Had an interesting situation this week that fits well into my Macro-Economics class I'm taking.
Technically right now, I'm frictionally unemployed. I'm taking care of my son and working on my Masters of Business Administration. Since I'm in school, I quit my job to further my studies, re-align my career, and take care of my son. Mom is a health professional with a doctoral degree. We can choose which one of us works and which takes care of Bill, we are incredibly blessed.
Thrown into this mix, a start-up opportunity this week that fits exactly the kinds of things I want to do. They are even willing to let me work 1/2 time while I'm in school. It sounds like a cool opportunity. But the only way we could make it manageable would be for Mom to go from 4 to 5 days per week down to 3 days per week, while I work 3 days per week. When you do that, then you lose your health insurance from both employers. It isn't really fair to the employers.
So my point is that if we had a national health care system, you could decrease the number of willingly skilled unemployed people in the economy. The health care would not be employer dependent. Maybe there aren't that many like me, but it is at least one argument for a National Health system. I know this is armageddon for some people, but my taxes already support health care for over 1 million military, 1.7 million civilian federal government employees, 1 million prisoners, the poor, and the elderly.
It's really just a fiscal policy decision that can affect employment rates and increase GDP.
Next Post will be back to the regularly scheduled writings about how cute our son is.
No comments:
Post a Comment