“Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem.”
Ronald Reagan 1981
“But at this particular moment, with the private sector so weakened by this recession, the federal government is the only entity left with the resources to jolt our economy back into life.”
Obamanation February 9, 2009
1981 to 2009, parallel problems in America, different leaders; diabolically different solutions. Has America changed so much?
I don’t think so. I think that at our heart we still remain a center-right nation. One man and rule doesn’t change this. Our institutions and freedoms have been chipped away at since Reagan, (essentially since the early 1900’s), even under Republican rule. This time, this Obamanation is different. We are witnessing a full-fledged coup d’etat of our government, a constitutional crisis. And all by a man that we know almost nothing about.
Blitzkrieg, Obamanation prize #1. Federal takeover of health care. Costs being a supporting argument to this goal. Health-care costs are high; we have a great system but by-golly those costs are high. Why? Among many things, cost-inflation due to medicare and medicaid. This is not even addressed or discussed today. And if it is, it is not noted or realized that further government entanglement in medicine and the creation of another federal program will not only exacerbate said costs, but actually increase them and lay waste to our precious freedom in medicine, a total federal takeover. I’m not a sucker, are you? Is this the America that you wish to live in, has America changed so much? Read this from Reason in 1993 –
“The cost of Medicare is a good place to begin. At its start, in 1966, Medicare cost $3 billion. The House Ways and Means Committee estimated that Medicare would cost only about $ 12 billion by 1990 (a figure that included an allowance for inflation). This was a supposedly “conservative” estimate. But in 1990 Medicare actually cost $107 billion.”
“This is a mere bagatelle compared with “conservative” projections for the next generation. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Medicare will cost $223 billion by 1997.”
Medicare expenditures in 2008? A double from the 1997 level – $468 billion dollars. Total unfunded liabilities for Medicare and Social Security? Over 100 trillion dollars combined. To solve the solvency of Medicare alone we would need to have a 15% payroll tax, not including Social Security! Can we add another Federal entitlement to our system and further our debt-load on future generations? Smashing economics 101 to bits, Poppycock and utter nonsense. We will bankrupt our beautiful land and fail to do that which all generations have done – to pass on a better future to our children. The basic ending argument is truly that simple.
Argument fodder for those on my side of the health care debate, from Nick over at It’s Just My Opinion.com
- If the government adopted a public plan, which was essentially free, and to pay for it enacted new taxes on private plans, and as a result of that all private plans went away (because they could no longer be competitive), would you be comfortable with that?
- If, in the above scenario, the government also imposed medicare-style payment amounts on the medical care facilities, and as a result no medical care facilities could be profitable, and the only ones remaining government-subsidized entities (universities, etc.), would you be comfortable with that?
- Finally, following the above scenario, if the “below-market” mandated uniform payments for medical services made the medical profession unattractive for smart people, and certainly not worth the work and dedication currently necessary to become doctors, nurses, or medical researchers, and as a result all those jobs either went away, or became performed by minimally-educated government workers with no practical means or incentive to heal anyone, would you be comfortable with that?
- What of those predictable and inevitable eventualities would you seek to avoid, if any, and how? If not any, do you think the rest of the country is aware of the eventual consequences of a public plan, and would accept them as preferable to the current status?
Answers to these basic questions?
New Conservative Generation debunks (brilliantly), several health-care myths and lies put out by the Obamanation –
As ABC and other major media outlets ignore all the problems with Obama’s health plan and blitz American’s with Obama propaganda, I decided to include some immutable facts about his plan. These facts will not change no matter how many speeches Obama makes.
“If you like your health care plan, you can keep it.” A lie from Obama
Wrong. The truth is that you will have no control over whether you can keep your plan. That decision is up to your employer. The OMB estimates, conservatively, that 15 million would lose coverage from their employer. That’s 15 million that had a health care plan that they were able to pay for, but now do not have the private option to do so. I say that it is a conservative estimate because I find it more likely that employers will drop their plans once they start getting taxed for having them.
Read more here, this is a great piece, between Nick’s arguments, my running series, here, here, here, here, here, Red Sucker and New Conservative Generation’s thoughts you now have the ammo necessary to create some shock and awe – a blitzkrieg to stop this madness.
24 comments:
I quit using the term "socialized" or "socialism" as I believe it is a media and academia ploy started in Europe, to sell communism to younger people. Younger people hear SOCIALism and say well, I'm social, I want a society, so socialism sounds okay. Communism still has that old "Bolshevik" ring to it and does not sell nearly as well. It is Communized medicine by a Communist pResident. That doesn't sound as nice does it?
Andrew – I am using a vernacular that I deem necessary although I see your point, the very fact that the term socialist doesn't carry an evil and disgusting connotation to the idiotic youth and moronic left in this country is distubing, shocking and pathetic.
Great post. Inconvenient truth the MSM will continue to ignore.
RK – Indeed
My point to using "Communist" rather than "Socialist" is to me linked to the much bigger picture that over the last 20 years, the Media, Academia, Democrats and Republicans have moved the perceived "center" far to the left. I understand your point too and am not in any ways trying to tell you what to say. I simply want folks to understand why I call so many things Communist.
This was an excellent post by the way, as they usually are here.
Check out my site sometime tomorrow. I'm going to go into an area of this whole healthcare reform debacle that I think is being overlooked.
That's all the info I'm giving (suspense will be unbearable by tomorrow!). It's something I've been thinking about a lot today. Just have to organize my thoughts. Keep up the great work!!!
