Obamacare: It’s a Good Thing – Right?

Last night, at the dinner table, I presented the boys with a scenario. What if the government wrote a law that made all forms of entertainment free for everyone? No one would have to pay for movies, to go bowling, skating, watch a ballgame, etc.

Earlier in the day I’d been reading comments on the Right Wing Obamacare Myths Debunked post by Matt Walsh. There was a lady, who wasn’t even an American, saying she didn’t understand why so many were against Obamacare when it would help so many.  All I could think was “My ten-year old would understand why this isn’t a good idea.”

As a family, we don’t always have the money to go to the movies, our local fun center, ball games, etc. We go to about 2 movies a year. Sometimes not even that much. Not always because we don’t have the money, but often times there’s not anything we really want to see. I figure, for just the boy’s admission and snacks, it’s about $15 a pop.

Before dinner, I sat down and wrote up the “Entertainment Act”. Before I read it to them and went over it, I told them to assume they’d pay about $15 to see a movie and the money they get for their allowance would be their annual income. Once they understood the ‘scenario’, we went over each section discussing it and answering their questions if they had any.

Entertainment Act

Article I. Allows everyone to participate in all local entertainment for free. Movies, roller skating, bowling, etc.

Needless to say, they were all for it. Free fun stuff? Sign me up!

Article II. Those working in the entertainment industry (actors, ball players, etc) as well as the owners of the theaters, stadiums, etc and their employees must still get paid. In order to cover the costs of the entertainment and to pay those working in it, there will be a slight rise in the amount of tax paid on purchases, a few new minor taxes, and less tax breaks at the end of the year.

Here’s where they began to have some questions. At first they were like “Okay, I guess.”, but wondered how it would work. We explained it would be a minor raise in taxes on things, which didn’t seems like a lot. Then they realized that the little – when put all together – adds up to a lot. This was when Brinson started thinking it wasn’t such a good idea. Harrison said “Well, it might still be good. I’m not sure yet…”

Article III. Those who don’t attend entertainment events, by choice, may choose to “opt out” of the program. However, in order to fund the program, those opting out will have to pay a monthly penalty fee. This fee will be in addition to the higher taxes to the less tax breaks, etc. People who never participated in any entertainment activities, and don’t plan to in the future, must still participate or pay the penalty. If a person has a bowling alley or some other form of entertainment in their home for personal use, that is fine, but they must still participate in the program or pay the penalty.

They began to have a few more doubts and questions. Their Gran doesn’t do any of those things, so we talked about how that would impact her. Then we talked about how it would impact them. As it was now, they paid $15 when they wanted to see a movie. Harrison began to get his quizzical eyebrow raise face going. “Wait a second” he says “So, if I don’t want to go to the movies, I have to pay?”

Nod

Brinson – “That doesn’t seem right… or fair.”

Harrison – “So, if I don’t want to do it… I have to pay and still pay more taxes and all that other stuff?”

I just gave a nod again. I was trying very hard not to sway their thinking with tone or expression or anything and I made sure they understood that there wasn’t a right or wrong answer…

Tom asked the boys “How much do you pay now to see a movie when you’d like?” They answered $15 (per the parameters at the beginning of the scenario) “So, about $30 a year. How much do you pay to not see movie and stay home?”

Brinson – “Nothing.”

Their expressions began to change from interest to ‘Hey, wait a second…’

Harrison – “This makes no sense…”

Me – “I’m not done. There’s more… Ready to move on?”

Harrison – “Yeah. I guess…”

I began to get the feeling this was no longer a ‘fantastic idea’ in their minds.

Article IV. City officials and city government employees (mayor, secretary, etc) do not have to participate in the program and won’t be required to pay the penalty.

Brinson – “See.”

Me – “What?”

Brinson – “I said it didn’t seem fair. That’s not fair. Why do I have to pay the money, but they don’t?”

Me – “Yeah, why would it be that way? Why would they put that in there?”

Harrison – “Because they don’t want to spend their money or taxes on it…”

Brinson – “Because it’s a dumb idea and they know it.”

We went on to show how the different people’s incomes and how what they pay in is comparable to what they make for a living. Kept it basic, I reminded them of how much they make in allowance each year. Then grabbed the taxes off of that amount. They noted that the people making the most money, paid the most money. Harrison mentioned finding a job that was easier work and less pay if the benefit was the same. This is another problem with such a program. Someone explained in this video that explains socialism to children.

The conversation eventually went on to how much the taxes would be raised or how much the penalty would be and things like that. That was when I said “Well, I’ll tell you how much your taxes will be raised and how much the penalty is after you agree to it and make it a law.”

Harrison – “WHAT!?”

Me – “Tell me if you want to make this a law. Once it becomes a law, I’ll tell you how much it will cost.”

Harrison – “That’s stupid.”

Brinson – “See. Not fair.”

Harrison – “Who knows what you’ve written in there. I could be agreeing to give away a kidney or something.”

Me – “So, do y’all want to make it a law?”

Brinson – “No. I don’t.”

Harrison – “Who would?!”

In the end, the kids decided it wasn’t a good idea. I put the paper, where I’d written it, on the table and said “So… That’s a no then?”

Harrison said “Hang on…” He left the room and came back a second later with the “Like” and “Dislike” stamps. I think the stamps speak volumes…

2013-09-27 00.47.252013-09-27 00.47.45

The fact that this is the basic crux of the Obamacare ‘bill’ and a 10-year-old and 13-year-old can understand it won’t work – while others insist it’s awesome – is incredible. It’s not that my kids are the savants. I love ’em, they’re smart, but it doesn’t take a lot of brains to ‘get’ that this just won’t work.

How anyone can is beyond me…

Edit: Please note – I have not said that going to the movies is the same as someone dying. My children (Thank the Lord) haven’t had to deal with a loved one or close friend dying from anything other than old age. Relating this scenario to them that way seemed a bit morbid to me. There was no reason to scare or upset my kids in order to point out that even a child can see discrepancies. They have also heard me discussing healthcare as of late and I wanted an unbiased reaction – I felt relating it to something they would really like to have and do made more sense and would get a more honest response.

Also – I need to make a correction. Congress isn’t “exempt”. Clearly that is not the proper word. Congress is not getting ‘exemptions’, they are getting preferential treatment. OPM will pay the majority of their premiums. So, they’re not exempt. They’re just letting us pay their premiums for them.

First thoughts or feelings about this post?
  • Awesome 
  • Facepalm 
  • LOL 
  • Meh 
  • So True 
  • That\'s Just Sad 
  • Wow 
Posted in Government/Politics, In the Headlines, Just Sayin', Kids and Parenting, True Stories
  • Laura

    I just love Brinson…”Because it’s a dumb idea and they know it.” He should get a gold star.

  • http://www.ayoungmothersmusings.wordpress.com Kyrsta

    AWESOME! Great example Shelley! :) What an awesome way to teach your kids this stuff. It’s incredible how easy it is to see that programs of this sort, “free” programs, won’t work yet people refuse to look at the truth that’s staring (and threatening to slap) them in the face.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I’ve – of course – met some resistance from those on FB, stating not getting to see a movie and not getting healthcare are far different things. My reply? Not only did they miss the point, I fail to see why forcing an entire country to get crappy healthcare is a good thing… Thanks for the kind words…

      • http://gravatar.com/bkl3mom Tamara Ashway

        Yea, Shelley, me too. People only see what they want to see. they see “free” and think it has to be good, at least for them and that’s all they care about. No need to worry about the other guy, as long as it’s free for me. So utterly sickening!

      • https://www.facebook.com/jameswilsondesign James Jonathan Wilson

        You have also gotten resistance for valid reasons. People don’t die from not being able to see a movie. People don’t die because they can’t afford to see a movie. And you have inaccuracies, the government is not exempt. They are losing there health insurance and must purchase it through the exchange, however they still will receive the benefit of having their job cover some of the cost of it. (Something anyone who works for a company that offers health insurance) receives. I understand and agree with to a point on what you are trying to say, I just don’t agree with the method used to try and get that point across.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          I do not understand why people are unable to read previous comments… I shall now go and edit the original article because I’m tired of repeating myself…

          No one said that going to the movies is the same as someone dying. Seeing as how children, well… my children anyway (Thank the Lord) haven’t had to deal with a loved one or close friend dying from anything other than old age – relating that to them that way seemed a bit morbid to me. As well as they’ve heard me discussing the healthcare debate and I wanted an unbiased reaction – I felt relating it to something they would really like to have and do made more sense and would get a more honest response.

          And, okay… Congress isn’t “exempt”. Clearly that is the improper word. I shall rephrase… Congress is not getting ‘exemptions’, they are getting preferential treatment in having OPM pay the majority of their premiums for them. So… They’re still on the plan-sort of-but they’re getting financial help with their premiums. Good thing too. Otherwise it might place a hardship on them… Oy.

  • Curtis D.

    And also remember how the value and quality of a movie or any other entertainment would drop if it was not only free, but required

  • Pingback: Obamacare: It’s Free, It Must Be A Good Thing…()

  • Chris

    This was stupid. Nobody dies from not being able to see a movie. Glad you were able to recognize that.

    Perhaps you should suggest another scenario. Tell your kids to imagine that their entire class gets sick. Their entire school even. Not sure whose fault, they just all get sick. And the prognosis is pretty simple..
    Treatment = get better. No treatment = die.

    To no fault of the child, they become dependent on whether or not their parents can come to their aid. If mom and dad have insurance, their kid lives. If mom and dad don’t have insurance, but try to get it, they get denied because the condition is pre-existing. If they don’t have insurance, and can’t afford it, they obviously can’t afford medical bills without help. Both scenarios, their kid doesn’t get treatment, and dies.

    So now ask your kids
    1. Do they think this is fair?
    2. Do they think it’s OK to deny someone for a pre-existing condition?
    3. That horrible tax they were asked to cover (and disliked in your initial proposal to them) is going to be used to save a few lives of their classmates. They can keep it, and kiss the classmates goodbye. Or they can pay it, and someone lives. See what they say to that.
    4. Now tell them that the actual cost of the treatment (to the healthcare provider) is $100. But the cost to the patient is $800, because the provider claims to have to be able to cover expenses and raises the price up to cover their ‘overhead’. Show them the absurd profits these companies are taking home so their top employees can drive six cars, live in houses with more bathrooms than people, and spend more time on vacation than they do at work. Ask your kids if they think this is fair, and if they think these types of people are right for doing this in the name of profit.

    The only reason you care is because this levels the playing field to make health care available to everyone. When you level the playing field, things tend to change. If the rich are suddenly given the same course of treatment as the lowly poor person, they suddenly give a damn about the poor quality of service. Which is awesome, because no one listens to poor people complaining about quality of service like they will when rich people start complaining. Obamacare is paving the way for a nationalized health system. It’s almost the same proposal Romney had while he was governor.

    If you think the system isn’t going to serve you well, instead of looking to rob the poor of what should be considered a basic human right, maybe you should look at why the service sucks, and start looking for ways to fix it. Companies are making billions of dollars in profit at the expense of the health of our nation.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Clearly this make sense to you. Otherwise it would not have struck such a chord with you…

      First, try to remember what it was like to be a ten year old. Now imagine not being able to do anything except go to school, do chores and go to bed. No, it’s not life and death – but it feels like it to a ten year old.

      Second, I wouldn’t ask my children any of those things. I wouldn’t do that to a child. I let a child be a child.

      Third, it’s absurd for you to assume that the only reason I want anything is because of whatever your preconceived idea you have about me. I am a stay at home mother of two. We live on one income. My husband is civil service. Therefor he was on the furlough which hit us with a 20% cut in pay. Now, my husband may be sent home – without pay – indefinitely. I live in the worst neighborhood in my town (there was a drive by shooting next door a month ago). We have a 1995 Van and a 1996 truck.

      We have insurance, now, through my husband’s job. When my first son was born, we had no insurance and had to use Medicaid. That went away 3 months after his birth and we had to pay for everything out of pocket. My husband’s boss FINALLY got him a family insurance plan. Once he did, we got pregnant with my second son. When I went to the doctor, I found out his boss hadn’t been paying the dues and we were without insurance – again. I had to go on Medicaid again and again it went away 3 months after he was born. That same year, due to complications with the pregnancy, I had to have three surgeries – without insurance. We had to get a second mortgage on our home – that we’re still paying on 10 years later.

      I have sjogren’s syndrome, lupus, urticaria and a dysfunctional thyroid. All pre-existing conditions.

      Having said all that – I still see Obamacare as the worst idea EVER. It has NOTHING to do with what the rich think and want compared to what the poor think and want. It has to do with common sense and anyone blessed with a modicum of common sense can see the pitfalls and dangers outweigh HUGELY the small benefit that SOME (that’s right… not everyone will get coverage) that it *seems* to help. Ignoring ALL other bells and whistles – just the fact that all of the people who wrote the bill are exempt tells anyone right there that it’s *NOT* what it seems… http://youtu.be/q2jijuj1ysw

      • Melody

        A lot of countries have government-provided healthcare insurance, and none of them have imploded on themselves yet. Not sure about the specific nuts and bolts of the Obama plan (I’m not American), but the idea of helping most people get decent healthcare without piling on a load of financial worries at the same time is not, in and of itself, a civilization-destroying idea.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Yes, actually, that’s exactly what it is.

      • Jamey

        @ Melody: Um… I guess you didn’t hear that Canada is trying to UNDO universal health care and get private business BACK into health care? Yeah… because it is working so great. The system in Sweden is supposedly one of the best, but they also have the worst tax rates in the world.

      • Linda

        You go. Girl!!!! I so admire what you’ve done! I’m going to share this with my kids!,

      • http://goodfaithwriting.wordpress.com the dark avenger

        Yes!

