HOME
Pictures
Videos
Rants/Humor
Other units of the Lewis media empire!
Comment Log
|
|
Why Health Care "Reform" was a Colossal Blunder |
|
How do I hate thee, health care “reform”? Let me count the ways:
Fourth way: Haven't you noticed some inherent characteristics of government? Sometimes I get the feeling that the big government advocates look at Washington DC as being stuffed with steely-eyed, square-jawed unelected straight-shooters whose passion in life is to Do The Right Thing. Since many of their pet agendas seem to depend on that assumption, big government types act as though this is true, whether they actually believe it or not. I tend to fall into the same trap: thinking that if such-and-such is the policy, then that is what will be done. Or, if the law says such-and-such, that is what will come to pass. Or if a policy has a certain INTENT, then the actions of bureaucrats will conform to that intent. But it just ain't so. Two examples: 1. Have you heard of RICO? It's a law that helps prosecute organized crime by going after mobsters' assets. It's worked pretty well. But some years ago some pro-life protesters were prosectued under RICO. Pro-life mobsters? Huh? Nobody thought they were mobsters. It's just that the prosecutor wanted to get them and the law was available. To use RICO you don't need to prove someone is a mobster first (like there is a legal definition). RICO trusts you will only use it against mobsters. That was the intent. But it isn't the law. 2. I read a rather horrifying account of how a young girl was lured over the internet, kidnapped and ultimately rescued. The cops trying to trace the cyber trail to find her used the Patriot act to obtain the information they needed. Huh? Patriot act? Well, I'm really glad they found her. But let's not kid ourselves: they misused the law to do it. There were no terrorists involved. This kind of thing can't end well. We know how Washington works. Things get done based on who has the best lobbyists or the most vocal political organization, not on what is in the common good. Examples are legion and I hardly think I need to illustrate. It's endemic to big government. If the government can compel the people, then getting the government to do so to your benefit or to suit your agenda is irresistable. Small government was predicated on the idea that people can generally mind their own business and live their lives and do fine. Big government is predicated on the idea that they cannot make their own choices and so "we" have to force them to do the right thing. In actuality, big government functions as a huge machine for transferring wealth and power from the less-connected to the better-connected. This is all done in the name of truth and justice, of course. And generally a little truth and justice trickles through, as a tolerated side-effect. If you kid yourself that only one party is like this, you are clearly delusional. Washington is like this. Government is inherently like this. What am I getting at? Glad you asked. We knw what the stated INTENT of this law is. But we shouldn't be too callow to realize what the actual EFFECT will be. When the government dispenses all the health care, what kind of health care do you think you will get? Will you get the procedure that makes the most sense? Or will there, perhaps, be a guideline that requires using a medical device that's only manufactured by a company with a really clever lobbyist? Will the list of allowed drugs for your condition include the one that works best? Or will that still be undergoing sham clinical trials at the behest of a competitor's lobbyist? I don't really need to ask these questions. Medicare is already like this. The FDA is already like this. No one wants any more of this, do they? You see, if you are paying, or even if your insurer is, there is still some chance that the choices made will involve your own interests. As they should-- it's your health care. But when the government is paying, the very dead last thing that will matter is whether your health care is effective. No one in Washington will receive any personal benefit AT ALL from your health care being cheap and effective. On the other hand, if it is expensive and lousy, a lot of well-connected people stand to benefit. So that's how it will be. Why are all those military bases we don't need still open? Why do we build bridges to nowhere? I mean, the bases aren't useless, and somebody's going to use the bridge sometime. But government programs are essentially 3 parts stupid, 1 part inefficient, and 1 parts whatever the original point was. Don't we all know this? It's it obvious? Isn't it emprical? Resorting to the government to satisfy a need should be akin to gnawing a limb off to get out of a trap: an act of sheer desperation. We should all have realized this long ago. I think the impetus for "reform" is that health care costs too much and accomplishes too little. But we know that getting the government even further into health care will make it cost more and accomplish less. Or will it be different this time, for the first time? |