By now probably everyone has heard how Rush Limbaugh publicly insulted a young woman. Rush is an ass; there's no question about it. And I don't use the term lightly. In fact, I apologize to all the donkeys, burros, asses and other long-eared equines of the world for lumping him in with them. They don't deserve it.
I don't have any respect for Mr. Limbaugh. What he said was clearly uncalled for. Of course, I've never liked him, even when on occasion I have agreed with him. Rush likes personal attacks and name-calling. I was taught long ago that that was the sign of a weak argument, when you stop discussing ideas and start going after people. But apparently Mr. Limbaugh doesn't care. And they say that we Aspies are self-centered.
However, since the discussion revolves around insurance coverage (or did intially), I want to point out that one of the reasons the Amish do not believe in insurance is that once you sign up you are entangled in other peoples' choices. Or to put it another way, when insurance is involved, there is no such thing as a private choice.
Insurance works by spreading the risk around, so I've been told. Actually what happens is that those of us who enjoy better health or better weather are penalized in favor of those who do not. We are paying for other people's choices and misfortunes. Ideally, the people who have better healh or weather or driving records outnumber those that do not.
It is one thing to talk about choice when you are the one paying the bills yourself. It is another thing to talk about choice when someone else is paying the bills. I think this is what Mr. Limbaugh was trying to get at. As I understand the situation, the young woman is taking contraceptives for a valid medical reason and she wants her school, a Catholic university, to pay. The school says that it ought to be exempt for religious reasons. That is what the debate is about.
However, when you ask someone else to pay for you, aren't you handing control over your life to them? This is what seems to be ignored in the debate. Should I, a nonsmoker, be required to pay for a smoker's hospital bills by way of my insurance premiums? I wear a seatbelt and don't drink or text while driving. Again, should I be required to pay for the hospitalization of someone who just went through the windshield and suffered massive head injuries requiring a lengthy stay in rehab because they didn't wear a seatbelt and weren't paying attention to what they were doing? Insurance says that yes, I should, and in fact I will. But what if I need care? Will there be enough insurance left to pay for my needs or will it all be squandered on other people's lifestyles? That is the big question that is being sidestepped.
Who decides who gets the money for what? Who should decide? The ones who are paying or the ones who are receiving? If the ones who are paying decide--look out. Some of you might not have any say in the matter of how you live your lives. Remember, whoever controls your money, controls your life.
Don't get me wrong. I have insurance. You have to nowadays. I don't know how the Amish get around it, and I suspect there are a lot of things that we don't hear about in the Amish community. But my eyes were opened several years back when I went for my annual eye checkup and was steered towards the more expensive glasses by the optical assistant. At that time I did not have optical insurance and I told her I could not afford these frames. "Oh," she said cheerily, "insurance will cover it." Other People's Money. Since I did not have optical insurance I could not use Other People's Money. I had to settle for the cheaper frames. When Other People's Money is involved, you don't have to be frugal.
This is the sort of thing that Ayn Rand warned about in her novels and writings, but very few are listening.
I don't have any respect for Mr. Limbaugh. What he said was clearly uncalled for. Of course, I've never liked him, even when on occasion I have agreed with him. Rush likes personal attacks and name-calling. I was taught long ago that that was the sign of a weak argument, when you stop discussing ideas and start going after people. But apparently Mr. Limbaugh doesn't care. And they say that we Aspies are self-centered.
However, since the discussion revolves around insurance coverage (or did intially), I want to point out that one of the reasons the Amish do not believe in insurance is that once you sign up you are entangled in other peoples' choices. Or to put it another way, when insurance is involved, there is no such thing as a private choice.
Insurance works by spreading the risk around, so I've been told. Actually what happens is that those of us who enjoy better health or better weather are penalized in favor of those who do not. We are paying for other people's choices and misfortunes. Ideally, the people who have better healh or weather or driving records outnumber those that do not.
It is one thing to talk about choice when you are the one paying the bills yourself. It is another thing to talk about choice when someone else is paying the bills. I think this is what Mr. Limbaugh was trying to get at. As I understand the situation, the young woman is taking contraceptives for a valid medical reason and she wants her school, a Catholic university, to pay. The school says that it ought to be exempt for religious reasons. That is what the debate is about.
However, when you ask someone else to pay for you, aren't you handing control over your life to them? This is what seems to be ignored in the debate. Should I, a nonsmoker, be required to pay for a smoker's hospital bills by way of my insurance premiums? I wear a seatbelt and don't drink or text while driving. Again, should I be required to pay for the hospitalization of someone who just went through the windshield and suffered massive head injuries requiring a lengthy stay in rehab because they didn't wear a seatbelt and weren't paying attention to what they were doing? Insurance says that yes, I should, and in fact I will. But what if I need care? Will there be enough insurance left to pay for my needs or will it all be squandered on other people's lifestyles? That is the big question that is being sidestepped.
Who decides who gets the money for what? Who should decide? The ones who are paying or the ones who are receiving? If the ones who are paying decide--look out. Some of you might not have any say in the matter of how you live your lives. Remember, whoever controls your money, controls your life.
Don't get me wrong. I have insurance. You have to nowadays. I don't know how the Amish get around it, and I suspect there are a lot of things that we don't hear about in the Amish community. But my eyes were opened several years back when I went for my annual eye checkup and was steered towards the more expensive glasses by the optical assistant. At that time I did not have optical insurance and I told her I could not afford these frames. "Oh," she said cheerily, "insurance will cover it." Other People's Money. Since I did not have optical insurance I could not use Other People's Money. I had to settle for the cheaper frames. When Other People's Money is involved, you don't have to be frugal.
This is the sort of thing that Ayn Rand warned about in her novels and writings, but very few are listening.
