Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care reform. Show all posts

Sunday, May 04, 2014

Top 10 HHCapitalism.com Posts for the Past 30 Days

Here below are the Top 10 most popular articles viewed on HHCapitalism.com in the past 30 days:

#10: "Why Government Interference in Markets Always Fails"
Few economists have illustrated as plainly and logically as Ludwig von Mises why price controls (and by extension, all types of interventions in free markets) don't work, never achieve their stated goals. For this reason we present here an excerpt from the chapter 'Interventionism' from his book 'Economic Policy'
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2012/11/why-government-interference-in-markets.html
#9: "Health Care a Human Right?"
A moral obligation to help the less fortunate does not justify massive transfers of power and money to a privileged and unaccountable Washington D.C. bureacracy.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/health-care-human-right.html
----------------
See also: "Post-Obamacare Reform"
Obamacare is now a dead letter. Here is a detailed, incremental health care policy reform proposal.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/howard-hyde/post-obamacare-reform/
#8: "Why be a Republican?"
Many people who see clearly the anti-constitutional and socialist path of destruction that our generation’s Democratic Party is taking us down, nonetheless are often reluctant to identify themselves as Republicans, much less get involved in Republican political organizations. Why should they?
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/why-be-republican.html
#7: "Nothing New Under the Sun"
Living in America in 2014 we have a tendency to flatter ourselves into believing that we are so much more sophisticated and intelligent than our forebears because we can download an app to our iPhone, but the truth is that most of our brilliant new original ideas are nothing more than a rehash of things that have been thought of and worked out many times over and in many nations throughout history.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/nothing-new-under-sun.html
#6: "Libertarianism and Republicans"
Is the rise of the international Libertarian movement and the Liberty Caucus a good or bad thing for Americans in general and Republicans in particular? Just what is Libertarianism? Where does it come from? What does it mean?
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/libertarianism-and-republicans.html
----------------
See also: "What is Capitalism?"
A working definition of Capitalism, to counter the popular misconceptions about exploitation of the poor and privileges for the rich.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/08/what-is-capitalism.html
#5: "Takeaways from CPAC"
Highlights from one couple's experience attending the Conservative Political Action Conference, March 6-8 2014
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/takeaways-from-cpac.html
#4: "Campaign Finance Regulation Lightens"
Implications of the April 2 McCutcheon vs. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision. Nancy Pelosi shrieks "Existential Threat!" Clarence Thomas says the decision didn't go far enough in lifting restrictions on political speech.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/campaign-finance-regulation-lightens.html
#3: "President of Southern California Republican Women and Men"
Incoming 2014 President Howard Hyde delivers his inaugural message to members, guests and newsletter subscribers.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/president-of-southern-california.html
----------------
See also: http://www.FaceBook.com/SCRWM
#2: Iron Firewall Descends on Ukraine
HHCapitalism.com has long been especially popular with readers from Ukraine. But recently traffic from that beleaguered nation has gone silent.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/iron-firewall-descends-on-ukraine.html
#1: "The CPAC Experience"
Top tweets from the Conservative Political Action Conference from the editor.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2014/04/the-cpac-experience.html

If you found this article valuable, consider making a donation of $1 today to encourage more work like it. Visit our Donate Page or click:








Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Top HHCapitalism.com Posts of All Time

Here below are the Top 9 most popular articles posted on HHCapitalism.com since its inception in 2006:

