Monday, March 22, 2010

We shall overcome?

Pardon me if I did not appreciate Nancy Pelosi and the triumphant democrats linking arms and proclaiming health care insurance "reform" as the new civil rights bill. I saw it just the opposite. Instead of liberating millions of fellow Americans from the shackles imposed by the majority, health care "reform" enslaves millions of Americans to the shackles imposed by the democrats in the congress. This is the opposite of what Madison and the founding fathers envisioned. They created a republican form of government with a senate to protect us from the tyranny of the majority. Freedom is not mandating that all Americans purchase a specific good - whether they need it or not - or else the IRS will visit you and the government will garnish your wages. Freedom is not the reduction of choice while forcing you into the arms of the government. Freedom is not limiting access to new drugs and procedures because they cost too much. But go look at medicare, medicaid and the VA and see that their choices and access are limited. Freedom is not driving private businesses out of business because of the imposition of costs. Yet this is what mandating covering preexisting conditions without raising the costs of premiums. Remember that insurance makes sense because you pay in premiums to be used in case you need them. It is not just showing up and saying "pay me even though I haven't paid in any premiums". That drives companies out of business. And because the democrats and particularly the president hate profits - hence the railing at obscene insurance companies profits even though they are low by any standards - they welcome the government takeover. Yet everywhere the government operates a business it does it at a loss and do it inefficiently as well. Margaret Thatcher said that socialism dies because if runs out of the people's money to spend. Well on the way, this government is going to set Americans against Americans. It will have this monster paid for by taxing only one group of its citizens not all. It has one group taxed to provide handouts to the others. One reason why the congressional black caucus with the exception of Artur Davis of Alabama and why the hispanic caucus voted for the bill is that they think their constituents in the main will be on the receiving end for the handouts rather than on the paying end. This will then start the country moving backwards to a racial/ethnic divide. We have made enormous progress but if the result of this legislation is to cast blacks and latinos as those with their hands out and whites as those who are paying for it (even though more whites will be on the receiving end) the those ugly racial/ethic divisions will once again divide us. Such will be tragic since the division should be those who take away our freedoms and enslave all of us versus all of the rest of us who love freedom.


John in KY said...

With this health care mess that just passed, the dems claimed that it would cut the deficit by 138 B the first 10 yrs. and 1.2T the next ten years. I thought that sounded fishy so I looked up the CBO preliminary estimate that they referred to. The report never mentioned 1.2T directly but said that it could cut the deficit by an amount around the range of .5% GDP. Now I did the math, and I came up with this. We are at about 14.5T GDP now. We would have to reach 20T GDP by 2020- the beginning of the second decade - and reach 28T by 2030, to average 24T for the whole second decade (1.2T = 24T x 10years x .5%). This would mean that we would need to grow GDP by 40% per decade from now until 2030. My question is, is this a reasonable number (a)historically and (b) given that we have free trade with China? I don't think our GDP will grow that fast unless it is due to inflation of the dollar.

H.A. Black said...

John, Grow rates like that are not sustainable and are not achievable either given all the new taxes embodied in the health care plan. I heard an interview with the owner of a medical imaging firm who said his first order of business would be to fire 24 people so he could get beneath the size threshold. He also mentioned that if he did not the new taxes would exceed his profitability and put him out of business.