Wednesday, April 02, 2014

Pro-ObamaCare arguments grow weaker, more shrill

The Economist has a new article promoting ObamaCare in Kentucky. It starts with a rehashing of Yahoo's assessment that it is "wildly successful," but just as the article builds to an exciting conclusion to the question of why all this government activism is so unpopular here, it instead reverts to the old claim that you just want poor people to die.

And this is significant because if they had anything better now would definitely be the time to use it.

From the article:
"Can't afford," here, is a euphemism. If, as Mr Benvenuti says, Kentucky "can't pay for" a 10% contribution towards Medicaid for its poorer citizens, it is because he believes the state's wealthier taxpayers don't want to pay for it. To warn of "creating dependency" is to pretend that there is some other way to make it possible for poor people to get decent health-insurance coverage. But there is no other way, as America's health-insurance system has proven. (emphasis added) Obamacare has given people who fundamentally don't want to have to pay for universal health insurance a word on which to focus their disgust. They need not acknowledge that they would simply prefer for many people to go without healthcare. (emphasis added)

As we have attempted to keep the focus on Governor Steve Beshear's illegal actions to force Kentucky into ObamaCare, we have clarified the issue well enough that no one in Frankfort had the nerve to seriously try to make his actions legal. They now have little choice but to pretend that healthcare in America has never worked. The truth is that government bureaucratic involvement has driven costs into the stratosphere just as technological advances and a competitive marketplace could have lowered them.  And government bureaucrats have no effective tools to lower costs now except rationing services or getting out of the way. And they really don't want to get out of the way, lest everyone realize we don't need them at all.

So they accuse us of wanting to deny poor people health care just as their preferred approach creates denial of services to more people regardless of their economic status. That's socialized equality we should all know enough to continue resisting forever.