        I see your point.

        There are already paying people for insurance…and if someone gets sick, and they don’t have it…no one is going to let them die, because the world is full of nice people!

        So, why bother paying for insurance, because if you ever need it, and can’t pay to save your kids lives…well, freeloading is optional.

        Nice lesson.

        And speaking of freeloading, if your husband works in a job that is unnecessary, why doesn’t he get a trade and keep leeching off taxpayers?

        Thanks for your uplifting message, even though it was full of crap.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Glad you can see the point. First do no harm. You cannot be turned away from a hospital if you cannot pay. That’s not so when everything is universal… Thank you for your contribution to the discussion.

      • https://www.facebook.com/curtishearn Curtis Hearn

        Shelley,

        Wow…you have been through a lot. A ton. I admire you for sticking to what you believe in through all of that. And I agree that Obamacare has a lot of problems. But I really don’t understand, after all you’ve been through, how you still think it is “the worst idea EVER.”

        Your scenario with your kids is really a red herring in my opinion. You can’t compare an “Entertainment Tax” with the healthcare debate. As Chris pointed out, those are two totally different things. One you potentially die from, the other, well, you don’t.

        Secondly, as you have already pointed out, we already have a national healthcare system called Medicaid. Obamacare is just a better way to fund it, since we will now have an individual mandate. Think of the mandate like car insurance…everybody has to have because, if you maim someone with your car, and don’t have any money, the insurance company will step in a make the person whole (financially, at least). It’s the same with healthcare. We are already paying for people who can’t afford insurance anyway (Medicaid), so why not shift that burden to insurance companies by paying a premium up front, so that the additional cost if/when catastrophe strikes falls on the insurance company? That’s how insurance generally works.

        I am, in general, against the socialist state. However, we have to find middle ground as a developed, advanced society. Economic stability is fundamental to our political stability as a cohesive society. If that requires a little give and take when it comes to healthcare, so be it. It keeps people out of desperate situations.

        By the way, not to be heartless here, but what if Medicaid wasn’t available, and one of your kids died during that period when you had no insurance. Do you think you would feel differently about this issue? Food for thought…

        Regards,
        Curtis

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          As I’ve said… the analogy was merely so they could understand. Whether one could die or not wasn’t the point. Besides, I’ve since asked if there was a possibility of death would they change their minds. The answer was the same either way. I don’t presume to know the answer. I only see problems with what is proposed.

          And no. I wouldn’t feel any different. What you’re suggesting is similar to the woman who, back in January, said she hoped someone would shoot and kill my children so I would change my opinion about guns. While you did not wish harm on my children, the premise is the same. Suggesting that certain outcomes would change my opinion. I fail to see how you think my children dying during that period would or could change my mind. I’m assuming that you mean if they were to die due to some medical condition. If so, it still wouldn’t change my opinion. Mainly because, even though I don’t have insurance, I cannot be turned away or refused treatment. My child, insurance or not, would have still gotten medical care. The outcome would have had no bearing on any of that. The only thing that would have changed, other than the fact that I now have a dead child, is that I’d be in debt more than I already was.

          I think people forget that there are many times, now, with privatized insurance that there is a panel of people sitting in some office building somewhere deciding whether or not some procedure is truly needed or not. They choose whether or not to pay for your care. This doesn’t change with Obamacare. There will still be people deciding whether or not you should or are allowed to have whatever procedure. If you didn’t have insurance, you’d have a boatload of debt – but you’d be alive. There are actually some studies I found that showed those with more medical coverage were actually sicker than those without. It’s crazy and makes no sense – unless you consider that there may be a panel of people denying benefits.

      • https://plus.google.com/100030086680402182855 Kit Erickson

        Shelly, aren’t you the poster child for why universal insurance coverage is a good idea? When you had your children, you had those paid for by medicaid, which is as close to universal insurance coverage as this country has. When everybody’s collective tax Dollars were paying for your children, you didn’t see any problem with everybody paying for your children’s and your health needs, so why is the idea of you paying for somebody else’s such a bad idea? As for having to pay for other people’s health insurance, aren’t we all paying for yours, since your husband is a government employee? You think that covering everybody’s preexisting conditions is a good idea, when they are your conditions. Do you not see the hypocrisy? You seem to believe that your husband’s employer had an obligation to provide him with insurance, so you think it is okay if the employer is left to pay for your insurance, but you, as a taxpayer shouldn’t have to be part of paying for that?

        Lastly, what is your better solution? It’s easy to sit at home enjoying your tax payer provided insurance and scoffing at the people that are without, and find problems with the proposed solution, but what is your alternate superior solution? Right now as a nation we spend more per capita on health care than any other nation, but we get far less than the best medical results, and we leave millions of people out in the cold. Do you really believe that is the best solution? Can you offer anything to improve it? What if you husband lost his taxpayer provided job and health insurance, and wasn’t able to find a job that was willing to offer health insurance that covers all of your many pre-exisiting conditions, what would you have us, as a society, do with you? Should we just leave you to die, as it would appear nature has selected you to do? What if it is one of your children? Will you just leave them to die? I don’t have to wait for you to answer either of those questions, because your history has already answered them for you, you would have no problem at all dropping the bill on all of us, the taxpayers. You need to reconsider your position.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Shelly, aren’t you the poster child for why universal insurance coverage is a good idea?

          No, not at all. If anything, I’m the poster child for what Medicaid is intended for. Use for a short time for you to get on your feet and then stop using it.

          When you had your children, you had those paid for by medicaid, which is as close to universal insurance coverage as this country has. When everybody’s collective tax Dollars were paying for your children, you didn’t see any problem with everybody paying for your children’s and your health needs, so why is the idea of you paying for somebody else’s such a bad idea?

          Perhaps the reason I didn’t have a problem with ‘everyone’ (which is a joke) paying for my child’s and my health needs, at that time, was because I had worked and paid into that system for years. My husband was working regularly and we were paying our bills. We went without booze, cigarettes, movies, vacations, new clothes, new cars, etc etc etc. The money we made went only to our necessities and we were paying into that program – not sitting at home wearing slippers, bathrobes and eating bon bons.

          As for having to pay for other people’s health insurance, aren’t we all paying for yours, since your husband is a government employee?

          lol Okay, sure. Though I’m pretty sure that his pay is coming from that press in Obama’s basement…

          You think that covering everybody’s preexisting conditions is a good idea, when they are your conditions. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

          Uhm… I really have no idea what you’re referring to or talking about…

          You seem to believe that your husband’s employer had an obligation to provide him with insurance, so you think it is okay if the employer is left to pay for your insurance, but you, as a taxpayer shouldn’t have to be part of paying for that?

          Okay… so, someone starts a company in Kalamazoo Michigan. It’s somehow, now, my responsibility to pay for his employees’ health insurance? How does that make ANY sense? In a country where you can start companies if you’d like or not if you’d rather not, you know what your responsibilities are going in. I fail to see why I should pay for your employees so you can make money. Oh… Wait. You must think you’re talking to a liberal…

          Lastly, what is your better solution?

          Well… See, the name of this blog is “Shelley’s Thoughts On…” it’s not “Shelley’s Solutions For…”

          It’s easy to sit at home enjoying your tax payer provided insurance and scoffing at the people that are without, and find problems with the proposed solution, but what is your alternate superior solution?

          You’re… joking. Right? Because if you aren’t, the government owes my husband a LOT of money for erroneously removing $664 and some change from his check every month to pay for our insurance. Plus the deductibles, co-pays, prescriptions… The tax payers aren’t providing my husband with anything. My husband goes to work – and WORKS. He earns the money that he makes and then uses to pay for our insurance.

          What if you husband lost his taxpayer provided job and health insurance, and wasn’t able to find a job that was willing to offer health insurance that covers all of your many pre-exisiting conditions, what would you have us, as a society, do with you?

          You’re just pressin’ that whole “Tax payer provided” bull aren’tcha? You realize that the taxes that “may” cover my husband’s paycheck is a FAR cry from those who sit home and collect checks. Right? Because if you don’t, then this is a conversation of futility…

          Should we just leave you to die, as it would appear nature has selected you to do?

          Well, I was going to say “Yes. Please do. Dying in a “Hemmingway” gloom is preferable to dying in this happy rainbows and unicorns facade that the government and Obama groupies would have us believe it is.” But then it occurred to me that I’d probably get charged some sort of fee for dying and decided against it.

          What if it is one of your children? Will you just leave them to die?

          Seriously… If the only way you feel you’re able to make your point is with guilt and the logical fallacy of appealing to emotions, you’re defeated before you ever say a word.

          I don’t have to wait for you to answer either of those questions, because your history has already answered them for you, you would have no problem at all dropping the bill on all of us, the taxpayers. You need to reconsider your position.

          Perhaps I should. Who knows. I’m guessing that looking from the position of ‘superiority’ and ‘down my nose at those who disagree with me’ is the position you’d prefer I take…? I can see how that would probably change things or give me a sense of entitlement. Doesn’t change anything though. Your whole comment was a comedy of errors and the “strawman” of logical fallacy. You took something I said and made it appear as though I said something I did not. From your first sentence out of the box – you were arguing something I never said… The only reason I responded is because it appealed to my need of sarcasming all over someone. Thanks for that. I needed it.

      • https://plus.google.com/109439199327812564454 Kayz Evans

        I rarely comment on blogs. But your response was so eloquent and made sense! THANKS for replying to ridiculous comments from angry people. I too have pre-existing conditions and have no insurance at the moment. BUT agree that Obamacare has WAY too many holes in it and has not been thought through. WORST idea ever == AMEN! I feel like those defending the program have not looked deeply into how it will really affect us. They hear FREE and think it’s great. Just like people thought NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND was brilliant. Until some people realized it was set up to eventually fail every single school. Govt. needs to step out!

      • https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.galliher Jonathan Galliher

        Actually, hospitals kind of can turn you away if you don’t have the ability to pay. By law, the emergency room only has to treat conditions defined by law as emergency medical conditions, and it only has to provide treatment until the emergency condition is either resolved or the person is stable enough to take care of any further treatment themselves or be cared for by family or friends. They don’t necessarily have to help a pregnant woman who is going into labor, for example, if there’s time to transfer her to another hospital or part of the hospital where those in charge can ask about ability to pay before providing care. Ditto for at least some fevers. Basically, if your illness isn’t going to kill you or leave you permanently disabled if not treated in the next couple hours you quite possibly can be turned away from the emergency room. And of course just because they have to treat you doesn’t mean they can’t proceed to bankrupt you afterwards.

        As for Congress’s “preferential treatment”, what do you have against the free market that you want to prohibit the government from using the same sorts of benefits and compensation that businesses use to attract top quality employees? Granted elected representatives campaign for their positions rather than following a normal hiring proceedure, but Congressional staffers are hired in a more normal fashion and the further you get from Congress the more government work is just another place to work.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Jonathan, out of complete curiosity – where do you get the information about a hospital not having to treat you? That may be for hospitals that are not non-profit, but that isn’t the norm. Not by a long shot. Many hospitals, in fact, have indigent care plans where you can have a percentage of your bill written off.

          Your last paragraph absolutely baffles me as this is where those in the -lack of a better word- ‘liberal mindset’ completely confuse me. For the most part, all we hear is that it’s not fair that the rich are able to buy this and that or get better healthcare because they happen to be born into wealth. Then, out the other side of that same mouth, it’s okay that Congress doesn’t have to pay for their healthcare – even though they fall in that ‘wealthy’ category? I have nothing against the free market. That was my whole point. What I do have something against is double standards and hypocrisy.

      • https://www.facebook.com/heatherneato Heather Nicole

        Here here!!
        My mother is disabled and has high medical costs, they lost their house, both their cars and have filed for bankruptcy due to the costs of the car wreck she was in (where she was rear-ended by a semi driver going too fast for conditions). She is also against Obamacare for very similar reasons. People don’t get it. You cannot force someone to be charitable, you cannot force people to be good or companies to be moral. There is NOTHING in Obamacare that punishes the insurance companies, there is nothing in Obamacare that doesn’t allow insurance companies to raise their rates for EVERYONE. This plan is just going to make things worse in that arena.

      • https://www.facebook.com/gail.hanson.35 Gail Hanson

        Your argument is in favor of the Affordable Care Act. Because if you aren’t eligible for Medicare, you will pay premiums. Not free. You will pay co-pays and meet a deductible. Not free. Instead of just hoping that you’ll stay healthy, you’ll have to budget part of your income for premiums and co-pays and deductibles. Then, if you chance to need medical care and it turns out being really, really expensive, so expensive that you don’t qualify for a loan to meet that expense, the people who provided you care will still get paid, instead of seeing you file for bankruptcy and walk away from the debt.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Actually, my argument is for health insurance through the private sector. I already have all those things. The difference between what I have now and when Obummercare goes into effect, is that now I have a little extra money to cover those premiums and deductibles. When the ACA goes into effect, the little extra money I have will cover the cost for people other than my family.

      • http://twitter.com/jasoncarter7 Jason Carter (@jasoncarter7)

        That is 100% of the reason your argument is empty, Shelly. You shelter your kids from life lessons, and then they’ll never learn them, and never learn to cope with things like sickness, death, or loss. At a young age (8 yrs old), I experienced the death of my Grandmother from cancer and what we now call, COPD. This past February, my mother passed. I found the discussions my mother and father had with me about death when I was young, helped me grieve in a more healthy way.

        You do your children a great disservice by sugar coating things like this so that they trivialize important issues when they get older. I’m seeing you as part of the ever-shrinking middle-class, and probably a person that has never truly known poverty, hunger, nor sickness. It’s unfortunate that people like you are given a soapbox with which to stand on.

        The biggest whole in your argument is thus: People don’t give charity in this country like they used to. People that are claiming charitable donations, are donating money to things like “Susan B. Komen For the Cure”, and other charities like that, which are nothing more than businesses that don’t do any true work for the charity they are representing.

        I’m not saying that everyone has stopped giving… but our society is not one to put others before themselves any longer. This is especially true in the Christian Church. Fewer and fewer churches do the real things that their Messiah set them to do. That is why we need things like the Affordable Care Act.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          You’re welcome to raise your kids how you see fit and I will raise mine how I see fit. I was exposed to FAR too many adult things that I should never have been exposed to. Not doing that to my kids. I don’t know what to say about sheltering them from death. I don’t have much control over that. People die, or they don’t. My father has Cancer – so they’re exposed enough.

          You can call it sugar coating if you’d like, but I trivialized nothing.

          our society is not one to put others before themselves any longer

          So I’m forced to do what someone else says I should do with my money – no longer given a choice – because others in this world are greedy. Yeah, that makes sense. It’s not benevolence any longer. It’s not for the right reasons and it’s going to cause people to be even more greedy, but apparently that’s what the world wants.

          Let’s give others the right to choose, except only some. Those who want to choose what they pay for isn’t allowed. Yeah… That makes sense…

      • https://www.facebook.com/jonathan.galliher Jonathan Galliher

        The relevant law that requires hospitals to treat is called EMTALA. You can easily find basic information on when the law requires hospitals to treat and to what extent on Wikipedia. Of course, not being required to treat isn’t the same thing as not treating, even for quite poor people. Hospitals get to choose how aggressively they select for ability to pay, and the hospital benefits from having a bit of charity care (although even not-for-profit hospitals frequently spend relatively little on charity care compared to their full budget).

        Perhaps I’m just not a liberal, but I’ve never argued for Obamacare on the grounds that it’s not fair for the rich to have things the poor don’t. I support Obamacare because it looks to me like it will advance the common good. It’s strikes me as absolutely bizarre, however, to suggest that Congress (and their much poorer staffers) are getting a special deal when they’re just (kind of) continuing to receive what every other full-time employee of a large employer has been getting for decades, specifically employer provided health insurance. However, unlike most employees, Congress and their staffers are being kicked out of the Federal plans and pushed onto the exchanges while simultaneously being barred from receiving any of the subsidies guaranteed to the moderately poor and middle class (mostly to the staffers’ detriment).

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Bizarre to one, and something else completely, bizarre to another isn’t unusual. I find it bizarre that you think it’s bizarre to say Congress is getting special treatment. In addition to that, Obama and his staff are exempt, so the point is the same.

          As for hospitals choosing what to treat, not so sure about that – but if that’s the case, it will only get worse on Obamacare. There is more than one case in Canada where the hospitals have petitioned the courts to allow them to remove children from life support because they’re taxing the system. It was hospitals in the US that took the children in and treated them when Canada removed the life support to let them die.

          Finding that to be “advancing the common good” is what’s bizarre…

    • lucy

      maybe if everyone in washington [ from the top down ] decides to use it we might be more receptive.

      • Becky

        I have a Canadian friend who was on a wait list for 6 years to have surgery. Just sayin’

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          But it’s free! Who cares if you may lose a limb or die while you wait… /sarcasm

    • Coleen

      Exactly Chris. Entertainment can NOT be used as a comparison because the ability to go to the movies is not essential for life. Ability to afford life saving medication or a surgery IS! We are a society and we should help take care of those less fortunate than us. NO I would not want to pay more for people to go bowling, but I don’t mind paying more so my sister living on minimum wage going through a nasty divorce from an abusive husband can get treatment for her back injuries.

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        I’m beginning to wonder if you people have children… or read. Or maybe you do both and don’t mind giving your children information that will do nothing but cause un-due worry. As I have said – repeatedly – It is MERELY an analogy on THEIR level. Something that is important to them. No one said – at least I didn’t – that going bowling is the same as as treatment. *smh*

      • apriljoanne

        The people posting comments like this must not know very much. People without insurance or money still get health care. If they are dying, in hte United States, they will still get treatment. They may have a lot of medical debt, and they may not pay their bills, but if they go to a hospital for care, they will be treated! And that has nothing to do with Obamacare really. So the argument that “entertainment is different than life” is not really that relevant.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Thank you for that… I hadn’t really understood that argument when a person without coverage cannot be denied treatment in our country. Thought maybe it was just me. :)

      • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

        Do you even live in the US?? If you are sick or injured, you can still get care whether you can pay or not. That is already the LAW. Not optional.

      • https://plus.google.com/110819580863416217967 Chrissy Doyle

        You do realize she was talking to a child right? In a child’s eyes, those entertainments are necessary. Not sure if you have ever been around a child in a supermarket that didn’t get the toy that was sitting on the shelf or not, but let me tell you…he/she will act as though it is the end of life. You missed the entire premise! Re-read it!

    • Russ

      Mr. President? Is that you?
      Unfortunately, the exercise was about money and fairness more than suffering and crisis. You see, sir, that people’s income, known as out here as money and earnings, is a real tangible thing. How it is spent and proposals to critically alter how it is spent is a real issue in most everyone’s home.
      To turn to making up grim (not Grimm’s) fairy tales of what COULD happen and make up abstract horrific scenarios does nothing but scare people into going along with bad ideas, but since you know that that is how politicians get things done, I can forgive your lack of reality.
      Crisis sells, sir, and common sense will always win out once people see through the veil. This is why legislation comes with so much stuff in it, so when people figure it out it is too late or there is too much in the way of undoing it.
      Shelley’s example hit it on the head and is how many of us citizen feel, so stop trolling for supporters and stop scaring the children! Thanks Shelley, well written!

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        Thank you. :)

    • http://goodfaithwriting.wordpress.com the dark avenger

      Actually a friend of mine lost his job and his ten year old daughter was just diagnosed with cancer. You’re such uplifting people, maybe your ten year old boys (or whatever) can go explain to their mother, “hey – you don’t expect to watch movies for free, do you?” — because that’s all kind of class.

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        Or perhaps they could explain to their mother than they give some of their allowance to the Cancer Research Foundation. That they hope her child gets better and they’ll be praying for her. Benevolence is much better when it isn’t forced upon someone. Then it’s not benevolence at all.

    • https://www.facebook.com/terry.g.taylor.56 Terry G. Taylor

      here is where the problem is for me…. Healthcare is NOT a right. It is Not an entitlement. It is something that is purchased with Hard earned money and those that can afford it have it. those that don’t might die. Life is NOT fair and making Everyone pay for those who can not afford it is trying to redistribute wealth. Those that want this to go through are just as was said earlier. They see FREE Stuff that they don’t have to pay for and think as long as I am being takin care of its great. But if your going to take money from me to pay for others and my healthcare goes down because of it I should just be happy with that? Come on people life is not fair and nothing is free… If you get something for free then someone else had to work harder so you could have it. JMHO

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        Exactly. And “spreading the wealth” is not only – theft, really – it doesn’t spread wealth. It spreads poverty. I don’t get how people don’t get that. Though, I’ve found it is the same people who say owning a gun isn’t a right, it’s a privilege. Last time I checked, it wasn’t called the “Bill of Privileges”…

    • https://plus.google.com/103315417176641958371 viopsadmin

      Well if you are ONLY talking about life and death you would have a point. Sadlly, Obammacare does not deal with only life and death issues. It forces me to pay for someone else’s birth control. It forces me to pay for every hypochondriacs fake pills. It forces me, a person who takes care of himself and his health through excersize and diet, to pay for those who choose to destroy themselves through smoking and unhealthy addicitons they choose to partake in.

      Not only that (and more) but it is forcing many people out of work, companies to stop hiring, and thus placing even more people on unemployment and food stamps. There are so many levels of wrong with this it’s ridiculous.

      So cry me a river about EVERYONE DYING if I don’t like Obammacare. I suppose you are okay with Obamma saying unions, big biz, and others getting exceptions are contributing to the death of all those classmates?

  • Chris

    And while you’re at it, ask them how much they could do to improve the issues that this health care system has with 56.55 million dollars. (In terms of their allowance, that’s 3.77 million weeks, or roughly 72 thousand years worth of their allowance)

    Because that’s what Republicans have wasted in trying to get the Obamacare act repealed.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Oh, and yeah… if the Republicans keep stonewalling, my husband will be sent home indefinitely without pay and we both still pray they don’t cave. Plus, I don’t recall telling you how much my children make for their allowance. Not sure where you got those numbers…

    • Jamey

      That’s absolute chump change in compared to the BILLIONS and TRILLIONS that will be wasted and passed onto taxpayers by ObamaCare. And lost employment due to ObamaCare. It’s already happening. Businesses are buckling, or having to cost shift either to the consumer, or by reducing full time employees to part time, health care costs are skyrocketing, the us debt is skyrocketing.

      Don’t nag about 55m when the trillions that americans will have to pay because of obamacare.

  • Whitney Weisberg

    Shelly-

    Not only was that an amazing example for your kids but I actually learned a lot
    From your example. I knew is was bad but truthfully didn’t research it enough to know how bad it was. If you did a similar example with adults maybe we would have a lot less Obama supporters!!! I commend you!!! This was amazing!

  • Mama Rachel

    This is an absolutely BRILLIANT way to explain the idiocy of the whole thing!!! Maybe our legislators should read it to better understand it. Oh, yeah, they’re all for it because it doesn’t affect them…. GRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Nicely done, anyhow! Our poor children are going to be suffering the consequences of this madness, so we need to make sure they understand it! :-(

  • Kat

    Amazing. You benefited from Medicaid not just once, but twice, and you complained that you could only stay on it for three months after giving birth. So you used government assistance for your health care, and are angry that it didn’t offer more coverage? Interesting. Perhaps next time you are in a bind, you should stick to the principles you are teaching your children and not take the government assistance.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Actually, there was no complaint whatsoever in anything I said. I was merely explaining my situation. There is government assistance that is there for people to use to get on their feet. Not to stay on and mooch off of so they can sit on their rumps or work at mediocrity. We used it when we needed it and moved on. That is how it is meant. I have not – ever – said to do away with all government assistance. I have not said we should get rid of all government help. What I said is the proposed plan will do nothing but tax the (already) taxed system, result in fewer medical workers, fewer people in the workforce, fewer jobs and discourage people from bettering themselves. Perhaps you should re-read what I said and come prepared to debate with all the correct information before you attack half armed.

      • M-L

        Plus, your husband works and pays taxes into the system. You should not have any guilt what-so-ever for using it when needed. The person that attacked you on this apparently did not read it in the same tone as I. You were not complaining, only explaining how the benefits worked. I feel for all the ones affected by this govt shut down, but I, like you, want the Republicans to stand their ground. I see this as the perfect opportunity for local churches to step in and help those in need during this time. That is the purpose of the church, not the gov’t.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          This is true. Plus, I fail to see how a law, entity, whatever forcing me to help those in need – by taking my money (what little I have – lol) is benevolent in any way. People – many people – have commented saying “I’m happy to have X amount of my money to go to help those without insurance…” or similar. Which is fantastic. So… Why not take your money and pay someone’s medical bill? Or second mortgage that someone (me) had to get to pay medical bills…?

          My “happy to give to those in need” (as we do) goes away and becomes “happy to give the amount the government deems is the right amount to those in need” when the government starts forcing it upon you. There’s no blessings in that.

    • Jamey

      Nobody said don’t get assistance when you need it. That’s not the point. The point is Obama care is CRUSHING businesses. And individuals, like me, who can no longer afford health care on the open market because of o-care.

      THAT is the real issue.

      • https://plus.google.com/100107355549188753322 Carol Wagner

        Exactly Jamey! I wonder what will happen when they fall into the same boat I lived in for all my working years – I can barely afford to have the coverage but can’t afford to use it. Before I lost my job 1 year & a half ago our plans were ever changing to provide all those “free” preventative care items under the upcoming law. Our premiums increased, most plans had deductibles attached to medications or had the meds had outrageous copays for brand name.
        I had already stopped covering my husband who has been out of work since 2008. To cover him on my $12/hr job the additional premium was an additional $400 a month, then a $50 copay to see the doctor (3-4 times a year) & then $120 for meds each month. For him to have insurance & use it cost us a total of $6,440. I stopped covering him 2 years before I lost my job. We agreed to a private pay amount of $60 with his doctor & the meds that we found that finally worked for him (after trying many generic meds) had patient assistance programs that, because he had no insurance, provided his meds for free. So for the past 3 years we spend less than $300 for him.
        I’m scared about what will happen to the various grants, charitable organizations & the pharmaceutical companies assistance programs – most all of them require that you have no coverage. Will these just go away? And while now we could be on Medicaid, it would also mean that his doctor would change & it would be very hard to find another. We could still pay privately to see her, but after working in the billing dept of a doctor’s office I know he would have to start all over again with medications he may or may not have tried b/c they cost less. Not to mention that there would be additional prior authorization paperwork required of the doctor. I haven’t mentioned my fear to him as I wait to see what happens.
        Unfortunately, in this case the govt’s “help” may hurt more than help. Especially when the can’t afford to pay a deductible or afford a $60 medication. The mostly healthy (like my husband) will decide to pay $300 a year vs $6000. And since you can sign up retroactively they (and probably my husband & I) won’t sign up until we end up in the ER.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Wow… You just made me realize something… There are many hospitals (I mentioned to someone else on here yesterday) that have ‘indigent’ care plans where they, if you don’t have insurance, will negotiate your bill down – based on your income/savings/investments/etc vs what you pay out – to a percentage that you pay and, sometimes, they write it off altogether. Now, with everyone having coverage – will that go away? That’s a scary thought…

          I went from Doctor to Doctor to Doctor for several years trying to find one that would actually fix the symptoms instead of giving me meds to ‘cope’ with them (pain pills). Shortly after I found someone that, while giving me meds to maintain the pain, found the cause and removed it, was when the “Obamacare” deal was introduced during Obama’s first term. Message boards and such went nuts and many a person in the medical industry stated they’d be retiring early when it goes into effect. I panicked and broke out in hives (I have urticaria). When I have a breakout of hives, my left thumbpad swells. It’s bizarre. It swelled up more than it ever had and I got concerned that my thumb would pop open. It got so bad, I paged my Doctor. It was about 10pm. He called back, I told him what happened and all. He told me to take some benadryl and blah blah blah. I thanked him, said have a good night and all. He said “Wait. Tell me what about the Obamacare thing panicked you…” So – I did and then I said “And I just found you and if you retire …” Anyway, he’s not retiring… We talked about 20 minutes and then he said “How’s your thumb?”

