Let's say the grim scenario is the one, among the possibilities for what happens after early November, that becomes reality. Let's say it's some time in, say, early 2014, and you come down with a serious illness. Say you look at how much money you have access to with which you can address it: direct government help, insurance claims, and your very own money. Say you use all those resources and you still need a bit more. You and your loved ones sit down and the kitchen table and come up with some more of your very own money to put toward the situation. How are you going to feel about a government bureaucrat - who, let us not forget, may be a smiley-faced, narrow-shouldered little dweeb, but who has the full backing of the armed force at the core of government's power - telling you, "Sorry, but that would put you over the limit for what you can spend on your situation"?
That, in the name of "fairness," is exactly what Ezekiel Emanuel, Donald Berwick, and Peter Orzag are recommending in a New England Journal of Medicine article.
That's because, as Paul Hsei at PJ Media points out, if the state controls some sector of economic activity, it has to treat it as if it were a finite pie. When people are economically free, inventiveness and innovation keep the pie expanding. But the pointy-heads can't have that in their quest to turn us into a nation of cattle.
No comments:
Post a Comment