, a man, woman, or child’s age will be balanced against treatment and cost. A man 95 years of age will not get much needed services because his life-expectancy would not yield the operation feasible. In other words, he is too old to spend $50 to 100 thousand for an operation when he has, at best, 5 years of life left to him. The unborn with suspected disabilities, will just as likely be aborted due to it’s lifetime expectations. Under the health care proposals, you will be judged upon your ability to make the expenditure worthwhile to the “whole.”

Hm, the government is proposing spending $2 trillion to decide if you are worth the money you make. Doctors face each case based on the personal interaction with patients; is this patient able to undergo surgery in his present condition? Is this patient going to benefit from the surgery, but not is this patient’s “potential” worth the money it will cost to fix his problem. Potentially, none of us is worth $150 thousand to $200 thousand to save our lives, but ethically everyone is worth the cost of the medical treatment that would make us whole again. As seems to be the norm for this government, they have removed the “morals clause” and replaced it with “dollar-potential.”

My dad is 84-years-old, or as he would say 84-years-young, and can no longer work as he did when he was a much younger man, but his potential as a human being has not lessened with age. He believes his life expectancy is what he feels it is and not what a chart on a medical facility’s wall allows him. Should this health care plan pass, my dad’s fate relies not upon his moral or ethical worth, but his monetary potential. I, like Mr. Morris, do not believe that the government has the right to decide the fate of our parents…or  for us. It’s impossible for me to conceive that the unborn child’s fate rest within the realm of what his life will cost as opposed to what his monetary potential could be. We’re not stock market purchases, we’re human beings with unlimited potential as long as the government stays out of our potential life expectancy.

Possibly-related Articles:                                        (auto-generated)
Advertise Here with Today.com

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.
Not A Member? Register for Free!

Advertise Here
Some Today.com contributors may have received a fee or a promotional product or service from a manufacturer for promotional consideration, while others receive no consideration at all. Each contributor is responsible for disclosing any such promotional consideration.