Fast Or Slow?

Hearing talk of how changes to Obamacare will harm people in various ways, I have been pondering…

1. Obamacare is failing. It promised to lower the number of uninsured by 25 million by 2017, lower premiums by $2500 per family, not increase taxes on any family making less than $250,000 per year, enhance competition and choice in the insurance market with most uninsured people getting coverage for $100 or less, and lower costs all around. It has done none of these things. It has done the opposite of all but the first, and it missed the 25 million mark by over half. And don’t get me started on, “If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.”

2. This failure has already harmed people who have been priced out of the insurance market in a healthcare industry designed by regulation to require insurance.

3. This failure will harm more people as it continues to fail.

4. Obamacare is unfixable because it mandates that insurance act as pre-paid health care, which is an entirely different animal (and hugely more expensive).

5. Obamacare is unfixable because it further regulates an already over-regulated industry. (There are other reasons as well, but I’ve already gone into those.)

6. Congress and the president (for various reasons) have no intention of fixing these problems and the other issues underlying our healthcare mess.

7. Congress and the president can break Obamacare faster.

Soooo, do I advocate for:

A. The faster destruction of Obamacare under the theory that it will harm fewer in the long run?

B. The slower destruction of Obamacare to give people time to prepare as best they can?

One Reply to “Fast Or Slow?”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *