Buy:creekdipper
09-28-09, 07:08 AM
I have lost count of the number of people who repeat an incredibly stupid accusation of hypocrisy toward those who oppose certain aspects of health care reform.
The "clever" comment goes something like this: Anyone who is critical of government handling of health care is a hypocrite if he/she uses Medicaid/Medicare/Social Security.
(I have seen, heard, or read this in newpapers, magazines, talk shows, news shows, etc. from private citizens, legislators, and commentators)
Those "clever" people seem to be forgetting two salient points: (1) The recipients were never given a choice whether to help fund those programs through their contributions and (2) Having "paid" for those services, the recipients are entitled to them. It's not like the persons declined to pay their contributions & then tried to collect later in life.
The charge of hypocrisy is tantamount to saying that county residents who fight annexation from local city councils are hypocrites if, after being annexed, they use the sewer services, fire & police protection, garbage pickup, schools, etc. for which their increased taxes are paying. Or, if one is critical of a local school board's decisions, then one should take his kids out of public schools.
This "winner-take-all" type of thinking would ensure that people would not vote their conscience but instead would test the wind to jump on the winning bandwagon (otherwise risk being left out in the cold). To me, this just adds insult to injury. Oppose a plan, lose but still have to pay for it...and end up being called a hypocrite if you DARE to participate in the plan later (despite the fact that you have been paying for its benefits over an entire career).
One should have the right to oppose a plan yet still be allowed to participate in that plan when it is the winning proposal...especially if one's taxes are paying for that plan.
The "clever" comment goes something like this: Anyone who is critical of government handling of health care is a hypocrite if he/she uses Medicaid/Medicare/Social Security.
(I have seen, heard, or read this in newpapers, magazines, talk shows, news shows, etc. from private citizens, legislators, and commentators)
Those "clever" people seem to be forgetting two salient points: (1) The recipients were never given a choice whether to help fund those programs through their contributions and (2) Having "paid" for those services, the recipients are entitled to them. It's not like the persons declined to pay their contributions & then tried to collect later in life.
The charge of hypocrisy is tantamount to saying that county residents who fight annexation from local city councils are hypocrites if, after being annexed, they use the sewer services, fire & police protection, garbage pickup, schools, etc. for which their increased taxes are paying. Or, if one is critical of a local school board's decisions, then one should take his kids out of public schools.
This "winner-take-all" type of thinking would ensure that people would not vote their conscience but instead would test the wind to jump on the winning bandwagon (otherwise risk being left out in the cold). To me, this just adds insult to injury. Oppose a plan, lose but still have to pay for it...and end up being called a hypocrite if you DARE to participate in the plan later (despite the fact that you have been paying for its benefits over an entire career).
One should have the right to oppose a plan yet still be allowed to participate in that plan when it is the winning proposal...especially if one's taxes are paying for that plan.