As we all know, the Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) has gone off the rails. It seems as though every day, we get blasted with some new revelation about it. I still linger, however, on the original idea that we have to buy a "one size fits all" policy that includes the 10 new regulations that health insurance policies must offer so they are not "sub-standard." A lot of people are still trying to understand why a 32 year old , unmarried male would have to pay for maternity care, and pediatric care when neither affects him at this point. Well, at the nerve center of the ACA is the premise that we can't pay for all of the needs of mothers, children, and senior citizens unless people who don't have needs chip in. It flies in the face of the way we buy anything else. Maybe the following example will bring it all home. Let's say I go to the store to buy my favorite brand of peanut butter. As I buy the peanut butter, I notice a new sign on the shelf below it. It reads, "If you buy peanut butter, you must also buy sardines, marshmellows, and castor oil." I don't like sardines, marshmellows, or castor oil. In other words, if I want to exercise my choice in buying the product I would want, I would have to buy my item, and three others I don't want. My bill would go up, and my ability to buy other products I really need would also go down. Get the drift; I pay for my insurance and others as well, and don't have extra money to spend for things I really do need, which would make the economy grow in an authentic way. Sound like a product you will rush out to buy? I wouldn't visit that store anymore, and I hope the one called government will close its store (exchanges) down soon and let me make the choice. ...Just a Thought...Gary Sutton
With regard to those who already have health care covererage through employers, and do not want to take that which is provided by Obamacare, what have we been consistently told? The President, ad nauseum, has repeatedly offered, "If you already have health care coverage through your employer, nothing will change; you can keep the same insurance, the same doctor, and the same care." Remember that? Really? Last week, we saw 300,000 customers dropped by Florida Blue because, "the coverage didn't meet the qualifications of Obamacare." Obviously, something is going to change for them in terms of their coverage, right? And let's say that the last person hired on a staff of 50 employees is going to make it so that company has to provide health coverage for the 50 full-time employees under the Affordable Care Act. If the employer subtracts that ONE last employee from the rolls to 49,that company does not have to provide for health coverage. Hmm, that person's life has changed in that now, they have no healthcare coverage and no job because of this government interference. Oh, and what about employees who work 30 hours a week? They get healthcare coverage, too, according to the new law. But, what if the employer cuts the hours to 29, so they can cut the cost of providing care out of their profits. That employee becomes part -time, and has no healthcare coverage. From here, our job creation in America becomes more part-time than full-time. Let's see in future speeches if President Obama keeps telling us, "If you already have coverage...Blah, Blah, Blah!
I received a question from Timothy on facebook the other day. Below, you can evaluate Timothy's thoughts regarding the government shutdown and my response.
Timothy wrote: "Those darn Democrats. It is inconceivable that they would not give the Republicans any of their extra-budgetary demands."
My response: Thanks, Tim. I am assuming sarcasm here, right? Is the political gamesmanship more important that real policy making? Do you feel that the government is moving along just fine under "those darn Democrats" and the spineless Republicans? Do you think the idea of political sides is serving us well in formulating policy for all of us; or do all of us even matter anymore? Once all of the "clean C.R.s and debt limits are passed through, will there be any reason for "those darn Democrats" to talk about Obamacare? I don't like the process at all and frankly am tired of the American people buying into the idea that it's more important for my side to win, than for the proper policies to be enacted. I'm sure you don't fall into that realm, but many others do. Until we, the American people become wiser and let what is best be our filter rather than political gamesmanship be our guide, I believe we are doomed.