#9: "Nation Building in Iraq 10 Years On"
How come no one in the Bush administration ever proposed a Capitalist model for Iraq's petroleum industry?
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2013/03/nation-building-in-iraq-10-years-on.html
#8: "Milton Friedman on Socialized Medicine"
With your Obamacare debate, get some wisdom from one of the greatest economists of the 20th century
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2012/07/milton-friedman-on-socialized-medicine.html
#7: "121 Reasons to Reject Obama-Reid-PelosiCare"
Written in 2009 before the PPACA was passed, this pamphlet still encapsulates the essential facts, true today as they were then, about Obamacare: Unnecessary, Destructive, Doomed to Failure.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2009/11/121-reasons-to-reject-obama-reid_29.html
----------------
See also: "Pull the Plug on Obamacare"
100-page common-sense citizen pamphlet on how Obamacare was sold on false premises, is accomplishing the opposite of its advertized promises, and what we should do instead.
http://www.amazon.com/Pull-Plug-Obamacare-Citizen-Pamphlet/dp/0615765939
#6: "Five Steps to Immigration Reform"
A simple, straighforward proposal: Legalize Capitalism, Elevate Citizenship, Liberalize the quotas, Document the Undocumented and Isolate the criminals.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/11/five-steps-to-immigration-reform.html
----------------
See also: "Illegal Immigration, 1806 -2006"
A 200-year review of the American experience with unlawful migration, squatters and the Homestead Act
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/05/illegal-immigration-1806-2006.html
#5: "Why Government Interference in Markets Always Fails"
Few economists have illustrated as plainly and logically as Ludwig von Mises why price controls (and by extension, all types of interventions in free markets) don't work, never achieve their stated goals. For this reason we present here an excerpt from the chapter 'Interventionism' from his book 'Economic Policy'
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2012/11/why-government-interference-in-markets.html
#4: "Nothing To Do About Jobs"
The one thing the government hasn't tried for 3 [now 5] years is to get out of the way.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2011/09/nothing-to-do-about-jobs.html
#3: "Unemployed College Grads of the World, Unite!"
According to Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius, “The labor force participation rates of college graduates have actually fallen by more than those of workers without a high school education…the growth in the absolute number of employed college graduates has been nowhere near enough to offset the increase in the size of the college-educated population.”
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2013/05/unemployed-college-grads-of-world-unite.html
#2: "What is Capitalism?"
A working definition of Capitalism, to counter the popular misconceptions about exploitation of the poor and privileges for the rich.
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/08/what-is-capitalism.html
#1: "Books on Capitalism and economics"
A Capitalist Bibliography: The Top Ten Easy-to-Read popular expositions on economics and capitalism; The Top Ten Hardcore Scholarly Treatises on economics; The Top Five Most Dangerous Anti-capitalist Rants; Other Books of Interest
http://www.hhcapitalism.com/2006/05/books-on-capitalism-and-economics.html

If you found this article valuable, consider making a donation of $1 today to encourage more work like it. Visit our Donate Page or click:








Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, April 27, 2014

Libertarianism and Republicans

From Howard Hyde's 'President's Address' to the Southern California Republican Women and Men, April 26 2014:

----------------
Today our meeting competes with the California State Convention of the Young Americans for Liberty at USC and coincidentally, my talk today is about Libertarianism and Republicans. I did not know about that event before I planned my presentation. I don't pretend to know anything in detail about that organization, but I do know something about Libertarianism from my own perspective, and with just enough serendipity today I hope to make a positive contribution to the discussion.

People sometimes ask me if I am a Liberarian, to which I reply, well, yes, I have some libertarian tendencies, but it's not like I have a meth lab in my Winnebago or anything. To clarify, I say that when I am elected President of the United States, Ron Paul will be my Czar in charge of the decommissioning of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, The Community Reinvestment Act, Dodd-Frank, Sarbanes-Oxley, Section 1706 of the 1986 Tax Equity and Fairness Reform Act or TEFRA, and the Fed. On the other hand, as it pertains to foreign policy and geo-politics, my nominations for Ambassador to the United Nations and Secretaries of Defense and State are, in no particular order, John Bolton, John Bolton and John Bolton. In the unlikely event that Mr. Bolton is unequal to all three commissions simultaneously, my alternates are Allen West and Benjamin Netanyahu (it shouldn't be difficult to procure a credible birth certificate for Ben, considering precedent).

Almost half of the attendees of CPAC (the Conservative Political Action Conference) were under the age of 26, and a plurality of these are libertarians or members of the liberty caucus. This is an international movement of youth who have opened their eyes and realized that as a generation they have been screwed by the collectivist members of their parent's generation, and are determined to do something about it. In libertarianism they see the solution.

Is this good or bad for Americans in general and Republicans in particular? In my opinion it is on balance very good, with the caveat that like anything else, the thing needs to understood by all at a greater than sophomoric level, or, like anything else again, it could just as easily lead to catastrophe.