          The man chatted with me on the phone long enough to see if the meds and topicals helped. That kind of care is going to go away, I’m afraid.

  • J

    re: Insurance and pre-existing conditions. If you understand what insurance means, you will see why it cannot cover pre-existing conditions as it destroys the entire concept of insurance. Insurance exists to cover some future malady that may occur in the future. You pay your premiums based on the risk the insurance company thinks you have of developing some illness or suffering injury. It works because the pooled risk of the thousands of people they insure is low so that when a few of the people get sick, all of the premiums that have been paid in can cover the cost of the care of the few sick people.

    To continue with the analogy theme…
    Let’s say you have an accident in your car and need to get it fixed. You call up insurance company A a few days later and purchase their insurance. After you get your insurance card, you then call up Co. A and say, “Hey I need you to pay to have my car fixed.” Well of course, they are going to deny the claim as it happened before you had insurance, a pre-existing condition. This makes sense in the insurance world. Why? Because in this scenario there would be no incentive to ever purchase insurance until AFTER you suffered an accident. You could instead just keep your money and in the event you had a car accident, call up the company to get insurance, have them repair your car, and after that cancel the insurance. You pay perhaps 1 month’s premium, your car gets repaired, and then you don’t pay anymore premiums.

    Do you think any insurance company would be able to remain in business with this model? Think about this in terms of fire or flood insurance for your home.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Hmmmm… Except that I, with several pre-existing conditions, as well as my son’s pre-existing conditions are covered and the fact that you can purchase, in some cases, backdated liability insurance… So… Doesn’t hold water, I’m afraid.

      • JSH

        I think J agreed with you in the first place. That is, in general, the government forcing companies to insure those with pre-existing conditions is just one more way to control the system, and it’s wrong. The purpose of insurance is to cover people before the conditions happen. (I, too, am one of those without coverage currently yet praying that Obamacare is fully repealed and replaced with…wait for it…nothing but free markets.)

    • Laura

      That scenario doesn’t effect me, but what about children born with medical problems? I have a friend with a son who has Cystic Fobrosis. Lots of medicine daily, lots of sickness. He shouldn’t be able to get inurance as an adult because he wasn’t insured before he was born with CF? I’m not agreeing or disagreeing, just trying to make sense of it all.

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        We are all trying to make sense of it all. I feel ya. I must say, though, that I’ve never said that the insurance industry is perfect or is without ‘issues’. Clearly it needs work when it comes to certain things. I see nothing wrong with the government regulating some things in the insurance industry. Forcing me to pay for things I don’t agree with is not the answer though.

        There are people out there whose religious beliefs prevent them from getting any sort of medical care. Now they have to pay a fee to *not* have something their religion says they shouldn’t have? It’s like forcing the Catholic Church to pay for abortions! (Which, it kind of is doing since abortions are covered…)

  • not a happy camper

    Too bad we can’t get more people thinking this way. I am sad for what is to come.

  • Donna Mullins

    Shelley, KUDOS!!!! That was GENIUS! Such a great way of pointing out the obvious!

    I am very sad for the future of our kids and grandkids.

    May God have mercy on our country.

  • Lori

    If you really read the ACA – there is not a monthly penalty – there is assistance for those you can not afford insurance and if your state is getting assistance from the ACA for the state medicaid aid there is little to no cost to you depending on the state you live in. Do your homework – there is more information out there than Fox News. Go to healthcare.com or a non partisian site obamacarefacts.com –

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Aren’t you cute… I don’t watch Fox News. I don’t have a TV… However, I do go to (supposed) legit websites. Such as the one you referenced (which is where I got this information) http://www.obamacarefacts.com. If you went to the website you referenced (www.obamacarefacts.com) you’d see there that it states there is a monthly penalty. Oooops! Who didn’t do their homework?

      Ooo Ooo Ooo! Mister Kotter! Mister Kotter!

      See, it is not *I* that hasn’t done their homework. The website you referenced, http://www.obamacarefacts.com, states:

      • If you don’t obtain coverage or an exemption by January 1st, 2014 you must pay a per-month fee on your federal income tax return for every month you are without health insurance.
      • In 2014 the fee is $95 per adult ($47.50 per child) or 1% of income, whichever is HIGHER. The family max is $285.

      And you’re one of those that claim you’ve done your homework and knows what it says, all the while slinging insults at those who HAVE done theirs… Tsk Tsk Tsk

      Perhaps you should have read my other post – direct from the site you claim doesn’t say there is a monthly fee, http://www.obamacarefacts.com, when, in fact – it does. You can read it here: (Oh, and don’t worry. There isn’t a pop quiz or anything… Though, there should be.) http://wp.me/p3LHED-4c

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      Apparently Lori hasn’t even been to an real news sites or even the sites she mentions… You have to read more than the first sentence of the first page to find it.

    • https://www.facebook.com/dennisnmartha.hall DennisnMartha Mickelson Hall

      ask your tax professional if you think there’s no fees, if you don’t ‘play ball’ and pay in or take the free handouts for lower income persons, you will be assessed those fees on next years tax returns.

  • george

    I think it is fine that you are trying to teach your kids about the compromises, pork, and gray areas that accompany any bilateral legislative piece. But unfortunately the example you are trying to use to teach your “ethic” wouldn’t work in my house. Rather than valuing having money, and cherishing seeing our hard work rewarded over other people’s laziness, we value equality in health regardless of a persons laziness level or not. We gladly contribute out of my paycheck the money to pay for anybody’s medication and treatments, even if they are a lowlife bum who never worked a day in their life.

    Now I imagine you are going to say something like, “ah, but you see, we are moving away from a system that will accomplish that towards an even more corrupt system that serves everybody’s health needs even less!” Unfortunately we can’t really debate that point, because I have my clear examples of where this law will help my friends (and enemies) who are most in need, and you have your concrete examples of where this law will be a step backwards for some-such-a in some-where-a. The situation is a lot more complicated than your entertainment law.

    Also, the payment of the penalty for opting out doesn’t really make sense. Nobody opts out of healthcare. The only reason to opt out of healthcare is because it is too expensive to afford. I don’t know of a single, rational human who says “I’m health right now, so I’m not going to buy healthcare, because I am invincible teenager and absolutely won’t get hit on the head with a frisbee walking through the park and need an MRI!” Oh, right, teenagers say that, but they are teenagers so what do you expect? Sure, I hear some people ‘say’ “oh yeah but what if you are healthy and just want to pay out of pocket and not want to buy healthcare! Well what then!” But realistically most of the people disenfranchised from healthcare are people who actually want it. And if those people want to opt out so badly then just buy the cheapest possible plan that covers absolutely nothing. I’m sure they will be popping up in droves so that people can escape the penalty and still “opt out”.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      “We gladly contribute out of my paycheck the money to pay for anybody’s medication and treatments, even if they are a lowlife bum who never worked a day in their life.”

      As do we, but we do so because we CHOOSE to do so – not because the government makes us. We also choose the amount and the person to whom we’d like to give. For instance, we would gladly give to someone fighting cancer or the common cold. We would not give to someone who wanted an abortion. We would gladly give to someone who needed chiropractic care, pre-natal care or allergy treatments. We would not give to someone who needed dialysis because they won’t give up the drink. We would gladly give to someone who had a sleep disorder, skin rash or broken bone. We would not give to an asthmatic with emphysema who won’t put down the cigarettes.

      See, George, the difference is that forcing me to give is no longer charity. It’s theft. And some see it as doing what Robin Hood did in that it’s taking from the rich and giving to the poor – but it’s not. It’s not even close to that. The money Robin Hood took from the rich and gave to the poor didn’t belong to the rich. He took the money that rightfully belonged to the poor. The money that the rich stole from the poor… That’s what he gave them. Robin Hood wasn’t “spreading the wealth”. Robin Hood was righting a wrong.

      Is it wrong that people don’t have or can’t afford health insurance? Of course it is. It’s terrible. What’s even more terrible is a government that forces things upon people when they’ve made it clear they don’t want it. Our country is no longer “We the people…” Or what the people want. It’s “Me, myself and I and what I want…”

      And let’s be real for a moment… Name one thing the government took away from the private sector and began running and regulating, that not only thrived, but increased by leaps and bounds and did better? I’m not heartless. I’m a realist. The healthcare system could use some work. I don’t know what, exactly, and don’t presume to – but I know it’s not ideal. I also know that Obamacare isn’t that answer…

      • https://www.facebook.com/dpout Daniel Pout

        “Name one thing the government took away from the private sector and began running and regulating, that not only thrived, but increased by leaps and bounds and did better?”
        Education

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Oh now that is rich… Clearly you’re using sarcasm. Certainly glad I’m able to recognize it when I see it. If I thought you were serious I’d probably cough up a lung from laughter… Good one.

    • Dakotaranger

      But do you care that your tax dollars are going to slaughter innocent children?

      If you want to help someone out with your money go for it, just don’t force me too. That’s selfish that you would require me to help someone who has smoked for forty years.

    • https://www.facebook.com/terry.g.taylor.56 Terry G. Taylor

      Spoken by a true Liberal. If you think that nobody (Adult) says they are not going to buy insurance because they are Healthy right now then you are as Disillusioned as I thought you were after reading that garbage you posted earlier. I know of a bunch that don’t buy insurance because they don’t want to spend money on something they “Might” need when it can be used to purchase thing that they WANT instead.

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        True. Plus I don’t think George, and others, have considered that the Amish and Christian Scientists won’t want to purchase insurance…

  • Cindy

    I appreciate how the author (Shelley) is able to rebuttal each debate logically.
    Thank you for not working off of emotion but fact. Thank you also for bringing this down to an understandable level. My high school Junior posted this because it made perfect sense and could understand exactly what Obamacare is. While at first its sound like a great deal, as the layers are peeled away it is very obviously rotten inside.
    Thank you again.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Your words are very much appreciated. It makes me happy that this helped your Junior – or anyone – to understand something they may not have completely understood or understood at all.

  • kyriosity

    Well done, Shelley.

  • Colter Chase

    some how i am always late to the party when it comes to politics, this is a wonderful example it brings stuff down to a point where people who lack enough brain cells to understand a majority of laws, can comprehend what is going on.
    Shelley you are awesome!

  • http://gravatar.com/bkl3mom Tamara Ashway

    Complete and utter insanity, that’s what Obamacare is at the very core.

  • http://thomasspear.name TS

    Shelley, I won’t say I’m against Obamacare as much as you are, but I also am not for it. Something I read recently is that a vast majority of the American public understands very little about the law. That includes you, includes me, includes everyone. To put it to your kids like this is a great idea, but I don’t think it captures the entirety of the law. In fact, I’d say quite the opposite has taken place. The only pieces of the law that you presented to your children were the parts that the media continues to harp on. The regulations of the law are at least 13,000 pages long. I don’t believe that you can summarize the law in 2 pages or less, while maintaining accuracy.

    This is why I’m posting. To say that it’s a bad idea without a full comprehension of the law is, as your son Brinson put it, “not fair.” the whole reason I’m neither a supporter, nor a detractor of the law is that I know I don’t have a full understanding of the law because I’m not going to take the time to read 13,000+ pages.

    That said, what you have done here is possibly come up with a great idea (bad implementation) for explaining to children how any given law works.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I know I don’t understand it all. That’s the scary part. I, clearly, disagree with putting it this way to my kids – but to each his own. This wasn’t a lesson in law or how the world works. This was merely an experiment with my own children based on what some people were saying on a blog I’d read. I guess it wasn’t really my intent to address the entire bill – as you pointed out – no one could. It was my intent to only explain the things listed (taxes, fees, read it after it’s law, exempt those who made the law) because those were the main things or points that were being discussed on the post that prompted this whole thing.

      Having said that… Because of comments on this post, as well as in the comments of the shares on Facebook, it has gotten the hamster wheel in my mind going a bit and though I’ve not figured out the details exactly as I’d like them to be – yet – I am working on a part two to this conversation. A re-introduction of the bill, so to speak. That is my goal anyway, as life sometimes gums up the works and my hamster is busy with the wheels of motherhood, wifedom and the like… :)

      • http://thomasspear.name TS

        Thanks for your reply. I understand and give you props then. Its nice to know that I can have discourse with someone without being attacked just on the basis that I don’t share their views. I look forward to part 2.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          You’re welcome. I thank you as well – for the same. I treat everyone with the same respect. If they don’t treat me with respect – they will get very *THICK* sarcasm in return. If I don’t feel I can play nice – I don’t reply at all… :)

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      A 10 year old could never fully understand it… what Shelley did was make a relevant (although unrelated) example, that they could understand what the premise behind obama care is. If they get the premise, and get that it is stupid… well they get it then.

  • Amanda

    I don’t know much about the ACA. I have never tried to learn about it, but in traversing the world of Facebook, this happened to pop up on my newsfeed. I read your blog and saw that you did a clear analysis on the information you had gathered from credible sources. I hate long-winded, complex, and veiled explanations of how the government system works so I found your explanation very refreshing…and interesting.

