Monday, April 26, 2010

Haknosses Kallah and why I'm against Obamacare

By A guest post:

Chaknosot Kalah & why I am against ObamaCare

It must have started all innocently. A young couple wanted to get married, found an apartment, bought a couple of mattresses and borrowed a few pots and pans and dishes from friends and relatives. The wedding date was set and they were awaiting it anxiously. Their friends wanted to do something special for the newlyweds. They collected a few dollars here and there and bride and a groom had a cake, wine, sodas and challah.

At least that's how I see Chaknoset Kalah started out. Now in the name of every kalah (bride) deserves a beautiful wedding, various Chaknoset Kalah organizations throw huge weddings with food for the guests and gown for the bride. They buy for the newlyweds two twin beds with brand new linen and towels and pots and pans and dishes and even a washing machine. That's right, all one has to do is declare herself to be a poor bride and these organizations will not think twice about setting up their household. I know it sounds ridiculous, but it's a private charity organization and if people want to donate their money to support two teens getting married without a job, education or any other conceivable way to support themselves besides living off the charity, it's their business. Who am I to judge them. Heck, when a poor friend got married we wrote a nice check to him, but at the same time when I get a phone call about Tova needing money because she is getting married and only wants to work part time as a kindergarten teacher's helper and her groom is not planning to work, ever if he can help it, I politely tell the caller that I do not support their cause. Yes, every bride deserves a perfect wedding, but I don't think it is necessary to provide a perfect wedding for every bride.

I do not believe in this charity and I don't support them. There are other charitable organizations that I do not support such as peta or global warming or various organizations that are of other religions'. No one is forcing me to donate to them and everyone is happy with the establishment.

Now we are talking about Obamacare. This is an all encompassing healthcare which takes my money to provide care to each and every American as they need it. Sounds fine, just like the original Chaknasot Kala organization, but then we have to look into what they are providing. They are saying that everyone deserves it. I remember about 20 years ago, government saw no problem with providing mattresses to patients on Medicaid as long as a doctor decided that the said patient needed one. (I'm not sure if this is still so today.) So, my hardworking money was stolen from me via taxation me to give brand new beds to poor people, while I had to scrape and save to get a new bed for myself. Had Medicaid been a charitable organization and I would have gotten a phone call from one of the organizations collecting money for new beds for poor people I would have been able to decided whether or not it's a worthwhile charity and donated or not according to that decision. But the government made that decision for me. Imagine if part of the ObamaCare was about Chaknasot Kalah. After all, every bride deserves a beautiful wedding, so why shouldn't it be part of our healthcare and let's make every hardworking American pay for that wedding.

9 comments:

aml said...

You're comparing health care to a free mattress? Your blog gets deleted from my bog roll now. You have nothing substantial to say.

frumskeptic said...

interesting, on other blogs u comment about how frum people waste money and go into debt cuz of their life choices. but when the general public does the same thing in America, you're more sympathetic to their idiotic ways.

Immigrantsfor years have been coming her unable to speak english, with little education and so forth.. they would learn it, and pay their own healthcare, and food.

Then socialism came to the US and the immigrants stopped learning english, and they stopped working.. Yay government .. nay my stupidity fr working on the books :(

Garnel Ironheart said...

There is a bigger problem with Obamacare.
There are three big items on every government's budget: Education, defence and health care. Any government with a decent revenue stream can afford two out of those three while giving lip service to the third.
Western European countries and Canada emphasize education and heealth care while maintain token militaries (especially Canada, eh?). The US, on the other hand, spends a lot on the military while holding back on health and education. I know I said two out of three but the US covers not only its own protection needs but that of Canada and Western Europe which makes its military spending blow out of proportion.
You cannot add Obamacare to such a situation. Either you have to cut back on your military, inviting all your enemies to attack, or you have to declare bankruptcy. Some choice, eh?

Avi Bitterman said...

"You're comparing health care to a free mattress?"

Why not? In both cases you have a subjective moral preference in which you are using to impose your will on other people.

Case 1: It is my subjective moral preference that everyone should have free healthcare, therefore I will force others(taxes) upon threat of being locked up in a cage(jail time if taxes are not paid) to pay for it.

Case 2: It is my subjective moral preference that every bride should have free mattress, therefore I will force others (taxes) upon threat of being locked up in a cage (jail time if taxes are not paid) to pay for it.

Seems pretty similar to me.

This is what we call extortion. It's when you want something, and you physically threaten other people to pay for what you want.

But it's okay if the Government does it right? Especially if we use words like "Taxes" instead of "Extortion" and when we use terms/definitions like "Democracy" instead of "Popularity contest in which the majority gets to impose their will upon the minority"

Vox Populi said...

>But it's okay if the Government does it right? Especially if we use words like "Taxes" instead of "Extortion" and when we use terms/definitions like "Democracy" instead of "Popularity contest in which the majority gets to impose their will upon the minority"

Well, yes. At least in Normal Land. How do you propose we do things?

Avi Bitterman said...

The Statist vs Anarchist debate, similarly to the religion vs atheism debate rarely convinces others from their pre-supposed notions and convictions.

But it you are truly interested, most of my positions can be outlined in the book: For an Emergent Governance.

For an Emergent Governance is not a "magisterial work" on a particular topic. It is a book to provide a comprehensive look into the empirical functionality of a stateless society, why the state is a utopian idea, and where this branches off into other areas of one's life.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24715527/For-an-Emergent-Governance

fave commenter (remember me?) :) said...

Sorry I'm nitpicky - it's Hachnosas Kallah, not Chaknosas...

...and I don't agree with your opinion about it. I know many people who LEGITIMATELY benefit from it, and just because others may "exploit" its services doesn't mean it shouldn't exist...

mlevin said...

Fav Anony - who said it shouldn't exist? The point is that it should not be forced on people. If you don't want to donate to it, it should be your choice and if you do want to donate to it, it should be your choice too. If you do not agree with a particular organization but agree with their cause you are free to go and donate to a different organization with the same cause. It's your choice. When government controls it, it takes away your choice. You are no longer free to choose which charities you like and which you do not like. You are no longer free to decide which causes you like and which ones you don't like.

Haven't you noticed that recently more and more charities are about animals? That's because people have this deep need to donate money to a good cause, but most of these causes are already handled by the government so people feel there is no reason to contribute more. So, they contribute to animals.

frumskeptic said...

anony- those who benefit from it, are well... those who should get a damn job.

how do they plan on paying rent and supporting a family if they can't afford pots and pans? Who'll pay for the food to put inside of them, another organization?

People should become self-sufficient before they marry... seriously. Its pathetic almost, that people who think they're mature enough to get married don't have the mental capacity to swallow their pride and work minimum wage for a bit just to gain experience, so that not only do they save a bit of money, but also eventually GROW in their field.

They clearly aren't financially ready to marry if they need help buying EVERYTHING.

Unfortunately, *most* people are screwing the system.

and, well... that wasnt the point anyway of the post