Thursday, April 30, 2009

Health Care and Nationalization


With the dangerous swine flu causing a lot of unrest around the globe, it can be assured that health care will take a front row seat in the minds of the people and the government. As the Obama administration pretends to look for solutions, while masking their true power-trip agenda, they will no doubt continue to push harder and harder for some type of nationalized health care. They will push for said plan by masquerading the idea that health care is a universal right, that it is unacceptable that not every American have access to treatments, doctors, prescriptions, etc... It will sound noble, descent, and desirable. But there is a grave problem with this philosophical notion. Here I attempt to argue against the nationalization of health care on the basis that health care is, quite frankly, not a right. Furthermore, by declaring it as a right and subsequently nationalizing the industry, we end up sacrificing an incredible amount of liberty.Add Image

Some argue that health care should be no different than fire or police departments. Here is the problem. Fire departments and police departments help protect us from situations that are beyond our control, usually caused by the actions or decisions of others. Our rights our violated when a burglar enters our home, and there is little we can do to prevent our neighbors from letting their home go up in flames (and risk having those flames jump over to our property). When it comes to our health, however, much of it has to do with the choices that we make. Of course their are genetic diseases that have very little to do with our own choices, and we all catch the cold every once in a while, but it there is no way to completely diagnose any health related problem as being a function of lifestyle or any other variable.

So we come to fat Albert. Fat Albert wants nothing more than to live out his life eating potato chips, smoking cigs, and downing cheap beer. Is it a lifestyle that he has the right to live? Of course. Is it healthy? Of course not. So what happens when his liver starts failing, he develops lung cancer, and his heart starts giving out? In a free society, with private health care, he must pay the consequences for his own actions. He can either pay for the costs himself, or sadly, die young. The point is that you and I aren't forced to pay for his medical bill.

But if we are to declare that health care is a universal right, than by necessity he should get all the treatment available, at our expense. Bypass surgery, lung and liver transplants, all on our tab. But no one is going to want to do that. It would outrage even the most extreme liberal. So what would happen? We would start being told how to live our lives. Regulations and government interventions would seek to do everything possible to force us to adopt certain, "approved" lifestyles. No longer would we have the freedom to eat potato chips and sit on our couch all day long. Now, don't misunderstand me, I am not praising that type of lifestyle, but I am defending the right to live it if one should decide that it fulfills their pursuit of happiness.

You see, health care is a privilege, not a right. Because it is a privilege, it must be something we work for and the consequences thereof must be our own to endure. Can you even imagine the wreckless abuse that will take place if you convince people that health care is a fundamental right on par with the freedom of speech and religion? Chaos would ensue and American health care would begin a long spiral downwards towards the failure that has become of other countries that have nationalized their own health care industries.

Long lines, overworked doctors, sub-par equipment, and inadequate treatments would only be the beginning. Important decisions regarding treatment would be made by bureaucrats, not doctors. And those who worked hard and who could afford top quality health care? Sure, they would be taxed to high heaven, but they would be ushered to the back of the long lines like everyone else. And that doesn't even begin to describe the enormous deficit increases that would befall an inefficient and irresponsible government trying to manage something that they literally have no idea how to do.

There are no doubt problems with our current health care situation. There are unfortunate tragedies that befall good, hard working individuals who simply cannot afford the right treatments. Health care is too tied up with corporate benefits, and at times even those who can afford it are still denied by unscrupulous health care companies. But nationalization is not the answer. Fortunately, we do have government subsidized health care programs for those who truly need it. Unfortunately, even those programs get abused far too much. In the end, I believe the difference between people believing that health care is a privilege that must be earned and a right that can be abused will make a tremendous difference in the effectiveness of any plan to improve our current situation.

What do you think?


Founding Father quote of the day

As on the one hand, the necessity for borrowing in particular emergencies cannot be doubted, so on the other, it is equally evident that to be able to borrow upon good terms, it is essential that the credit of a nation should be well established.

Alexander Hamilton, Report on Public Credit, January 9, 1790

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Founding Father quote of the day

But a Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.
John Adams, letter to Abigail Adams, July 17, 1775

Friday, April 10, 2009

Liberty and Sacrifice

Why is personal freedom such a big deal? Those of us born in this country have grown up with it our entire lives and sometimes I believe we take it for granted more than almost anything else. It doesn't mean as much to us as it should because we don't understand life without it. I am taking a world history class this semester and my eyes have been open to the incredibly rare treasure that is individual liberty.

The fraction of human beings that have ever enjoyed the liberties that we enjoy in this country is incomprehensibly small. Why is this? Why were so many governments incapable of realizing the prosperity that comes with this freedom? Why?? I think because of one, corrupt and selfish men, and two, that it was literally considered absolutely crazy. History teaches us that governments never trusted their own people. They never believed they were capable of self motivated productivity. Because they are inherently lazy, stupid, and selfish they could never be left to their own devices.

There is a reason why history books sometimes call our country a great experiment. The freedoms we fought for were never before granted in such abundance to any other people to ever have lived. How could such a society possibly survive? Well, as we know, it didn't just survive, it thrived. It became the largest super power the world has ever known. A beacon for hope to all other nations. The promised land. And all of this because of one simple principle- individual liberty.

It is because I value individual liberty so much that I revile liberalism so much. Liberalism seeks to limit our personal freedom, and does so through propaganda and taxation. Most of the time, people don't even realize it. Liberalism believes that adopting a superior moral conscience is more important than preserving individual liberty. The collective is more important than the individual. That is why you are told what you should do all the time by them. Don't turn on the A/C, don't drive SUVs, and don't even think about trying to make too much money. Oh, and of course you are "free" to do whatever you want, but if we don't like what you are doing we will just tax the heck out of it. What kind of liberty is this?

The propaganda machine put in place by our White House seeks to convince us that all of this is done under the noble principle of sacrifice. We have to sacrifice or wants, our lifestyles, and our freedom for the greater good. I reject this. It is as un-American as socialism. It is an insult to our constitution and to our founding fathers. It scares me to death to think about what possible roads this thinking can lead to. No one seems to even flinch when our President roles out the most massive spending plan ever conceived and then tells us that we will need to make sacrifices. Wake up, people!

How is this happening? Because of fear. That is why anyone ever gives up any amount of liberty. We have been successfully convinced that we are incapable of solving our own problems (remember the whole lazy, stupid, and selfish thing?). What choice are we then left with but to surrender our liberty to the The Federal Government so as to save ourselves? From bailouts to regulations to taxation, it all boils down to the principle that Obama and his liberal gang subscribe to and live by- that this country would be better if they had more power and we had less.

I don't think we fully realize the terrible, and actual, sacrifice we are making by surrendering our liberty to them. Forcing people to do what you think is correct is never worth the cost of them losing their liberty. I don't care if you want a Prius, don't drink from plastic water bottles, don't drive SUVs, refuse to participate in capitalism, and want to give all your money to the government. But as soon as you think that I should be forced to do any of those things, either by law or by taxation, then you and I have a serious problem. We are blind to what is happening because we still think of bondage in terms of chains and whips. Yet, unchecked, the type of bondage we are willingly (even gleefully) submitting ourselves to now could lead to much worse. As for me, give me liberty or give me death.

Founding Father quote of the day

Individual liberty is individual power, and as the power of a community is a mass compounded of individual powers, the nation which enjoys the most freedom must necessarily be in proportion to its numbers the most powerful nation.
John Quincy Adams