    But in reading the comments section (they’re my favorite part), I can’t help but feel as though you weakened your case. To the comments of others who voiced varying opinions, your replies were sarcastic and never once considered that, as many cons as there seem to be in this next step for our healthcare system, there may be equally as many pros. There are things about this bill being passed that, as a stay-at-home mother doing research on her home computer and through various other media sources, you could not possibly know unless you have read the bill in its entirety. However, this does not mean that you’re not entitled to your own opinion on the matter or that your opinion is wrong.

    But as I scrolled down through the comments, your remarks became more and more vindictive and scolding, refusing to except that there might be even a modicum of truth under what those who took time to read your blog, but had a different view on the matter, were saying. It is unfortunate that the unbias you showed in presenting your children with this topic did not carry over into your overall assessment of this little experiment. You came off as appearing to think that you know everything there is to know and that everyone opposing you are liars and/or fools. As someone who is straddling the fence on this debate, your presentation is becoming less and less convincing that I want to be on your side of it.

    For perspective, let’s say that the argument is about the color of the sky. “The sky is blue!” says one side. Are they wrong? No. The sky is totally blue…sometimes. But what about the pinks, oranges, and yellows that occur during sunrise or sunset? What if it is cloudy? What if it is night? Sometimes there is no definitive answer.

    And then, from out of nowhere, you started to comment on things that were no longer related to the topic at hand. From my interpretation of your words, you said that you should have the right to choose who gets medical care based on whether you feel those who need treatment are worthy enough. (“…We would gladly give to someone fighting cancer or the common cold. We would not give to someone who wanted an abortion. We would gladly give to someone who needed chiropractic care, pre-natal care or allergy treatments. We would not give to someone who needed dialysis because they won’t give up the drink. We would gladly give to someone who had a sleep disorder, skin rash or broken bone. We would not give to an asthmatic with emphysema who won’t put down the cigarettes.”) I fail to see how this reflects on whether or not the ACA is a good decision. However, it did succeed in negatively affecting my opinion of you as a person, and thereby, your cause.

    You then went on to imply that your opinion reflects the entirety of the United States because you are one of the billions to which “we, the people” refers. (…”What’s even more terrible is a government that forces things upon people when they’ve made it clear they don’t want it. Our country is no longer “We the people…” Or what the people want. It’s “Me, myself and I and what I want…”’) So, I started google-ing for other blogs/websites on people’s opinions on the matter and I got 4.25 MILLION hits, all various articles and blogs that broach the topic of whether the ACA is good or bad. Are all of these “credible sources”? Of course not! But a lot of them are. And what I found was that everyone has a different opinion on the matter. There are statisitics and polls and projections that I certainly don’t know enough about to debate their accuracy or lack thereof. But it is there. For both sides.

    Honestly, I don’t know which side I’m on. You had me in the beginning but then made a slew of comments with which I disagree from my very core and caused me to doubt your judgment. But, fortunately for you, there are people just like you on the other side of the argument. Personally, I would rather die of thirst than drink from a poisoned cup and so I will remain undecided.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I’m not sure what you read, but it certainly wasn’t anything I wrote. Not without making some HUGE assumptions on your part. As for the sarcasm, it’s what I do and check out the number of people who appreciate my non-name calling/insulting replies. It’s pretty much only you that feels that way. Have a good day.

  • https://plus.google.com/116639466668220421372 Kirk Perry

    Hey leave us Canadians out of this. We see lots of issues with Obamacare and most of us love our system. Long waits can happen but they happen because people are taken on a case by case priority basis. If you are having immediate life or death problems you get in right away. Some waiting for a hip replacement or other non life threatening procedure end up waiting so lives can be saved. No one goes bankrupt in Canada because they got cancer and couldn’t pay their bills. You get cancer you will be treated. You show up with a severed limb you get treated right away. You show up with a heart attack and you are treated right away. it can be frustrating for a person sitting in the waiting room with a dislocated finger (happened to me) but I know there is a good reason I’m waiting. Someone else’s life is being saved. The number one reason for bankruptcies in the U.S. are health bill related. I have my second child on the way and I don’t have to fear taking out a mortgage on my house to pay for it. I’m a big fan of Dave Ramsey, who if you don’t know him is a finacial helps guy from Tennessee. He often talks about Canadians being smart because we tend to pay our houses off more frequently than Americans do. It’s not because we’re smarter it’s because we aren’t paying so much to insurance companies to pay for our health care. It’s like not having an extra car payment to us so we pay down our house instead. We do have problems in our system but (and I can’t emphasize this enough) almost all Canadians wouldn’t trade it for anything close to your existing system or for Obamacare. Frankly we think Obamacare is a bad joke. BTW liked your analagy.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      It’s funny that you assume they’re off saving the lives of someone. My Canadian friends have spoken about long waits. Waiting hours on end because the doctor working the ER that weekend was having a cookout with his family and would get to the hospital when he could… That’s not the same thing, really…

      • http://goodfaithwriting.wordpress.com the dark avenger

        Yeah, well, here’s another Canadian with a wife from Mississippi to tell you that your “Canadian” friends do not speak for the majority. And at the same time, let me debunk all the other crap that’ being splashed here by people who are clearly making stuff up. For instance, Canada is NOT trying to get rid of our public health system. It’s one thing that poll after poll shows we’re most proud of. It rocks.

        As for that one story about the woman with the leg – nice try – if it’s at all true, it certainly does not speak even closely to the way our system works. I can get an appointment with my family doctor TODAY if I want. If I couldn’t there’s a walk in clinic within blocks for immediate but not urgent care. And, if that isn’t enough – there’s an emergency center. Canada is a world leader in medical technology.

        We’ll let health statistics answer the rest. Your country ranks behind countries in Africa in some areas for infant mortality. Life Expectancy in America? Bottom of the barrel for modern countries.

        So, maybe instead of looking in a warped magnifying glass at other country’s success stories, have a long look in the mirror.

        AND…your claim that you only used Medicaid “when you needed it” somehow makes you above the rest who need it? You took your share and want to villainize everyone else. Excuse me, I have to get some febreeze…the smell of hypocrisy is getting WAY to foul in here.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          I ask this, in all seriousness – without a bit of sarcasm, snark or negative tone… Do you read? I mean, clearly you CAN read, but do you? Because either you haven’t read anything I said, or you read stuff that wasn’t there.

          The problem with the “we’re proud of it” polls and “it rocks” is that those polls and numbers are coming from the same leaders in Canada (in rank) as the leaders in the US on how many Americans want gun control. Tell someone something long enough and they’ll believe it.

          Canada petitions courts to end life saving treatment for child: Once
          Twice

          Canada infant mortality rates because of Canadian Healthcare

          Diabetes Loss of Limb

          There’s tons of such examples. People say that it’s isolated. Funny though that it’s isolated when it speaks against one position, but makes others horrible monsters when it speaks against theirs…

      • https://plus.google.com/116639466668220421372 Kirk Perry

        I would agree it’s not the same thing but your friend’s experience is also not the norm…obviously. This is a big problem in these debates. You can always find a few stories of why something didn’t work but at the same time there are thousands of stories where it did work. Everywhere I’ve lived we’ve never run into that kind of foolishness.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Funny because I can find a lot more than a ‘few’. And really, if the system is supposed to help and make everyone healthier, etc. Isn’t it failing if ONE person dies or loses a limb due to the inadequate care? Even if it were true that there is only ONE such case – it’d be one too many, right? I mean applying the argument I’ve been given over and over on this thread… “Isn’t it wrong for even one to go without adequate care?”

          Guess it depends on what you’d consider ‘adequate’…

  • https://www.facebook.com/TTTaraLC Tara Campbell Wisely

    This is a really poor analogy. Because you can choose whether or not you want to participate in entertainment, it is not a basic need. The likelihood that you will opt out of using healthcare facilities all your life is slim to none. Car insurance is expensive. Can you imagine how much more expensive it would be if everyone who drove a car and participated in using the highway system wasn’t required to have it? If not having it didn’t come with penalties? You can argue here that owning a car is optional, but we all know that the reality for a working person in most places in this country is otherwise. I am not a cheerleader for ObamaCare. There are aspects of it I think wil work and others I think will not, but this ridiculously simple analogy ignores the complexity of the issue.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Yes, I guess I was wrong to ‘simplify’ something in a manner that a child could understand. You’re correct. My apologies.

      • https://www.facebook.com/TTTaraLC Tara Campbell Wisely

        I do understand that you wanted to simplify the idea to present it to a child, and if you had done that and kept the analogy intact so that it actually represented something close to the original issue, I’d be giving you kudos, even if I didn’t agree with your criticisms. It’s like saying you want to summarize the movie ‘Spider-Man’ down to it’s basic plot line, but then your summary describes the movie “Star Wars” instead.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Okay then. There’s about 128 people who disagree with you, but alright. Thanks for the input.

          Shoo

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      It really isn’t that much more complex than the 10 year olds need to understand to get the idiocy of it. A 10 year old would never understand ObamaCare. But by using an unrelated example (that is valid… it’s like a parable), with a similar premise, they can understand it.

  • http://twitter.com/GiveawayBandit Giveaway Bandit (@GiveawayBandit)

    This is great how you demonstrated this to your kids and keeping them informed. I always think it is important to teach them information as detailed as possible… But we are paying for people’s healthcare and expenses right now that don’t have their own insurance. My family works hard to pay for our own health insurance and I am tired of so many people on welfare that shouldn’t be only to pay higher taxes. I am curious, how do you choose to pay for the welfare system? Trust me, working in the insurance industry I do know that Obamacare is far from perfect BUT we need to start somewhere. Shutting down the government is obviously not helping. It just makes us look like a country that is in complete chaos.

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      I agree, shutting down the government was the wrong fight. But correct in principle.

      Broadening the coverage base and tax bases is a better option… how we get that I’m not sure, but if we had more people paying, everyone could pay less.
      Obama care is not just far from perfect, it is the perfect train wreck. Have you seen how many big businesses are reducing employement and hours? You know why? They would rather pay the penalty and let us taxpayers pay the bill… That is all obama care has done. Raised insurance rates astronomically, its making employment harder to get and keep, and is making health care harder to get. My wife’s doctor is one such victim of obama care. It just wasn’t worth staying in his practice cause he couldn’t survive on the oc mandated rates.

  • Pingback: Politics | Pearltrees()

  • http://jenn0221.wordpress.com jenn0221

    I agree that this is a ridiculous plan. I also agree that there is no way a person could fully understand ‘obummercare’, unless they wrote it, because there is so much to it. But maybe that is what congress intended. For the majority of Americans to not fully understand it, giving the people only the good, in hopes of passing it. My question is why, if ‘obummercare’ is so good, does congress get to be opted out of it? Oh that’s right, because they know it’s not a good deal for the majority of people. Sure it’s a good deal for the bum sitting on the side of the road (no offense to homeless people), but it screws over the people who have worked hard all their lives, who have worked hard to get where they are. I would not want a person to die just because they have no insurance and can’t afford proper health care, but forcing people who choose to not to have insurance (for whatever reason) to pay a FINE is not right. We are supposed to be a free country! Well our rights are being taken away quicker than we can blink.

  • https://www.facebook.com/nicole.stoddard.90 Nicole Stoddard

    Maybe I just don’t understand it, and I won’t claim I have done my homework. I just know that my gut tells me it’s a bad thing. I have friends in Canada and they are horrified for us. I was pregnant at the time they talked to me about it. Guess what, the resounding yes went to. I will have to pay my doctor under the table even to show up. hmm. Maybe just a scare tactic, but I believe it. The numbers for those entering medical school have dropped because of the threat of obamacare. What I cannot understand is why don’t we fix what we already have and not add a mess to a mess? Medicaid for example. . . why not make it in a bracket formation? Meaning: You are a family of two, and you make this much, you will pay this much. You are a family of two, and you make more than this but less than this, you pay this much. . . . so on and so forth. That way those that can’t completely afford insurance but make too much to qualify for Medicaid would in fact qualify just for a different coverage, and pay a little. I don’t know if this makes sense, it’s just been running through my head today. I have gone without insurance in my life for around eight years when I was a teen. I got pneumonia three times. My parents still made too much to qualify for Medicaid, and so we had to pay for things out of pocket. I am married now with two kids, and we are considered poor with the income brackets. BECAUSE of obamacare our premiums are rising in prep for 2014. They are making it so they are charging us just enough not to be able to opt out of it and look at the health insurance marketplace. What else I don’t understand is it is requiring everyone to have insurance, to purchase it, meaning no it’s not going to be free. What it doesn’t do is require the insurance to keep a cap on their prices. Meaning, yeah you’ll have it, it doesn’t mean you can afford it. Thank you for writing this. I have a hard time reading those that are for Obamacare because I feel like they get so emotional about it. I understand that it can be scary for those without insurance to have a condition they need to get taken care of. They need to understand that it is also just as scary for those like myself (who cannot really afford the insurance we have, but we have it) because we will be paying even more in order for them to have insurance. I mean this is all just dandy, take care of each other . . . right. . . .but who is going to help us pay our mortgage when we can no longer afford it due to taxes? Dear, obamacare supporters can we move in with you and not pay rent?