So, what exactly is libertarianism? What do we need to understand about it?

The modern libertarian movement has its roots in the Austrian School of economics, which began in the late 19th century with Carl Menger and reached its apogee in the works of Friedrich Hayek (Nobel Laureate) and his mentor Ludwig Von Mises, whose 93-year lifespan overlapped with Menger's from 1881 until 1973, after Nixon had declared that "we're all Keynseyans now." (Come to think of it, that's probably what killed him.)

Like classical liberalism and modern American conservatism, libertarianism holds that the best model for political economy is that characterized by the most limited interference in the decisions of citizens, low taxes and light to no regulation beyond preventing and punishing murder, assault, robbery, theft, fraud, rape, persecution and conspiracy. Conservatives may call this being guided by the Ten Commandments; Libertarians might consider it plain common secular sense.

The Austrian school was the most radically minimalist in its view of the appropriate role of government, and that minimalism was taken to its radical extreme in the work of Mises' disciple Murray Rothbard, who posited that government wasn't even necessary for police and defense, as these services could be bought and sold on the free market just like bread and haircuts.

In 1963 Rothbard wrote a book on the Great Depression that I consider one of two absolutely required reading for anyone wanting to know just how President Franklin Delano Roosevelt did NOT save the country from the Great Depression but rather worsened the crisis, and how Herbert Hoover was no free-market, laissez-faire pro-capitalist president; the other required reading being Jude Wanniski's (of Wall Street Journal fame) How the World Works. In the same book Rothbard also wrote the most clearly articulated presentation of Austrian business cycle theory (or the theory of booms, busts and crashes), a theory to which the financial crisis of 2008 fits like a textbook case.

The two dominant branches of Libertarianism in America today are represented by the Cato Institute on the one hand, based in Washington D.C. and focused on practical, policy-oriented research and lobbying, and the Mises Institute on the other, deliberately based away from the centers of power in Auburn Alabama in order to remain more purely focused on theory and academic freedom. While Murray Rothbard and the Mises Institute's president Lew Rockwell have carried Mises's theoretical torch forward in many ways admirably, in many other cases they have made assertions that Mises never did and probably never would have, and have done so dogmatically and intolerantly.
My infatuation with Rothbard ended abruptly when I read the op-Ed piece that he had written at the conclusion of the Reagan Administration. "Eight years, eight dreary, miserable, mind-numbing years of the Age of Reagan, are at long last coming to an end." he groaned in a piece titled 'Ronald Reagan, an Autopsy' -- fifteen years before the Gipper's actual passing. It was a littany of accusations worse than Thomas Jefferson's indictments of King George III in the Declaration of Independence. Nancy Pelosi could not have penned a more bitter diatribe. The only thing Rothbard gave credit to Reagan for was lifting the 55 mph federal highway speed limit.

Now, Ron Paul is derived from Rothbard, and in many respects in a good way. It was Rothbard who first penned the academic The Case Against the Fed from which Paul's more populist End the Fed is derived. I am mostly in agreement with these positions on domestic economic issues, as is John Allison, current president of the Cato Institute, bank president for 25 years and author of The Financial Crisis and the Free-Market Cure.

So again, while I am wary of extremists of any stripe, my only quarrel with Libertarianism as such is the role and character of America’s diplomacy and armed forces in the world; on the latter I stand firmly with Ronald Reagan. Otherwise I look forward to the day when we’ll say that "We're all (conservative) libertarians now". That's much better than being all Keynseyans, or progressives, or all socialists. Maybe the young people can help us bring that about.

If you found this article valuable, consider making a donation of $1 today to encourage more work like it. Visit our Donate Page or click:








Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Post-Obamacare Reform

Obamacare is Dead. Here's what to do next.

Read the complete article at FrontPageMag.com.



If you found this article valuable, consider making a donation of $1 today to encourage more work like it. Visit our Donate Page or click:








Labels: , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, November 29, 2009

121 Reasons to Reject Obama-Reid-PelosiCare


Obama-Reid-PelosiCare is a bad, old idea that must be defeated.

