Obamacare debate too heated

Photo used by Fair Use Doctrine

Photo used by Fair Use Doctrine

Luke Chval

Photo used by Fair Use Doctrine
Photo used by Fair Use Doctrine

Debates become too heated when it comes to politics. Especially when it comes to amateur debates of misinformed citizens spewing words out of their party leaders’ mouths.

One of the topics among laborious discussion is the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as Obamacare, part of the platform that President Barack Obama ran on in the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections.
Whether the news source is biased conservatively or liberally, broadcasters are presenting previously unknown information that is supposed to show the “uselessness” of Obamacare or prove that it’s “right”. This is when things become crazy.
News sources reaffirm people or sometimes even convert people to their side of the topic, but it shouldn’t matter. There are thousands of pieces of evidence that could show the faults of Obamacare, and equally as many defending it. And then citizens grab whichever chart or graph they want and start parading it around like it’s the key to the health care crisis.
Contrary to the belief of some citizens, the vast majority of politicians want to do what is best for the citizens of the United States. Barack Obama does not sit in the Oval Office thinking of ways to “get back” at white, Christian conservatives. At the same time, Republicans are definitely not trying to overthrow the government.
And that is the flawed logic that leads people to conclude that they have the evidence that shows the truth. But if anything that a common citizen sees about Obamacare is true, the officials in charge of the decision would already know about it. That’s why there is no “key” to the health crisis. In the end, some group of people are going to get the short end of the stick, and the government is just weighing its options.
There are logical, lucid, humane arguments for the conservative and liberal viewpoints of Obamacare. One conservative view is that fiscally liberal governments are struggling economically, such as Illinois, California, and Europe, and that those uncovered still receive treatment from hospitals. A liberal might say that the health care system is flawed so that too many people are uninsured without certain benefits; the system has to be fixed somehow, and this is the way to do it.
The truth is that there is no certainty about how Obamacare will play out. No one knows for sure what it will look like, who will be covered, how much taxpayers will have to cover to pay the enormous bill, or even if the plans will cover those who are unfortunate enough to not have their own insurance and be forced to seek shelter under the upcoming policies, unaware of what the future holds for their health and safety.

Anyone who claims they know what Obamacare is going to be and do is intoxicated with the pride of knowing a few perhaps questionable facts and statistics. Governments and economies are complex: one size does not fit all. Obamacare isn’t going to be the exact same as the liberal programs of Europe and several liberal states are. No one knows what one particular thing led to those economic crashes, and it might not be included in the Affordable Care Act.

Whenever someone is asked about what they think about Obamacare, the most wise thing to say would be to say what they believe to be true and then say “I think that’s right. But I don’t know for sure, because nobody is sure about Obamacare.”
By Luke Chval