  • http://twitter.com/Whim Kim Nordquist (@Whim)

    I’m with Chris. You say you wouldn’t use his example of an entire class getting sick because they are children and you want to “let a child be a child”. How about not using a drastic example such as an entire class getting sick, but just talking them as the mature and intelligent kids that I am sure they are about the actual health plan…whether you are for or against it. My daughter is twelve years old and her teacher sees her students as competent enough to discuss the current affairs of the country in a straight forward manner. Her teacher does it in a way to not sway the kids to either side, but give them enough information to come home and talk to us about it and form their own opinions. (if we are also careful in the words we use so they are not manipulated into our way of thinking.) Her teacher feels differently about healthcare than I do, but I have no worries about her teaching my child because of the fair and factual way she teaches. I would never give my kids a completely irrelevant and sugar coated analogy to try to get them to take my stance on an entirely unrelated subject…especially ones as serious as healthcare.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      In all honesty, the only way to get a legitimate, truly theirs, opinion on this was to leave Obamacare and healthcare out of it. Reason being – besides putting the notion of their friends dying in their heads – is because they have heard my husband and I, sister, family, whoever, discuss this many times in the last several years. Children will often side with their parents and what they believe because they are there parents. They’ll often give the reasons they’ve heard their parents give. I did not want a response of what they thought I wanted to hear. I wanted a response of what they truly thought about being made to pay for something they don’t agree with…

      And I’m certainly happy that you trust your daughter’s teachers and school that much. I do not. I do not trust anyone when it comes to them interjecting their beliefs on my children. I try not to do it myself – again, what they overhear is a different matter. For instance, my children attend charter schools – online. They have teachers, assignments, books, tests, standardized testing, the whole nine yards. Even though they are in my home -learning- there have been many things the teachers and/or books have taught that are clearly and outright incorrect. If it weren’t for the fact that I wasn’t there to address it and correct the error, not only would my children be given incorrect information – they’d believe it and never question whether or not it is incorrect. There are far too many liberal agendas in text books these days -and teachers who don’t know they’re teaching things that are not true- for me to trust they’re not subconsciously feeding them their own beliefs.

      • http://twitter.com/Whim Kim Nordquist (@Whim)

        I see what you are saying, I just don’t understand how it is getting their true opinion on an entirely different situation. The two scenarios aren’t even kind of alike and one is about fun and entertainment and another is about people’s lives. But I know what you mean about them picking up on your opinions…it is almost impossible for kids not to do.

        My kids don’t go to a regular public school and although we live in a place where we have different political views from most of our neighbors, we share in most of their values and religious beliefs so I do feel more comfortable with what is going on in class than I was in other areas I have lived. Because it is not a public school they do not have to follow the regular curriculum and the parents are highly informed on what is going on in class so I know this is not the normal public school experience. I know they will still come across things that are not true or opinion versus fact and they will come across this their entire lives so the best thing I know to do is to help them talk things out and research and use their noggins and form their own opinions…something I think we all work on for our entire lives. In other words, it is not that I trust their school SO much, but I trust my kids and the way we can talk about these things and figure them out the best we can.

        I don’t think that it Obamacare is perfect and I know their will be hiccups, but I feel it will be a huge step in the right direction. I know more than one family that has not taken better paying jobs so that they could stay on Medicaid and not have to pay anything. This way they will be countable to pay a reasonable amount and will have more encouragement to seek better opportunities. Also, friends and family (my mother being one), who don’t have to be afraid of making changes to or losing their insurance because they have an illness or health issue that used to make it nearly impossible to be accepted into a new plan. I haven’t read every word of it (sheesh! who has time for that!?) but I have read enough to know that I am very grateful for it.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Where you live sounds nice. Unfortunately, that’s not the case here. I’ve lived and been all over and I’ve not found that – yet. I’m curious… why do you say those who didn’t take better paying jobs so they could stay on Medicaid would now not feel the need to do that…? Did you see the parts of the bill that based what you pay in for premiums directly related to the amount of money you make? Of course no one can sit and read it all (another thing that bothers me), but I don’t see anything changing there.

  • https://www.facebook.com/toniann.staheli Toniann Moss Staheli

    Shelley you are awesome! I loved reading all the comments. I am sorry for the trials you are facing. It gives me hope that you are strong, and not willing to compromise between right and wrong, despite the hardship it has caused you. I pray that the Republicans will hold strong and not give in to this bill. I fear greatly how Obama care is going to affect our society. I know that it won’t be good. And no matter what I know or don’t know about the bill, the sole fact that those that created it, want no part of it, tells me it can’t be a good thing! What else do you need? I also agree, it goes against the religious beliefs of many. I loved the examples you used, abortion specifically. My tax dollars should not go towards something I think is morally and ethically wrong. The whole thing you said about charity is right on. We need charity is our society, when you take that away and make it mandatory, the world gets cold and uncompassionate.
    I also heard this about the bill (correct me if I’m wrong) … That even if employers opt to provide health care for their employee’s, they do not have to provide it for their families. So a scenario could very well look like this. The Husband gets health care coverage, but his wife and child do not. They can apply for the exchange, but because the husband makes more than the qualifying income, his family will not qualify for any exchange plan, but they cannot afford a plan outside of the exchange because the prices are too expensive. So then they are fined because they do not have a health care plan that the gov’t would not allow them to buy. They can get divorced, and the mother and child will now qualify! Also, if 2 single people decide to live together and each make, say $30,000… individually they will qualify for the exchange, so what is the point of getting married when their combined income as husband and wife disqualify them? Now we have even more of an excuse not to get married. When families fail, this nation is doomed, and that is exactly where we are headed. We don’t need any more excuses to break up families or discourage people from getting married! Whoa, all of a sudden I got carried away there. Anyway, I just wanted to say thank you :) I enjoyed your comparison and thought it made perfect sense. Yes, entertainment is different than health care, but it made perfect sense. Despite the good the bill might do, the bad points that you brought out are enough to know that it will do more damage than good. Have a great day!

  • https://www.facebook.com/leah.m.grammer Leah Mohr Grammer

    The biggest thing that bugs me is why I HAVE to pay for it. Personally I don’t want it. My husband is in healthcare and we would rather pay out of pocket and get what we want rather than be subject to what people want to force on us. Nobody forces you to go to the movies, so why pay for it?? Nobody forces you to see a game so why pay for it. I shouldn’t be forced to pay for health care if I don’t want it.

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      If you are willing to shop, you can get pretty decent prices. I was quoted $18-30k for a hernia surgery in Cali… In Las Vegas? $4k.

  • https://www.facebook.com/Sarah.Cutler.Rodriguez Sarah Cutler Rodriguez

    Hi! New reader, brought in by this incredible debate. I think I’ve learned more from this one blog post and the ensuing debate than by all I’ve heard and read in the news over the past year!

    To address one responders question (paraphrased) “why would anyone but a dumb teenager opt-out of health insurance,” here’s possibly one reason:

    My husband heard on the radio today a caller telling how, with 6 kids, her family was paying $500 a month for their medical insurance. They received a letter stating as of today the premium is now $1100 a month. They went from $6000 a year to $13,200. Her call was to vent her frustration, but when my husband told me about it, I decided to do the math.

    Now, if they opt-out, they can instead pay the penalty of $285 a month for the whole family, which comes to $3,420 per year – a little more than half what they were paying BEFORE the ACA came into effect. Who wouldn’t choose to opt-out and save all that money? Who pays the difference – Mr. & Ms. Taxpayer, of course.

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      Possibly because they now don’t have to get it until they are sick, and they can’t be denied? NO! That can’t be it… Or the fact that the penalty is often cheaper… NEVER!

  • Pingback: It’s Free, so it must be a good thing | A Moral Outrage()

  • https://plus.google.com/112143682311084274576 Kaela Frame

    Hey Girl, I commend you! Not only for your post, but also for standing your ground in these comments. I think my favorite part of this whole thing has been your responses. SO love your informed sass! Made me smile multiple times, and I even said, “You go girl!” out loud. Thank you thank you! I’m sending lots of respect in your direction!

  • https://www.facebook.com/k8.rouse Kate Rouse DuHadway

    Just setting the record straight – the Affordable Care Act does not mean health insurance is free.

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      Nobody said it’s free. That doesn’t mean her example is invalid. The principle is the same.

  • ronrontay

    I am a naturally conservative person, married almost forty years, with two sons in their early thirties who are tops in their fields. People frequently compliment me on the job I did raising them because of their high principles, as well as their upper incomes (top 1%). So I was saddened to see you using such a poor analogy to “teach” your children about the health care act. Comparing entertainment to health care is not just dumbing down the issue, it completely evades the moral code upon which our country was founded. In my view, it is NOT okay to let others suffer, or die, based on their age or income. If you traveled more widely, perhaps you would see how the rest the civilized world manages its health care. Statistics show that no one does it at a higher cost, with less benefit, than the United States. Our people deserve better. Your children deserve better. And I fear that the moral consequences of the lesson you “taught” your children will not be very entertaining.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      It’s interesting that because I have an opposing opinion or a different way of doing things, it somehow means I have not traveled widely. I wish I had a magical way to know things about people I’ve never met. Though, I’d want one that works better because yours is inaccurate.

      No one is “letting” anyone suffer. My sons get an allowance that they must take 10% of and put in savings and the other 10% and give back in some way. They choose the ways in which they want to help. They happily give money to those in need. Forcing them to give an amount that someone else deems necessary – they see as not only unfair, but removes their input in the process. It’s also not allowing them to give to whom, when and where they would choose. They’d give anything they could to someone in need, but they would not give to someone who wanted to have an abortion…

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      Say what?? Have you ever tried to talk to a 10 year old? You have to use examples with the same or similar principle that they can understand. Her example is totally valid. Did your kids have a higher understanding at 10? Who knows. It worked for her kids.

      Also, no one has ever said they want anyone to suffer. Did you know it’s illegal for a hospital to turn someone away for lack of ability to pay? See there? We DO take care of the sick.

      Did you know that those other countries also have the worst employment numbers, incomes, and highest taxes? Yeah… working really well. Switzerland is an exception… but they also pay the highest taxes too.

  • Pingback: Homepage()

  • https://www.facebook.com/Songlady2 Mary Witherspoon

    Let’s change the movie story to if you don’t pay a little more some one dies because they can’t pay. Then let’s see what they say. Going to the movies and dying of something you don’t have to die from if you just had the money is a BIG DIFFERENCE! I have a friend who was a Gulf Coast Veteran who needed a hip replaced but because she didn’t have the insurance she suffered for over a year in great pain getting the run around until she was in a wheel chair unable to walk. Finally she got enough money together to buy temporary insurance to have the surgery. It was ridiculous!

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Younger son in bed, older one is still up. I just asked him if there were 25% of the population that had a medical condition that could get better if they were able to see movies, but may die if they didn’t, would he want to pass the bill then. His response?

      “No”

      See… He gets it. I’m glad your friend was finally able to have the surgery after all that time. In Canada there was a lady in a similar situation. She had circulatory problems due to diabetes. She was about to lose her foot if she didn’t have surgery. Her surgery was put off until the system could provide her with the surgery she needed. While waiting, she not only lost the leg that needed the surgery, she lost her foot on her other leg…

      • http://idrg80.wordpress.com idrg80

        Clarifying point–are you saying your son chose not to pass the proposed example law at the expense of possibly 25% of the population!?

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          I am actually not going to expound on that right now. Not until I have more time or am able to make a new blog post. Taken out of context – any more than it already (possibly) has been – does no one any good.

    • http://flamewalker04.wordpress.com educatedpanther

      That’s why you get insurance before you get sick. The vets do deserve better care, though.

      A LITTLE MORE? Have you seen the rates??? I used to be able to get catastrophic care for $60/mo. Now I’ll be lucky to find anything under $300. That is not a LITTLE. That is many times more. It’s no wonder businesses are running as fast as they can from having to provide healthcare (by reducing hours, attrition by not hiring any more full timers, etc).

      • https://www.facebook.com/dennisnmartha.hall DennisnMartha Mickelson Hall

        my sister-in-law fighting cancer couldn’t get a price quote on the cancer meds, doctor finally got involved to get them a cost since they were paying out of pocket. Retail cost ‘in the system’ was $4500.00, on a direct pay basis..$19.00. Same pills, but you think this ‘system’ is better?

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          This ‘system’ worked, studied, tested, tried, failed – I’m sure – and eventually succeeded in making those medicines that are helping your SIL. The new system will stifle and end the discoveries, trials, tests, etc and will result in more deaths… The money part may bite, but what’s more important? Money or life? …

  • http://twitter.com/aliciaafter30 Alicia (@aliciaafter30)

    A friend of mine posted a link to this article on Facebook and, after sitting here for more than 45 minutes reading through the post and comments, I must commend you on the wonderful job you’ve done not only explaining this to your children but how you’ve taken every negative comment sent your way and made sure you properly answered with facts.

    My husband is an amputee, my aunt is a diabetic in desperate need of a pancreas or she will likely die in the next 5 years, and my father is going through 4 major surgeries in the next couple of months to correct his back, his knees, and something else (sorry I forget). None of the aforementioned people want Obamacare. My husband had a chance to read through a little of the bill only to discover that the class 3 device he so desperately needs (his left leg) isn’t covered. A friend of mine in California, who was the top salesman in his region, and any region within 3000 miles, was just let go because they were cutting employees because of Obamacare. My father recently had to drop his health insurance because the premium tripled in the wake of this disaster. Most of my friends, who rely on a full time job to pay their bills, are being cut to part time. They’ve had to resort to getting 2 jobs and losing time with their children.

    I can’t quite understand how anyone can say “the analogy is not the same” when the meat and bones of your analogy are spot on. So well thought on. Thank you for this article. Thank you for sticking to your beliefs even in the wake of what you’re dealing with in your life. You’re an inspiration.

    Oh, I also read the article by Matt Walsh. I just read it to my husband. He’s terrified that he won’t be able to get his transportation statistics either.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Oh dear. I did not mean to panic your husband about the availability of transportation statistics. I apologize!!