[In Summary...]

  • 1. It’s unnecessary.
    • 1.1) The American system, for all its warts, is still the best the world.
    • 1.2) A supermajority of US citizens have coverage they are satisfied with, and the un-insured do not lack services.
    • 1.3) There are options for improvement available which would cost NOTHING.
  • 2. It’s destructive.
    • 2.1) It crowds out voluntary cooperation and the private health insurance market.
    • 2.2) It raises costs and risks to business, aggravating unemployment and inflation.
    • 2.3) It creates the mother of all budget deficits and social conflict as far as the eye can see and beyond.
  • 3. It won’t work.
    • 3.1) It takes private medical decisions out of the hands of patients, families and doctors, and assigns them to Washington bureacrats and committees. The latter are neither wiser nor more caring.
    • 3.2) Wage and price controls aggravate shortages, raise costs and stifle innovation.
    • 3.3) It’s Socialism by definition (no matter how much the anti-capitalist sponsors try to deny it): a government takeover. Socialism has been demonstrated over and over again to be a failure. It won't work because it can't.



[In Detail...]

Obama-Reid-PelosiCare is a bad, old idea that must be defeated

  • 1. First, because it’s unnecessary.
    • 1.1) The American system, for all its warts, is still the best the world.
      • 1.1.1) No other system provides as high quality care to so many of all socio-economic levels as ours.
        • 1.1.1.1) The Breast cancer survival rate in the USA is 90%. In Europe, it’s below 80%[5] (National Bureau of Economic Research).
        • 1.1.1.2) Life expectancy in the USA is is 73 (men) and 79 (women) years (up 50+% in 100 years), compared with 59 and 72 in Russia (down 15+%). Yet Russia has had socialized health care for 90 years.
        • 1.1.1.3) Infant mortality rates appear high in the United States because we actually count them, including premature births. Most countries fudge their numbers.
      • 1.1.2) No other system produces more or better innovations, advances and science prizes as ours. Why kill the golden goose?
        • 1.1.2.1) In 37 of the last 50 years, 68 Americans have won the Nobel Prize in ‘Physiology or Medicine’.
        • 1.1.2.2) Who in 2009 wants to be treated with 1999 state of the art? But if innovation stops, the best we’ll have in 2019, or 2029 or 2039 is only what we already have today.
        • 1.1.2.3) The UK already killed one of its golden geese: kidney dialysis. Pioneered the technology, but has one of the lowest rates of usage in the world.
      • 1.1.3) No other national system – the UK, France, Canada, Germany, or Russia – has produced results better than the US.
        • 1.1.3.1) 800,000 Britons are on surgery waiting lists. 15% report having to wait[6] for more than 6 months for elective treatment.[7]
        • 1.1.3.2) Patients diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. have a better chance of surviving the disease than anywhere else. The World Health Organization also rates the U.S. No. 1 out of 191 countries for responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient.
        • 1.1.3.3) The British Audit Commission notes that accidental death due to hospital errors in the UK have increased 500% in the last 20 years.[10]

    • 1.2) A supermajority of US citizens have coverage they are satisfied with, and the un-insured do not lack services.
      • 1.2.1) A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care.[2]
        • 1.2.1.1) 93% of insured Americans who had recently suffered a serious illness were satisfied with their health care. So were 95% of those who suffered from chronic illness.
        • 1.2.1.2) 70 percent of the uninsured who indicated their level of satisfaction said they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care, and only 17.5 percent said they were "very dissatisfied."
        • 1.2.1.3) 60% of women voted for Obama, but 74% are happy with their own health care. 64% would rather have a private than government plan.
      • 1.2.2) There are not and have never been 50 million Americans without access to healthcare.
        • 1.2.2.1) 10 million of the uninsured live in households that earn at least $75,000, according to the Census Bureau[8].
        • 1.2.2.2) 18 million uninsured are between the ages of 18 and 34. Being young and healthy and excercising free choice, they choose not to purchase insureance.
        • 1.2.2.3) 5% of the ‘uninsured’ are illegal aliens who should not be entitled to welfare at the expense of citizen taxpayers.
      • 1.2.3) The critical long-term uninsured are less than 5% (12 million, NOT 50 million) of the population. Even these get treated in emergency rooms that are the envy of the world.
        • 1.2.3.1)It isn’t necessary to overhaul (destroy) the system that works for 96% of the population for the sake of helping 4%.
        • 1.2.3.2) Even if you regard 12 million uninsured as a crisis, it does not follow that a plan crafted by Obama, Reid and Pelosi and enforced by a massive new bureacracy is the solution.
        • 1.2.3.3) How about giving 5 minutes of ‘equal’ consideration to the Republican plan?[11] Naah! Of course not!

