"We see it as an entrepreneurial bill ... a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care."
Nancy Pelosi
This is the speaker of the House talking about the healthcare act, describing its future great benefit of developing "entrepreneurs" by allowing people to do what they want without any worry about having to pay for healthcare.
What a distorted view of the world she has. By her interpretation, because of this Act, people will be able to do things they were never able to do before. Yesterday, people could not become musicians and today, they can. Now that is change. Am I to believe that people all over this country are holding themselves back, keeping inside their inner spirit of creativity, because if they do what they want, they can't afford health care. By not "granting" healthcare on the citizens of the United States of America, we are actually holding back the creative efforts of guitar players everywhere. Who else must be held back? Who else is being kept from being all that they can be? We must be holding back people that want to become fisherman, bikers, campers, doctors or any other direction they want to go. Think of the humanity lost if people cannot give up jobs to go fishing because they might not be able to afford healthcare. Couldn’t they practice at night? When they were not working?
Does Nancy care about the tax burden I must carry to support the guitar players? If a person, under the Nancy-Obama Health Care Act can now stop working to pursue a passion for drum playing, does not another person have to make up for their lack of contribution to the overall cost of this social entitlement program? Won't I be asked to accept less monetary exchange for my labor so this person can labor less? Why is there always some utopian ideal that there is a free lunch? Why do I care that my kids will have less food so that someone can learn to play the bass? Nancy, what about my inner creativity that will now be stifled because I have to pay someone else’s “fair” share?
By granting these new “entrepreneurs” to the American dream the ability to be who they feel they must, I have lost another part of my ability to be who I want. I am less free to pursue what I deem correct for me so that someone else can be free to be who they want. The important part being that before this Act, we were both free to do as we wish, it might be hard, it might take sacrifice, but we could. After this pile of wealth spreading legislation passed, I am less free, I am more burdened; I have less Liberty to pursue my happiness. I have less for my family.
Why does every act of Congress seem to remove liberty from one group of people to be granted by Governmental charity to another group? Why does one group suffer so that another group can be granted ease of life? Why can't laws be written that remove no liberty from any citizen while increasing the liberty of all? Why is Nancy capable of determining what I am allowed to have? Where in that greatest of all writings does it spell out the Federal government shall determine what part of my labor I get to keep and what part shall be taken by force of law to be gifted to someone else so that they can play the canastas?
No comments:
Post a Comment