      Thank you for taking the time to write. When floating in a sea of … well I don’t like to call names … ‘people who criticize’ – it is sometimes only the smallest post of support that serves as the donut shaped floatation device that keeps me from drowning. Your comment, however, was a floatation device, a life vest, and a rescue team. Thank you.

  • https://www.facebook.com/juliene.sizemore Julie Sizemore

    I have been reading a lot of these comments and i am surprised by how many seem to be misinformed. You certainly do not need insurance to get medical care, (especially lifesaving care), it’s just way cheaper. So no, it doesn’t make sense to say that The Affordable Care Act in and of itself will save lives. And less sense to say that opposing it will cost lives. The truth is that people are more likely to get care when they have insurance, but it’s still their choice. Choice is the key. I believe that everyone should give of themselves so we can all live a little better. But charity flows from the heart and cannot be mandated by the government. I sure hope i am making sense. Now i have to say, I agree with you, Shelley 100%. It was an excellent analogy, thank you for this post.

  • https://www.facebook.com/zbarney Zach Barney

    Shelley-This is extremely well written, and mind blowing to me that people simply are not getting your point. My favorite comments are people saying that the cost is not that high. It’s high enough for many employers to drop healthcare coverage altogether. It’s high enough for places like Applebee’s to cut employee hours in order to not be required to provide it to them. It’s high enough to screw my children over in taxes, lack of social security etc.. for their entire lives.

    I also love the comments from people generalizing doctors and saying that they don’t deserve six cars and a million dollar house. Excuse me, but good doctors most definitely do. They put in the hard work. They passed the exams. They have to pay their own uber expensive insurances, and they have to stitch us up, reconnect our limbs, break bad news, fix our organs and keep us living. It’s a hard freaking job and I’m happy paying more for better doctors that I CHOOSE TO PAY. Most don’t live like you entitled handout seekers assume.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you. <3

  • https://www.facebook.com/leslie.s.thomas.12 Leslie Sophia Thomas

    Instead of teaching your kids how “stupid” this bill is, try teaching them about the very really issues that face america today and inspire them to do something about it instead of just blogging your complaints.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      What “very really issues” would that be? I suppose I should inspire them to become megalomaniacs that tell other people what to do, how to live and how to raise their kids. Instead of telling people you’ve never met what to teach their children, try teaching yourself that expressing ones opinions with blogging is no different than expressing ones opinions of criticism to those bloggers.

  • http://twitter.com/shannonfabulous Shannon McFerren (@shannonfabulous)

    So maybe what we need to do is encourage the senate and congress to allow Obamacare to happen and then let itself implode? When all these people who think “IT’S FREE” find out it’s not and that it will cost them money and probably even their jobs, maybe they will vote with an educated vote in 2016??!!! *Maybe,* just maybe people will see that this makes NO SENSE (kind of like your kids got it…)!!! Or am I being too hopeful!? Obamacare will be the death of small businesses all over the country and will kill many, many American dreams! Our country, as we know it, is changed forever. Thanks Shelley, for a common sense look at how crazy stupid Obamacare really is!!! Your comments and sense of logic is refreshing and enjoyable to read!! Keep your head up and keep pressing on!!

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you

  • https://www.facebook.com/leslie.s.thomas.12 Leslie Sophia Thomas

    I apologize that may first post may have sounded harsh and critical of what you are teaching your children, because you are probably teaching them a lot of good things. However, I do stand by my point of the importance of teaching them about poverty and inequality. I have found that most middle and upper class children cannot fathom how or why people would need the government to take care of them. I think that in order to be able to create real solutions for our social problems, we need to look at the “why’s” behind policies and go from there.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I appreciate that and I too see the importance of teaching children about poverty, the needy, etc. As I’ve said before, they give to charity. We give back. We give where we see fit and choose to give. How anyone can fault me for that – I do not understand.

      • https://www.facebook.com/leslie.s.thomas.12 Leslie Sophia Thomas

        Giving to charity and fixing social systems are two different things, and both important! I would suggest reading the book “Outliers” and/or taking a gander through the current body of research on meritocracy and then take another look at the bill.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          When I got to the part of the bill that said vaccines are mandatory, no longer an option, I’d seen enough.

      • http://chtuhmrzj.wordpress.com drewrick

        “We give where we see fit” is exactly the problem. Maybe your help is needed the most not by that feel-good cause but the smelly drug addicted homeless guy. Cancer research doesn’t need another million but that guy needs a couple of hundred a month to get a home address and start looking for a job (instead of robbing people in the street). You may say for yourself that you give to the homeless but the statistics speak a clear language – we give mostly to what makes us feel better, not where it is needed the most. And that’s why we have taxes.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          You have a right to your opinion. I have a right to an opinion of that opinion and can say – for a fact, in my case – it’s crap. Perhaps you missed the comment where we took in a homeless man who had been previously addicted to Meth. We paid $200 and more for his medicines he needed when his appendix burst and had no money or insurance. We housed him for a few months until he was in a more improved state and could travel – where we then paid for him to go to Florida where he had family.

          Do not presume to know me. You don’t.

  • http://chtuhmrzj.wordpress.com drewrick

    I can’t thank you enough for showing us how efficiently you have convinced your kids of your point of view by carefully setting up your story and then at the end equating it with healthcare. All your readers who haven’t yet developed the skill to recognize a straw puppet argument must be so pleased. Just a few quick questions:
    – Do you think people decide to get cancer like they decide to go to the theater?
    – Do you think the uninsured should continue to get no cheap preventive care and only go to the ER when it’s already too late, so that the tax payer gets to pay their now much more expensive treatment?
    – Or do you think we should just let the uninsured die to save that cost?
    – Or maybe should we cover preventive care before the illness gets expensive in the first place?
    – Do you think that maybe that lady “who wasn’t even an American” has seen other ways of financing healthcare work, and work well? Do you think that maybe instead of closing your mind and shouting “USA, USA”, you should listen to her, and learn?

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I can’t thank you enough for showing us how efficiently you have convinced your kids of your point of view by carefully setting up your story and then at the end equating it with healthcare.

      You’re welcome.

      All your readers who haven’t yet developed the skill to recognize a straw puppet argument must be so pleased. Just a few quick questions:
      – Do you think people decide to get cancer like they decide to go to the theater?

      They may. They may not. Why? What does that have to do with anything? I’m pretty sure, actually – I’m positive – I never mentioned health, Cancer or the like to my kids when we talked about entertainment. It has only been those who disagree with me that have done that. As have you…

      -Do you think the uninsured should continue to get no cheap preventive care and only go to the ER when it’s already too late, so that the tax payer gets to pay their now much more expensive treatment?

      If that’s what they want to do, sure. It’s not my place to say. I can only speak for myself and say that, when I was in that situation – oh not so long ago – I didn’t want to skip preventative care and only go to the ER and have to take a second mortgage out on my home, etc etc etc. That’s why, through hard work and determination, I no longer have to…

      – Or do you think we should just let the uninsured die to save that cost?

      In what country does anyone let anyone insured or otherwise die? Oh… Wait… Canada does. Yeah… They have people and children whose conditions, according to their Canadian Healthcare Panel of Doctors (who have never laid eyes on the patient, much less been in the room with them), would not improve. Therefor the Panel of Doctors and Hospital reps petition the courts to get permission to stop treatment, remove feeding tubes, breathing tubes or anything else that’s keeping them alive – and let them die. They actually won’t even provide the patient with the necessary tools that would keep them alive long enough to get home so they can die there. (They don’t because they don’t see the point in wasting that time and those resources on someone who – according to them – is going to die anyway…)

      But wait. That’s not what you asked… You asked should we just let the uninsured die. The Canadians let their insured die. Last time I checked, you cannot be refused treatment because you’re unable to pay. So, where are these bodies and piles of uninsured people that we’re letting die?

      – Or maybe should we cover preventive care before the illness gets expensive in the first place?

      We… do. It’s called privatized healthcare. For those who can’t get that – there’s Medicaid and other programs.

      – Do you think that maybe that lady “who wasn’t even an American” has seen other ways of financing healthcare work, and work well? Do you think that maybe instead of closing your mind and shouting “USA, USA”, you should listen to her, and learn?

      Perhaps she has, however, she said she was an Aussie and, because of friends there – the information she was giving was not correct. And ya know… Maybe I do have a closed mind – according to you or others – What I don’t have is per-conceived ideas about others who disagree with me thereby slinging insults at them based on … well… nothing. You know NOTHING about me, my closed mindedness, hardships, blessings or anything else. You only know that I sat down and had a conversation with my sons. A conversation that you – for whatever reason – took offense to and felt the need to attack me. I guess I have to be a ‘progressive’ thinker in order to be able to accuse someone else of being close minded when I am also close minded for the same reasons – but opposite sides of the coin. The difference in you and I though… I’m not in denial and when I do close my mind, I don’t open my mouth.

      Oh, by the way… That child in Canada that I mentioned. The one the Canadian courts ruled to die so he would no longer tax the (already taxed) system… When he was taken off the breathing machines, he was taken to a helipad and Air Vac-ed out of Canada and into the US where he received the care he needed and he is now improving…

  • https://plus.google.com/110819580863416217967 Chrissy Doyle

    First of all, I would like to thank you Shelley for taking the time to explain the idea of Obamacare to your children on a level that they would understand. I know that teaching children at home is becoming non-existent, it is obvious in so many ways…a soapbox I am not climbing on at the moment.

    As for those of you who think that she should have brought up death and disease to her very young children, shame on you. You are probably the ones who allow your children to be a part of a world they are not yet ready for. Children have the right to just be children and not deal with adult issues like disease and death unless they are directly exposed to something of the sort. Furthermore, if something like that were to happen, God forbid, his/her parents are the ones to determine how to handle it with that child, not those of you trying to argue a healthcare perspective. They are children!!

    Now, to the matter at hand. You all continue to tell Shelley that she is a hypocrite because she has pre-existing conditions that she has had treated. Maybe you and I did not read the same article. Because someone who just left their debts to be paid by tax payers does not take a second mortgage out on their home and deny themselves any frivolities whatsoever while doing their very best to pay their extraordinary medical bills.

    A few people even mentioned how she has scoffed on the poor for not having anything. Or, again maybe our definitions differ. Sounds to me like she is the poor and that she is one of the ones who are suffering. It always amazes me that when someone states their opinion everyone else knows that person’s whole life and can make a judgment as to whether or not they are taking advantage of something.

    Here’s my opinion. Obamacare is just another way for those who refuse to work and pay taxes to sit on their bottoms and continue to suck the tax payers dry. While yes, healthcare would be provided to everyone. May I remind you that it was not ever mentioned as to what level of healthcare would be given. Nor, as Shelley mentioned, did they ever give a glimpse into what the tax increases would be. You are all willing to jump off the bridge blindfolded. I will never understand that. Have you ever taken a really close look at this bill? The general synopsis is that the healthcare is free and that taxpayers will be given more taxes. Don’t you want to ask further questions?

    My first question is what are the benefits? If I were to ask my insurance provider that same question, I would be provided with a list of benefits. That’s not going to happen with this bill until we all jump on board and drink the Kool-Aid. I really don’t see how it doesn’t seem cultish.

    Ok, what about the taxes? You are all willing to pay whatever amount they shove down our throats because they put the word “free” in with the healthcare “plan”. How is that free? Someone also mentioned that paying the additional taxes will help those who cannot help themselves. Well, if I am already paying an increased tax for the “free” healthcare, then why am I going to pay an additional tax so someone else can have “free” healthcare? Granted, there are people who actually physically cannot work or provide for themselves let alone medical services and prescriptions. Those people already qualify for a little program we like to call Medicaid.

    Oh, by the way, we are already paying the taxes to support the program. I personally think that rather than initiating Obamacare, we should use those funds to better structure our current welfare and aid systems. I cannot imagine the actual number of people who are able to work and provide for themselves and their families but who just don’t see it as necessary. I see it all the time. People collect their Medicaid and foodstamps and yet have brand new cars and live in expensive homes or apartments when less expensive means are available. And if chosen, they most likely wouldn’t need the help in the first place.

    Again, I am not criticizing those who actually need the assistance. I know full and well that there are people that just cannot survive without help. I am not talking about those people. I am however talking about the people who won’t work, use drugs, or buy things with their foodstamps that even the average taxpayer will go without because it is a leisure item! If limits came into play, then our current system might function a little better. We might free up some of the tax payers dollars and put them to use in other areas of healthcare, like better assisting the indigent programs so that no one goes untreated. Wait, wait…in doing so the current taxes would not have to be raised. My final question to you, are you going to drink the Kool-Aid?

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you Chrissy. Hope you don’t mind – I added some spacing to your reply. I assume you were using a phone or ipad… :) Thanks again for your input.

  • https://www.facebook.com/taya.tasse Taya Tasse

    OMG, when I first read your “thoughts” I was a little irritated and tempted to leave a comment. However, I admit, I read your ‘thoughts’ quite quickly and with preconceived notions. After reading many of the comments here, and your carefully thought out responses, I have re-thought my thoughts, lol. Thank you, Shelley, for your “thoughts” and for providing a forum to share thoughts. I was most moved and impressed by your point-by-point response to Kit Erickson. Way to go! It always amazes me how “confused” some people can be when they here that someone works for the government. They make many assumptions, going as far to allude that government workers don’t actually work and are just receiving a “check” from “taxpayers.” lol. Again, thank you Shelley, for spreading some rational thought in times like these :-)

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you. <3

  • bcmdrolando

    Have you heard of the word solidarity? It’s the opposite of individuality, which is exactly what you explained to your children. A society with no solidarity is unjust and blaming the poor for their condition. Sad.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      sol·i·dar·i·ty (sl-dr-t)
      n.
      A union of interests, purposes, or sympathies among members of a group; fellowship of responsibilities and interests

      And those who disagree with me who, according to you, do care for the poor and their condition is somehow *not* members of a group with/for the same interests and purposes…?