    • 1.3) There are options for improvement available which would cost NOTHING[1].
      • 1.3.1) Liberate the national health insurance market. Allow citizens to purchase insurance across state lines. Don’t New Yorkers buy produce from California?
        • 1.3.1.1) Allow employees to use their employer’s contribution and shop for themselves.
        • 1.3.1.2) Lift mandates on insurance policies that limit offerings and choices. One size does NOT fit all.
        • 1.3.1.3) The Commerce Clause of the US Constitution was intended as a free-trade agreement among all the states. Open the market!
      • 1.3.2) Permit and promote free-market and consumer-choice options like Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) and Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs)[3].[4]
        • 1.3.2.1) Health care and insurance costs should be tax deductible for everyone, not just employees of large corporations and the government.
        • 1.3.2.2) Stop telling doctors and hospitals who and how they must and must not treat. Let them make their own decisions about charity vs. bankruptcy.
        • 1.3.2.3) Charities, religious organizations and non-profits have a role to play. Get out of their way.
      • 1.3.3) Enact tort reform. Frivolous lawsuits, runaway malpractice litigation and the corrupt legal casino drives up costs for everyone.
        • 1.3.3.1) Health ‘reformers’ complain of overuse of unnecessary medical tests. But these tests are defenses against frivolous lawsuits.[9]
        • 1.3.3.2) In the 4,000+ pages of the bills, there is no tort reform. They don’t dare limit attorneys' fees or impose caps on damages. The Democrats are in bed with the trial lawyers to the tune of millions in campaign contributions.
        • 1.3.3.3) If you think it’s important to preserve the right to sue, and think you’ll have that right under a single-payer, government system, think again, and carefully.

  • 2. Second, because it’s destructive.
    • 2.1) It crowds out voluntary cooperation and the private health insurance market.
      • 2.1.1) The ‘public (government) option’ makes it a losing proposition to offer any private (voluntary, free-market) option.
        • 2.1.1.1) Section 202 of H.R..3962 REQUIRES you to enroll in a ‘qualified plan’ without defining what that means.[14]
        • 2.1.1.2) Section 59b of H.R..3962 indicates that the IRS will enforce your qualified health insurance enrollment with fines
        • 2.1.1.3) Sections. 1158-1160 reduce payments for patient care to what it costs in the lowest cost regions of the country. Good luck if you’re in New York or Florida.
      • 2.1.2) Private companies compete with each other for market share based on satisfying customers at the lowest cost. How can they compete with government entities whose cost overruns are covered by taxpayers?
        • 2.1.2.1) Private practices and firms can’t rationally compete with rivals (the government) that they are obliged to subsidize with their taxes. Do we tax Pepsi to support Coke?
        • 2.1.2.2) State agencies, with their inflexible bureacracies and insulation from the need to satisfy customers in order to earn a profit, can’t rationally compete with private firms.
        • 2.1.2.3) Something will have to give. That something will be private practices and firms… and quality of service, cost, efficiency and innovation. Hello stagnation.
      • 2.1.3) Instead of a free market where people compete and cooperate to help each other, we’ll have a multi-trillion-dollar political battlefield where special interest groups, lawyers and lobbyists jockey for advantage.
        • 2.1.3.1) The bills themselves are Frankenstein monster products of political jockeying, not unified, coherent proposals. Their mandates and penalties are arbitrary inventions.
        • 2.1.3.2) Forcing drastic change on a divided public maximizes conflict, stirs angry protests and increases political polarization[17].
        • 2.1.3.3) It’s the politics, stupid! So-called responsible ‘moderates’ like Mary Landrieu fret about the cost of the program until they get their share of the pork[18].

