ObamaCare in One Easy Lesson
Politics
| July 16, 2009
| Tim
Via InstaPundit:
"I'm Barack Obama, and I favor more competition in health insurance." [....] It will come as a surprise to private health insurance providers that they have not had to compete up till now. Nationally, there are some 1,300 companies battling for customers. [source]
If he wants the government to get into the health insurance industry, Obama has three options:
1. He can offer health insurance plans that are more expensive than the prevailing rate among these 1,300 companies. If so, almost nobody will buy the government plan, and he won't be significantly increasing competition.
2. He can offer plans which are just about the same as the going rate. In this case, he will attract just about as much business as the others. So the number of similar insurers will increase from about 1,300 to 1,301, also meaning no significant change in competition.
3. He can use taxpayer money to artificially lower the cost of the insurance offered, and charge much less than a normal company, which can't take money from taxpayers. If so, in the short term, US employers will have to switch to Obama's plan, since if they don't, their costs will be higher than their competition, who might have done so. In the long term, this will drive other companies out of the market, meaning much less competition.
So there you have it, three possibilities resulting in almost no change, almost no change, and less competition. There is no third option: he's either lying to you a little (if he intends #1 or #2) or he's lying to you a lot. I sincerely wish that weren't true, but it is.
Further, in scenario #3, once most private plans have been removed from the marketplace, the Federal government will be in a position to consolidate its control over healthcare, and dictate what treatments people can and can't receive, from who. Many critics are concerned, in fact, this is Obama's ultimate intent — he and Congressional Democrats have certainly been speaking lately like they will soon have the power to control many people's healthcare choices.
Tim,
Building the Tower of Babel reminds me of the current administrations aspirations. The idea that "Man can build anything" can and will have consquences - some intended, and many unintended. The discussion I think should be how much destruction in the economy is really desired by the current administration? I suppose my bias is on parade in that question, but I sincerely think there is sinister motivations in the many initiatives being enacted. My two cents. YMMV.
Don
Don!
The idea that "Man can build anything" can and will have consquences...
Interesting analogy -- why the tower of Babel? I tend to think more of 1 Samuel 8 (I think) where Israel rejects God and instead desires a powerful human leader — who, God warns them, will take the best of everything they have.
I guess its the resurrection of the 'progressive' belief that, with enlightened minds controlling the government, we'll be able to 'engineer almost anything:
Progressives’ infatuation was characterized by a blind, unquestioning faith in “scientific” management and social engineering. The individual citizen, they thought, was incapable of directing his own affairs, either to his own good, or to the well-being of the National State. Hence the thesis of Herbert Croly in "The Promise of American Life" (1909) and Walter Lippmann in his "A Preface to Politics" (1914) that America’s competitive position in the world required putting affairs of state into the hands of trained managers and scientists, under a strong leader.
I sincerely think there is sinister motivations in the many initiatives being enacted.
Well, one thing that is sure, there are certainly nefarious means afoot, whatever the underlying motive. (By which I mean the incessant dishonesty, broken promises, doing everything in the back corner without letting those governed evaluate it first, etc.)
Does Obama love this nation and wish to help? I do believe he was sincere when he said that he thought maybe he could inspire poor black kids to set their sights high.
But on the other hand, do we have any serious question that Jeremiah Wright hates the USA? None if you've heard much of what he's said. And how about Ayers and Dorn? They make Wright look like a star-spangled patriot. (They expected and planned, if they gained power, to murder about 25 million [see video] Americans.) I would bet, to lesser degree certainly, most of Obama's Hyde Park academic associates also feel America has been a force, on the who, for oppression. And what about ACORN, who Obama has served and helped organize? They usually take a Wright-like line.
So, whatever his inner motive, his friends don't seem to like America-as-it-is (what does "Change" mean, anyway?), and seem to want to replace it with something else, something you and I would certainly consider evil, however they view it. I mean, seriously, how could you like America and most Americans and cozy up to all of that?
The comment rules will apply. Please post only once.
« Sotomayor is Deeply Offensive |
Front Page |
Page Two
| John Cougar: Free Speech for Me, Not You »
|
Tim,
Building the Tower of Babel reminds me of the current administrations aspirations. The idea that "Man can build anything" can and will have consquences - some intended, and many unintended. The discussion I think should be how much destruction in the economy is really desired by the current administration? I suppose my bias is on parade in that question, but I sincerely think there is sinister motivations in the many initiatives being enacted. My two cents. YMMV.
Don
Posted by: Don on July 17, 2009 02:54 PM