      You're Not Making Any Sense At All

  • http://twitter.com/Dannielle0624 Dannielle Jaworski (@Dannielle0624)

    Here is some simple information for those not understanding.
    http://www.upworthy.com/his-first-4-sentences-are-interesting-the-5th-blew-my-mind-and-made-me-a-little-sick-2?g=2 (all fact checked, but do feel free to fact check on your own)

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/01/this-obamacare-video-will-make-you-sad-for-america/ (this last one is just funny)

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Not gonna lie… That first dude, though adorable and able to keep my interest, I don’t have a CLUE what he was talking about… lol

      That second video. Yeah, it was funny – but I find it to be so much more. Forget the fact that it showed how clueless people have strong opinions based on nothing and can support those opinions, I found it interesting that the white folks chose ACA and the black chose Obamacare. It’s clear they didn’t have a clue what was in them. The only thing they knew that was in them – for certain – was the name “Obama”. Seemed they automatically had an aversion or liked it based on the NAME used…

      yeah, over-simplified on my part and not science by any means… Just an observation. Thanks for sharing!

      • http://twitter.com/Dannielle0624 Dannielle Jaworski (@Dannielle0624)

        I found John to be very easy to follow and understand. And the second video, to me, boiled down to racisim. Just my opinion.

        • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

          Yeah, that’s kinda what I was saying too – but you were better as you were blunt. lol

          I’ve flagged the first video to look at again later – but for now, it confused me. Of course since Saturday night I’ve gotten about 10 hours total sleep, I’m still screening comments, getting dinner ready and homeschooling. I’m a bit distracted. :)

  • https://www.facebook.com/gail.hanson.35 Gail Hanson

    Here’s a thought for making your analogy a better fit. First, imagine that the entertainment industry functions just a little bit differently than it does. Imagine that you can pay for your entertainment if you want to, but you pay as you leave the venue, and — you don’t really have to pay. But, as you leave, the people that provided the concert, or the movie, divide the price of the entertainment by the number of people who have decided to pay. So, if only 1/2 the people pay, they’ll pay twice as much as they would if all the people pay. If just 10% of the people decide not to pay, then the other 90% will pay an extra 11%. So, if the ticket would cost $6 if everybody paid, now it would cost $6.66. And you didn’t get to decide if you wanted to give somebody the price of a ticket. As you so aptly point out, charity is better if it is freely given, not forced. And as for if it’s free it’s great–where the heck did you get the notion that paying between 2.5% and 9% of your income was the same as free?

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Uh… yeah – no. Wasn’t a lesson in trickle down poverty spreading and math. That makes about as much sense as a 13,000 page document, that no one has read, becoming a law. That’s a ludicrous thought – don’tcha think?

      And I never said it was free for me. I know better… Remember, I’m the one getting screwed in this deal… lol

  • https://www.facebook.com/chip.franks Chip Franks

    Shelly,

    Thank you for the well reasoned, intelligent debate. I love your example, and your responses to the nay-Sayers even more.

    The folks screaming emotionally about how children will die, and we are heartless to deny care to the needy lose all credibility with their histrionics. I guess we’re letting people die in the streets constantly now?

    What will happen, and what’s actually happening now is that with rationed care–people will get lower levels of service. There are already fewer doctors, there will be less incentive to privately fund medical research (where the vast majority of breakthroughs occur), and the health care of EVERYONE will suffer as a result. This is also true for the needy for whom these folks are beating their, oh so compassionate chests.

    Truer compassion comes from people being able to help themselves. A good job is really important in that–and that’s the other side of this: jobs are being killed left and right over this ridiculous piece of legislation.

    Keep up the good fight, Shelly. A lot of us think you’re just awesome.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you and bless you… <3

  • http://keriblue1.wordpress.com keriblue1

    Reblogged this on keriblue1's Blog and commented:
    Just giving one side of Obama care isn’t appropriate. You need to be realistic about social order. Lots of people don’t go to the movies anymore than you. Every one needs medical treatment at some point or another. Why should I have to pay your medical bill because medicaid and Medicare is paid for by my taxes. And even if you can’t afford to pay the medical bill, you will still need to sign forms saying that you will be responsible to pay for your care. Nothing is free. Be realistic with your children with all sides mot just one simple side. Government is not free. Freedom is not free. Somebody will always be paying the price for everyone else at one time or another. That’s life and you just have to accept that as you take care of your family, someone else is taking care of you.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      So, you’re chastising me because… You agree with me? I’m very confused.

  • http://twitter.com/Dannielle0624 Dannielle Jaworski (@Dannielle0624)
    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Yes yes… we’ve seen – repeatedly the links you’ve posted to this blog that seems to enjoy belittling me and my opinion. I just hope that if the day comes when I have nothing to post on my blog – but links and large parts of other blogs, just to tear them down – with no thoughts of my own – I would see that as time to hang it up. There’s a HUGE difference in my blog post and his…

      I didn’t have to tear anyone down in order to lift myself up. In fact, I didn’t lift myself up at all…

  • https://www.facebook.com/franklin.syfrett Franklin D Syfrett

    Shelly I agree with the whole way you used the analogy to explain it to your kids. I have raised 3 sons as a single father. I was never able to get Medicaid because I was a white male. (That was the words use to me by the Social Services Department) All of my sons have grown up and have kids of their own. I am going to forward this blog info so they can also understand how maybe they can explain this to their kids. Also I am a Vietnam Vet and I get medical services through the Veteran’s Department but still pay copays and pharmacy charges. I applaud you in standing up for your side and I think that most of these people don’t get it because they all see the “FREE” sign. But how can anyone think this is a good idea if the reason that you have insurance at your work and you are being told that it is not good enough for you to not get taxed by the govt. If you have company insurance then it would make sense that it should be good enough to meet your needs. If your choice is that of insurance the it is the choices that we were given by the Lord our God to make decisions for ourselves. Please stand strong in support of your beliefs and understand that not everyone is so “brain dead” to not see the problems with a program that they can’t or won’t tell you what it will cost before you agree to having it as a law.

    Thanks
    Frank

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Thank you for your support, Frank. More importantly – thank you for your service to our country. God Bless

    • https://www.facebook.com/MoorishCobra Stelios Onuris

      I find it hard to believe that social services said something that blatantly discriminatory to you and you didn’t sue. And while she did use a good analogy to explain the Affordable Care Act to her children, she neglected to mention that this is the incarnation of the act after the Right got all the compromised they asked for. This is the version where they gutted anything even resembling the universal healthcare plan President Obama originally wanted and replaced it with basically selling us to the insurance companies. Then they lovingly called it Obamacare because it sucked, they knew it, and they wanted President Obama to be the fall guy for it.

      We’re not stupid.

      • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

        LOL I wondered what the “left” was going to say or how they were going to justify the utter failure of Obamacare when it tanks – because it will. Now, I see there’s already a movement or excuse in place.

      • https://www.facebook.com/lonicole21 Login Rich

        I find it highly believable that social services said “something that blatantly discriminatory”, they said something very close to the same thing to me. Mine was that I was white, pregnant with my first and only child, and didn’t live in an household with more than 3 people in it. (Also how would he be able to sue, when he can’t afford medical insurance?) This was 2 years ago, while I was working full time and going to school, I paid for my pregnancy out of pocket, which I have no complaints about, I was also refused WIC, and Food Stamps for the same reasoning. As of right now I have an amazing 19 month old, am paying for my own insurance (although my payment for it is about to go from $185 to $250), and just finished paying of my medical debts. As Shelly has pointed out several times, the hospital did not refuse me when I was in labor and no insurance, Instead they cut my costs of my medical bill and worked with me to figure out a solid payment plan that worked best for me. Obamacare is the most ridiculous thing for our government to do, I understand that some can’t afford to get insurance, but there is a big difference between working your ass off, and using something, such as Medicaid to help you until you can afford your own, and sitting on your lazy ass and demanding that MY tax money pay for you 8 different children when you could work for it. Obama is forcing me to give my money, from my paycheck, that I work my ass off for, to those who wouldn’t do the same for me, Obama is taking away free will to give and making it a requirement. I for one commend Shelley for speaking up for herself and the country she lives in!

  • https://www.facebook.com/michaellibby.bell MichaelLibby Bell

    When did health care become a right, it is your right to be healthy but not your right to be charged for other people. If we want to help others that is my right to decide that is called giving. How can you force people to give. That is not giving that is a bill. Same thing with Guns every American has the right to own a gun but does not have the right to have the government pay for your gun. My wife and I know several women that are single parent income and struggle to make ends meet. It would be a shame to make them have to have insurance when they can’t hardly put food on their table. That is not good health care at all. Giving is something that comes from your heart and should never be forced on people that is why Obamacare would not of got passed if they did not say it was a tax. There are times to help and times to be helped. Something has to be done but this thing had to be past to find out what whas in it. Well now we are finding out.

  • https://plus.google.com/101043060563978401037 Kayli Spencer

    Thank you so much for analogy! It was perfect for the intended audience and a great way to explain it for other peoplem especially those too dense to realize what Obamacare really is…. I must admit I laughed as I read through the comments of those accusing your husband of relying on taxpayers. What rubbish! My husband works for the government too, and boy does he earn it! I would sure hope someone who puts his life on the line would be entitled to some monetary compensation….he’s in the military.
    I am an immigrant, my native homeland has a similar programme to this Obamacare, want to know what happens? Need a MRI immediately to make sure you dont have a brain tumor? Forget it, you will have to wait 2 weeks. Need a specialist ? Good luck, the wait time is only 8 MONTHS.A few years ago my grandmother’s heart was failing, and needed a specialist. That was in January. She died in June. That is what Obamacare and any other socialised medical progamme does.

    What happens is the middle and poor are left with low quality medical care and the rich, because they can afford it, get the better care. I believe that is a “robbing the poor to feed the rich” set up, is it not?

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Yeah, I guess it is… Some have mentioned that this spread the wealth business is like Robin Hood stealing from the rich and giving to the poor, but it’s not. Robin Hood didn’t steal from the rich and give to the poor. The money he took didn’t belong to the rich. It belonged to the poor. He was merely giving it back. However, I see your point…

  • https://www.facebook.com/jim.knox.1694 Jim Knox

    One may choose not to go to a movie. The same way someone doesn’t choose to get sick or injured.
    A young healthy person who does feel the need to have catastrophic insurance goes hiking at a state park. He slips and falls into a gorge. After a lengthy rescue he is helicoptered to the trauma center where he undergoes several surgeries and is in ICU for 3 weeks and can no longer work due to his injuries. Since he doesn’t have any insurance, and he’s now disabled guess who pays the bill? Huge difference

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Uhm… Who? The bonehead that went hiking without proper equipment? Makes sense to me. No. It really doesn’t… I fail to see why I should have to pay for someone else’s injuries. He wasn’t my employee on the clock when it happened. He wasn’t on my property. Why do I have to pay for his medical bills? He gonna buy my groceries?

  • https://www.facebook.com/justin.wheatcroft Justin Wheatcroft

    By your logic then we should get rid of all forms of welfare, including WIC, Medicaid, Medicare, SS, food stamps, etc. Plus, your logic is terrible. First off, you compare health care to the entertainment industry. They are not even close to being the same thing, I’m sure you’ve heard the “apples and oranges” thing, so I won’t get into it here. Second, your first premise is entirely incorrect. You say that “everyone [is allowed] to participate in all local entertainment for free.” Maybe you should read the Affordable Health Care Act language first before you make false claims about it. Everyone will not get it for free, not even close. Please check your facts before you spread more garbage information.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      I will. You first. My logic is sound and not once does it insinuate all forms of welfare should go away. Hey – I’d even be okay with MORE if it was handled in a better manner. You know, mandated to be used in the manner it was meant and do away with abuses to the system.

  • http://jonathanbohrer51.wordpress.com jonathanbohrer51

    Justin, I think a large part of the reason that so little is actually getting accomplished in our government is because of the exact attitude you approached this forum with. Notice if you will, that of all the posts here, the only one with any biting cynicism is the one you posted. Immediately, you can feel the condescending tone you used, and I think much of the reason people argue instead of discuss can be attributed to attitude. If you’re going to speak in opposition of what she’s saying, do so in a professional manner. It doesn’t make much sense to talk down to people in order to get people to see your way. I think you had some decent argument, but that you also flushed it down the drain with the way you presented it.

  • https://www.facebook.com/lihana Susan Thomas

    I understand your side. I even agree that this act is not perfect and needs some work. As someone who qualifies for obamacare I don’t get the free part. They don’t give it to you for free. They give a policy that you can afford. In the past insurance cost me well over four hundred dollars a month because I have epilepsy. I should add I haven’t any seizure problems in over five years. Because of obamacare I can actually afford a insurance policy now. Sure the government helps you pay for it, but it was explained that once you are in a place where you can pay for it all on your own you pay for it yourself. It is like school loans. They help you pay for school and once you graduate and have a job you pay that money back. What do I know though. I only spent over five hours with a social worker explaining it all to me. You should also note that I do have a job and part of my paycheck like everyone else pays for it.

    • http://www.shelleybroadway.com Shelley

      Of course it’s not free. The name of the post was satirical in nature. Even if something is “free” it’s not free. There is always a price.

  • Titus2Homemaker

    I have wondered the same thing. It is so blatantly obvious that the math just doesn’t work, that it boggles my mind that anyone thinks it’s a good idea. (People seem to think that the money to pay for all of this will just magically materialize out of thin air.)

    Tell your boys that when they run for Congress, I will vote for them! :)

Categories

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Clef two-factor authentication