    • 2.2) It raises costs and risks to business, aggravating unemployment and inflation.
      • 2.2.1) Forcing employers to offer coverage that satisfies Washington is a manifest strain on those firm’s financial health. That can’t make it easier to hire more workers. 2.2.2) Unemployment is the crisis the government should be focussed on relieving as the priority before health care.
        • 2.2.1.1) Consumers will pay higher prices (and taxes) for the products of businesses who were compelled not by their customers but by the government to act ‘correctly’.
        • 2.2.1.2) When a business is faced with rising costs, it must become more efficient, raise prices or get out of part or all of its markets.
        • 2.2.1.3) How much sense does it make to beat up ‘greedy’ businesses that succeed and earn profits, then turn aroung to bail out the poor ones that are ‘too big to fail’?
      • 2.2.2) Unemployment is the crisis the government should be focussed on relieving as the priority before health care.
        • 2.2.2.1) With 10+% unemployment nationally and 12+% in California, you would think the federal government would be able to figure out its priorities better.
        • 2.2.2.2) Nothing makes it harder to obtain health insurance than the loss of one’s job. Fix unemployment and you solve the problem of the uninsured population.
        • 2.2.2.3) Labor is an economic good with a price. Right now the price (and risk) is too high. Government must focus on policies that make it easier, cheaper and less risky to hire.
      • 2.2.3) Monetary and fiscal fiddling and meddling have resulted in the worst economic recession in 50 years. Don’t give us more of the same in health care!
        • 2.2.3.1) Manipulating interest rates and guaranteeing unsound risk gave us the credit crisis. Manipulating actuarial calculations will destroy health insurance just as surely.
        • 2.2.3.2) Read The Housing Boom and Bust by Thomas Sowell, then tell us that we need the federal government to run health care.
        • 2.2.3.3) Cutting income and capital-gains tax rates permanently would be more stimulative to employment and the economy overall than any government spending plan.

    • 2.3) It creates the mother of all budget deficits and social conflict as far as the eye can see and beyond.
      • 2.3.1) Honest supporters of the bill admit that it’s a huge open-ended commitment that will NOT be self-financing work out exactly as planned. John Cassidy, The New Yorker, November 4, 2009[12][13]
        • 2.3.1.1) “There are no provisions to substantively control the growth of costs or raise the quality of care” – Jeffrey S. Flier, Dean of Harvard Medical School[15]
        • 2.3.1.2) Sections 2521 and 2533 of H.R. 3962 establish racial and ethnic preferences in awarding grants for training nurses and other vocational programs.
        • 2.3.1.3) It would actually HELP Obama’s chances of re-election in 2012 if the health care bill fails.[19] Political failure that spares the worst economic damage is better than the alternative.
      • 2.3.2) How many failed stimulus packages does it take to discredit an economic theory or an administration’s competence?
        • 2.3.2.1) This program hasn’t even yet passed, yet the Obama administration’s MONTHLY budget deficit is already greater than G.W. Bush’s for an entire YEAR.
        • 2.3.2.2) As practiced by Congress, Keynesianism claims that money spent by government multiplies economic benefit. Yeah, right!
        • 2.3.2.3) What isn’t seen is what gets destroyed by separating capital from its original producers. How many jobs were lost to create the ‘stimulus’ job?[20]
      • 2.3.3) The illegal immigration problem will explode, with fraud, abuse, and social unrest. If you want responsible immigration reform and domestic peace, this isn’t the way to achieve it.
        • 2.3.3.1) European countries[1][16] that have large numbers of immigrants on the public dole have social problems MUCH worse than we have YET seen in America.
        • 2.3.3.2) The unemployment rate among immigrant youth in Paris is 40%. Every year, rioters burn 500 cars.
        • 2.3.3.3) Open borders have to be conditioned on capitalist principles, not invitations to suckle benefits from the host society.

