Health care legislation passed by the U.S. House before departing for its annual August recess will do little to lower premiums or provide more Americans with insurance, but will give a bigger break to wealthier taxpayers, according to studies and experts.
Two bills focused on expanding Health Savings Accounts [HSAs], which are funded with pre-tax dollars and are combined with bare-bones plans that cover only major expenses. That puts most of the burden for paying medical expenses on individuals, but they can use tax-free savings to cover them.
They would expand the list of allowable expenses from the accounts and increase the maximum contribution to $6,900 from $3,450 for individuals and $13,300 from $6,900 for families.
The “bigger break” is people keeping more of what they earn. But welfare statists see no difference between that and getting a government handout funded by other people's’ taxes. Notice that paying for one’s own healthcare is characterized as a “burden,” not a personal responsibility and right. The bias toward the entitlement mentality and government control, and against achievement and success, is obvious.
Not surprisingly, then, this article, published in the New Jersey Star-Ledger, is titled New Republican plan to address Obamacare gives biggest breaks to the rich. Going on, Savant reports:
"These bills provide more opportunities for higher-income people to tax shelter but won't really make much a difference in the health care system," said Larry Levitt, senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, which studies health care. [sic]
I left these comments:
What, exactly, is “the health care system?”
Statists hate the idea of people keeping more of their own money, and spending it as they see fit. To these statists, “the system” has nothing to do with actual individual human beings. It has everything to do with central control and wealth redistribution.
But the “system” is people--real, live individual people, each with their own needs and values and goals. The GOP bill expands freedom of individuals to take care of themselves, expanding peoples’ ability to manage their own affairs with their own money according to their own judgement, while maximizing the most frugal uses of their money. HSAs liberate people to tailor healthcare more to their needs and values, while reducing dependence on third party payers like employers, leaving the holder’s healthcare less vulnerable to losing her job. HSAs reduce the tax discrimination against individuals and in favor of employers, thus adding more fairness.
The government shouldn’t be interfering in peoples’ health care choices at all. But as long as it does--and it does so on a massive scale--any small attempt to reduce the infringement on individuals’ rights is a welcome step.
There is plenty wrong with “the system,” such as the myriad government mandates and government-stifled competition that drive up premiums, and they should be dealt with. Those who oppose policies that expand individual freedom, such as HSAs, cannot claim to care about “the health care system.”
----------------------------------------
Such is the Leftist bias in Star-Ledger reporting. I want to make clear that I am in favor of a flat tax, with no deductions or credits that favor some but not others.
Related Reading;
No Free Market Health Reform Will "Work"—by Socialist Standards
How to End the "Hostage" Crisis
The Healthcare Alternative: Government Planning vs. Individual Planning
No comments:
Post a Comment