Daily News Updates - Health Insurance News

Health Insurance vs. Socialized Healthcare, Pt2 -- What Difference?

This is the continuation covering Kevin Freking’s clarification of this controversial issue…

Previous...

John McCain is describing the Democratic candidates' health care plans as a "move closer to a nationalized health care system." This is a leap, open to all kinds of innuendos. In the first place, to ‘nationalize’ means to ‘transfer ownership or control to the government. This is not only a sizable stretch, but also imbeds a very subtle and deep notion of context.  As ‘Hark’ so incisively noted in his commentary on May 4th: “It’s like the accusation that Obama is a Muslim. By denying it, he, or they, are tacitly admitting that something is wrong with being a Muslim, or a single payer health insurance solution”. “ something is inherently evil with a government solution to a problem…the government is always the problem, never the solution.” It’s kind of like being asked, ‘Have you stopped beating your spouse?'"

Moving on, neither Clinton nor Obama are proposing government control of hospitals nor doctors. On the contrary, they are promoting even more health insurance then we already have. Also they propose even greater choices then he have now. These choices would include private plans as well as an option similar to Medicare.  They even propose tax breaks to help lower- and middle-income people pay their monthly premiums.  Except for small businesses, employers will either offer employee health insurance to their employees or must pay into the system.  Upper-income Americans will be asked to contribute to America’s wellbeing a little as their taxes would go up some. The US became the envy in health and wealth back when we embraced the immortal concept “Ask not what your country can do for you…but ask what you can do for your country”. Lest we forget.

To be continued…