  • 3. Third, because it won’t work.
    • 3.1) It takes private medical decisions out of the hands of patients, families and doctors, and assigns them to Washington bureacrats and committees. The latter are neither wiser nor more caring.
      • 3.1.1) It’s already happening. Check out the Medicare Commision with its 15 members appointed by the president, with powers to dictate what is covered and how it will be paid for.
        • 3.1.1.1) Recently the US Preventative Services Task force changed recommendations on mammograms, saying women under 50 don’t need them[23]. ‘Recommendations’ have a way of becoming rules.
        • 3.1.1.2) What would the Democrats, CNN and MSNBC have said if George W Bush had proposed that?
        • 3.1.1.3) Even if politicians were the wisest among us, there’s still too much data and too many variables for them to keep track of between campaign stops, press conferences and photo-ops.[32]
      • 3.1.2) Do you know what the Office of Management and Budget is? That’s YOUR new health insurance company.
        • 3.1.2.1) Who should get medical care? Whose life is worth saving? Who should decide? Ezekiel Emmanuel (health adviser to President Obama and brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel)?[24]
        • 3.1.2.2) Which advice is better for women--a US Dept of Health and Human Services (HHS) panel of medical experts, or the Secretary of the same? Their statements contradict each other.[28]
        • 3.1.2.3) The British National Health Service is the biggest employer not just in the United Kingdom, but in the whole of Europe. Care to estimate the size and budget of a U.S. health bureaucracy?[33]
      • 3.1.3) The more government controls choices, wages and prices, the less information is available in the market to guide their wise and benevolent decisions.
        • 3.1.3.1) The government program can’t function if for-profit players are allowed to ‘poach customers’, so private practice and firms will eventually be outlawed.[25]
        • 3.1.3.2) The House bill gives the HHS task force the mandate to review "the benefits, effectiveness, appropriateness, and costs of clinical preventive services" in making its de facto insurance coverage rulings[29].
        • 3.1.3.3) The founders designed our Consititution knowing that no nation would ever be governed by angels. That’s why we have separation of powers and minimal concentration at the center.

    • 3.2) Wage and price controls aggravate shortages, raise costs and stifle innovation.
      • 3.2.1) Sneak preview: New York State. Cost of HMO plan for family with children: $39,000.
        • 3.2.1.1) The whole concept of insurance as a low-cost pooling of risk for unlikely but catastrophic events has already been completely overwhelmed and perverted by excessive regulation and mandates.
        • 3.2.1.2) Socialized medicine has not improved health or general welfare anywhere that it has been tried.
        • 3.2.1.3) They couldn’t even deliver the H1N1 vaccine on time and under budget. And we want to trust them with the whole massive, complex system? Why?
      • 3.2.2) Washington’s hostility to profit is already discouraging qualified people from entering the medical field and investors from taking risks.
        • 3.2.2.1) We are facing shortages of doctors and other medical professionals – 125,000 by 2025 according to the Association of Medical Colleges[26].
        • 3.2.2.2) But who wants to risk years of study and hundreds of thousands of debt only to become a bureacrat’s peon[30]?
        • 3.2.2.3) Price controls cause shortages. That’s Econ 101.
      • 3.2.3) If risk takers are not compensated when they lose, but punished when they succeed, they’ll stick their money into a mattress or buy gold. Forget about investing in uncertain quests for miracle drugs.
        • 3.2.3.1) It costs over a billion dollars to bring a new drug to the market. Who’s going to pony up that dough when private investors flee? You?
        • 3.2.3.2) The politicians yell ‘greed’ (and you cheer the politicians) when the pharmaceutical companies actually attempt to recoup their costs.
        • 3.2.3.3) Where are the next miracle drugs to come from, if not research and development? That requires willing investors and risk-takers.