When I think about 9/11, I simply see a swirl of things, like a tornado or twister spinning out of control. You see the shape of the twister as the main event, but there are so many small , but important small things churning inside of it. That is how I see 9/11. Yes, I see the towers smoldering, and the fires blazing from the Pentagon and the lonely hole in a field at Shanksville. But more than that, I remember the feelings of helplessness as I watched people caught in the Towers waving cloth from the windows, and later watching as many jumped to their deaths. I remember wondering what it would be like having to make the horrible choice on how I would want to die; asphyxiation, burning to death, or jumping to my death from a skyscraper. I remember seeing the firemen racing to the scene, carrying the heavy equipment forward toward the buildings why so many were running from them. Yes, I also recall seeing people helping each other as they fled , and hearing the stories of those who stayed behind with others so they would not die alone. And, I remember seeing the dust, thinking it looked like what a nuclear winter might be. And finally, day by day, I watched as the firemen and volunteers dug away bucket by bucket at the pile of debris as hope for life turned to recovery of the dead. Finally, I remember hearing the haunting cell phone recordings of the victims saying "Goodbye," each in their own way as they faced their final moments. Even today, as we all commemorate that moment, it seems so surreal, and yet it happened. Today should be a reminder that we must be forever vigilant , and hope that it never happens again. ...Gary Sutton
Another day, and another country to worry about. Do we attack, invade, or involve ourselves in the country of Syria knowing now that they killed 1000 of their people with chemical weapons. Entry into their affairs would be necessary because these killings were not done, "in an internationally accepted way" and would be seen as a "humanitarian" incursion to save people. Wait, a minute! What about the 100,000 other Syrians who died in that rebellion over the past 3 years? Do you think they really cared about whether it was a chemical, a bomb, or an AK 47? We didn't get involved then, but now we should. Hmm? Meanwhile, Al Queda has become an increasingly larger part of the rebel army against Syrian President Assad's regime. Isn't Al Queda the group that was admittedly responsible for the attacks on 9/11 in our country?? So now we are going to help them, or as former Congressman Dennis Kucinich said, "become Al Queda's Air Force." Oh yeah, another question...If our enemy is fighting our enemy, why would we step into that conflict now? Like so many out here on Main Street, I am trying to take the politics out of this and figure out what serves us best. Can we just walk away? If we do something, what is the objective? How fast will we be in and out, or is that even a fair question? What should our country's policy be toward Iraq? What other chain of reaction will be set off in the region if we do take action ? There need to be answers to all of these questions, don't you agree?--Gary Sutton
What do Trayvon Martin , Chris Lane and Delbert Belton all three have in common? Well, first of all, they are all dead, shot to death by guns or beaten in the case of Belton. Second of all, we know who killed each of them. George Zimmerman killed Martin in a struggle, while three youths gunned down Lane while he was jogging, and 79-year old Belton, was beaten to death with flashlights by young adults in a parking lot outside his Legion Hall. Zimmerman happens to be white, while the other killers were all black. In the wake of the protests by the famous and not-so-famous in the aftermath of the Zimmerman Case where he was found "Not Guilty," there is a nagging tendency to want to reverse the tables here and assign blame to these black killers that would include a lot more people than just themselves. In short, many saw Zimmerman as representing ALL WHITE people who would do the same thing given a chance. No one will say that because it's not the right thing to say, but it definitely was intimated. Obviously, that is wrong, as evolving history shows us. Equally wrong, however, is the rush to blame ALL BLACK people for the actions of five callous individuals. In a day and age where media fans the flame of protests they want to see, and division they want to widen, the media assigns blame and plays on feelings of guilt, prejudice, and racism even where it does NOT exist. They stoke the fires of hatred, and play to real and imagined stereotypes. (example: Why should there have been any talk of protests, riots, or violence by Black People after the Trayvon Martin Case? Did police issue the same warning after the O.J. Case about potential riots, demonstrations, or violence by White People?) Here is the real truth! These murders, horrible as they are, are not our business. Really? Whose business are they, then? Good question. How about the parties involved. Zimmerman shot Trayvon, and they were the only two there. No one else. Zimmerman was tried, and found Not Guilty of second Degree Murder. Case Closed. In the upcoming cases that will involve the three who shot Chris Lane, and the two who pummeled Belton to death, it will again be up to the court to assign blame, hold a trial, and come to a verdict, and if found guilty, assign a punishment. Is it our business other than to comment as a news item or offer an opinion? No! All White or Black People have no party in any of these cases, and we should all soon start eexempting ourselves from involvement,blame, or responsibility. -----Gary Sutton