We’ve built an entire health care system (maybe an entire government) on the illusion of something for nothing. Instead of tackling that basic logic, we’ve got a reform process that is trying to evade it.
This would be bad enough in normal times. But the country is already careening toward fiscal ruin. We’ve already passed a nearly $800 billion stimulus package. The public debt is already projected to double over the next 10 years.
Health care reform is important, but it is not worth bankrupting the country over. If this process goes as it has been going ”” with grand rhetoric and superficial cost containment ”” then we will be far better off killing this effort and starting over in a few years. Maybe then there will be leaders willing to look at the options staring them in the face.
But how can you trust the CBO. They are the ones who said President Bush’s Tax Cuts would result in huge deficits.
1, and they were right. It’s just that Obama has improved on it.
[blockquote]We’ve built an entire health care system (maybe an entire government) on the illusion of something for nothing. Instead of tackling that basic logic, we’ve got a reform process that is trying to evade it.[/blockquote]
This is the money quote. It’s this mentality, which we all share now to some degree, which is going to destroy us. It also allows politicians to get elected and re-elected. We are going to have to learn to be a poorer and fiscaly prudent country. We are going to have to relearn to live within our means. And we are going to have to learn to give up what we want so that we can have what we need.
We have allowed, even encouraged, our elected governments to work on the premise that so long as there are checks left in our national check book we must certainly still have money. Politicians are greatly encouraged by this mindset. It gives them carte blanche to use the phony checks to buy votes. Until we recognize that politicians (like baby’s diapers) should both be changed regularly (and for the same reason) we will continue to travel merrily along our road to Hell paved with good intentions.
Brooks is correct – to a degree. What I find hypocritical is that the only time these grand arguments are raised is when programs are proposed to deal with corrupt systems that leave large numbers of (hard-working) people exposed to catastrophe. Where were Mr. Brooks and others when Mr. Bush and those whom his government were to regulate were enhancing the wealth of a very few by actions which have caused the collapse of our economic system. Yeah, I know, It’s all those poor folk who want something for nothing who are responsible – an argument invariably made by people who’ve never had to worry about a meal or health care or fine private schools for their children. I’d pay a little more attention if I heard Brooks’ argument made by a man trying to support his wife and children (why isn’t she working – why are they having children) at a $10/hour job (he ought to be grateful – he’s making more than the minimum wage) with no health coverage for his family, and threatened time and again with lay-offs. I suspect I won’t hear that argument from him Meanwhile, Brooks will appear on various TV programs, attired in his nicely tailored suits, having been driven to the studio in a limo from his expensive condo, and deliver his solution to the problem: don’t deal with it, it will cause me financial distress.
4, the Republicans tried to out do the Democrats and you are right to call them on it. They wanted to get elected and you get elected by giving the people what they want, ie. large quantities of money. You don’t get elected by getting people addicted to the public trough and then cutting back on what you put into it.
But that’s Ok. Let’s spend with abandon until the country collapses.
Can someone point out for me where the Constitution allows the federal government to do this?
You think this is bad, wait until we, the American Taxpayers, get the bill for the ‘cap and trade’ tax legislation being railroaded through Congress this week.