    • 3.3) It’s Socialism by definition (no matter how much the anti-capitalist sponsors try to deny it): a government takeover. Socialism has been demonstrated over and over again to be a failure. It won't work because it can't.
      • 3.3.1) There’s a reason HillaryCare failed in 1994. Americans read the bill and understood its abolition of private medical practice and takeover of 1/6 of the economy.
        • 3.3.1.1) Socialized care was ‘invented’[27] by Otto von Bismarck of Germany in the 1880’s and made a constitutional right in the Soviet Union in 1918. There’s nothing new under the sun.
        • 3.3.1.2) 78% of AIDS vicitms in Russia contracted the virus through dirty needles or HIV-tainted blood in the state-run hospitals[31]. Great track record.
        • 3.3.1.3) Socialists in America have been trying to implement it here ever since, but Germany and Russia have never been the model for US to follow.
      • 3.3.2) The most prosperous, secure, and healthy peoples of the world are those that live in liberty, with the least government intrusion, low taxes and free markets.
        • 3.3.2.1) Government is an armed agency whose proper role is the prevention and punishment of murder, assault, robbery, fraud, theft, rape, persecution and conspiracy.
        • 3.3.2.2) If government would stick to its own role, then voluntary cooperation among patients, families, private insurance companies and dedicated medical professionals will take care of the rest.
        • 3.3.2.3) Advocates of sociialized medicine in the United States use Soviet propaganda methods to achieve their goals. See Michael Moore’s ‘Sicko’. Then again, don’t.
      • 3.3.3) Pop Quiz: Socialism has been definitively debunked since:


        A: 1989?

        B: 1961?

        Correct answer is


        C: 1922.
        or maybe D: 1620
        • 3.3.3.1) There’s a reason the Berlin Wall fell in 1989. Totalitarianism could not compete with liberty. Socialized health care is a totalitarian animal. It tolerates nothing it does not control within its reach.
        • 3.3.3.2) The building of the Berlin Wall in the first place in 1961 was a manifest admission that socialism is a prison for its citizens.
        • 3.3.3.3) Ludwig von Mises explained in 1922 why the socialist ideal is impossible and MUST FAIL everywhere it is tried. Read: Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis.





References, Notes and Sources


[1] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013004574517961189341646.html


[2] http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/24/obama-pushes-national-health-care-americans-happy-coverage/


[3] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704204304574545814221561286.html


[4] http://www.hsainsider.com/


[5] http://www.defendyourhealthcare.us/images/Why_U.S._gives_hope_to_breast_cancer_patients_10-29-09_.pdf


[6] http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/244716/Study_UK_Health_Care_Flawed_Canadian_Wait_Times_Highest_and_Dutch_Care_Scores_Best


[7] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3749801.stm


[8] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704335904574495131591949574.html


[9] http://townhall.com/columnists/CharlesKrauthammer/2009/11/27/kill_the_bills_do_health_reform_right?page=full&comments=true


[10] http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=86044656


[11] http://www.gop.gov/solutions/healthcare


[12] http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2009/11/some-vaguely-heretical-thoughts-on-health-care-reform.html


[13] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704795604574522680235765894.html


[14] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704795604574519671055918380.html


[15] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539581994054014.html


[16] The author lived 4 years in France, 3 in majority-immigrant neighborhoods.


[17] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703932904574511263515975366.html


[18] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704888404574550012759377786.html


[19] http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryElder/2009/11/19/senate,_help_your_president_--_deep-six_obamacare!?page=full&comments=true


[20] See That Which is Seen, and That Which is Not Seen, by Friedrich Bastiat, 1850.
http://bastiat.org/en/twisatwins.html


[21] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703792304574504020025055040.html


[22] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574527493169603118.html
(written by a Democrat)


[23] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704204304574543721253688720.html


[24] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html


[25] http://www.thefreelibrary.com/_/print/PrintArticle.aspx?id=99491045


[26] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703574604574499423536935290.html


[27] Much the same way that Al Gore ‘invented’ the Internet.


[28] http://townhall.com/columnists/KenBlackwell/2009/11/26/politicizing_medicine,_medicalizing_politics?page=full&comments=true


[29] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704779704574552320222125990.html


[30] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574525903492235572.html


[31] The Lesson of Soviet Medicine, by Yuri N. Maltsev, Free Market vol 27 no. 10, Oct 2009 published by the Mises Instititute www.mises.org


[32] And voting ‘present’.


[33] http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWVkNTBjM2M1NzFhZmY0ZWNjODc5ZWY3YWIwYzE0ZWQ=


See: The WSJ Guide to ObamaCare
Labels: , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)