I actually believe that the nibbling away of our freedoms began with the string of horrible Presidents following Lincoln who oversaw "Reconstruction" in the "postwar" South. D.C was as corrupt in 1870 as it is now which led to the so-called "carpetbaggers" who became "robber-barons" This led to the forming of unions to fight poor working conditions and the rise of so-called "progressivism" or as I call it "Communism." This accelerated after 1900 so we agree there, so it is really just "semantics" or a matter of perspective. Most folks not living in the "south" weren't taught as much about the "reconstruction era". Reagan was really the only non-progressive President we had in the entire 20th Century. I'm not disagreeing with your post in any way, just giving an amateur historian's perspective.
One more compliment, the cartoons you post here are absolutely classic. They really give your blog character.
I actualy work for a health insurance company and there's something Obama isn't bothering to tell you. Surprise, surprise. A very high percentage of large companies actually pay the bills for the their employees. They write the actual benefit plan, determine what will be covered and what will not, and pay the actual medical costs. They simply pay the insurance company to administer the plan. So the cost of the health coverage to the offering company goes WAY beyong the insurance premiums. For some companies, no longer offering health coverage due to a government option could save them billions each year.
So now what is the probability that you will still have employer paid benefits offered to you.
T.J. is absolutely correct and in addition, those corporations will get untold revenues from not having to pay for benefits, plus kickbacks from their favorite politicians. I am all for taxpayers subsidizing huge international corporations, aren't you??? They are truly in great need of money, unlike the American Taxpayer!
Andrew – Thank you and I understand your point on semantics, I wouldn't say that you are an amateur historian, in fact you have a much better grasp than many history professors. Yes, Reagan was the only non-progressive president we have had in the 20th century. Bush was not a conservative. I got these cartoons from IBD, I read it every day, thanks!
Tommi – Great point, Conservative Generation (linked in this post) points to some 15 million folks that now have employer health insurance, will be dropped and switch to government, on top of the uninsured today! Madness!
Rebel, I saw that 15 million but I think it's actually going to be much higher than that.
Thank you for the compliment. Given the range of things that I study and the fact that I am not technically paid for it, I believe that makes me an amateur. Most history professors are simply wrong where it comes to idealism. Then they color history with their political views. I try to separate the two and look at things with the perspective of a referee. I actually have called Bush 43 "left of center" just like his father for many years. I believe Jeb would have been far closer to Reagan then G.W. Having lived in Florida and seen first hand how Jeb did things, I believe it is a shame that he will always be in his Father's and Brother's shadow.
I find it interesting that our perspectives are so similar, yet you live on the "left coast" and I live in S.E. Florida with my family being "traditional southern". Those are very different paths in life to have such similar perspectives.
Andrew – you are a very well read guy (I was goning to say young guy but I'm not sure), and yes, Bush was left of center,I am glad that you realize this, many on our side still don't amazingly. It is spectacular that our perspectives are so similiar, it just goes to show that an active mind will search and discern the truth – what is proper and the way things should be, regardless of locale and local culture (mine being liberal looniness).
Tommi – oops I missed your comment. 15 million, 50 million, they don't care. They just want you on the government dole and they want to strap future generations with 85% confiscatory tax rates. It is enough for a revolt I tell you…..
Great summary post, as usual. 🙂
To Andrew:
I use the term 'socialism' (when I do) because it's the correct context for what I'm trying to say. The difference between socialism and communism is that communism is socialism, with the addition of a particular government and religeous structure. Socialism is only (generally speaking) the process/structure of the government running what could/should otherwise be private enterprises, interfering in private contracts, manipulating markets, and exerting control over private enterprise.
I agree that it's unfortunate that our uninformed youth confuse the two, and/or do not appeciate the malignancies of socialism simply based on the terminology. However, I'm not going to debase my logical analysis to try to appease people who are two dumb or ill-informed to reply with anything other than the semantic equivalent of "nuh-uh" anyway; personal choice.
I'm 36. And have had 2 major concussions so my brain does not exactly work right all the time. The various studies keep me from becoming a vegetable which would happen without exercise. It's rehabbing just like with any other paralyzing injury. Here in S.FL, there is Liberal and Conservative looniness. Rush Limbaugh lives a 15 drive from here. The Cuban community understands Communism well and is very conservative, yet many "New England" Yanks are here and are very liberal so I am in the land of extremes. My family is as I said, "southern traditional conservative" while I personally have far more libertarian leanings.
Nick – Well put, as usual from you :). I think that we are in agreement on 'socialism', are you still working out of town?
Andrew – I'm 33 so we are close in age. Not a huge Rush fan (love the band though) as you will notice I don't talk about him here. Too much of a partisan Repub and inconsistent. He has caught a stride against the Obamanation but I prefer the Becks of the world, I mean come on, Common Sense is a great book, I'm half done BTW. Interesting that you have a mix of Cubans and New England libs there, is your congressman a liberal? Mine is actually a decent GOPer.
Yes My congressman is a flaming snot nosed liberal. WEXLER!!!!!! 1 district north is very conservative. Also farther south are very conservative.
I have been a Beck fan since I first heard him on 9/12/01. That was hands down the best radio show I have ever heard. I actually watched Limbaugh on local T.V. here long before that. I learned about and followed politics since early in life as my parents were Repub fundraisers for Reagan. I finished Common Sense already and am trying to decide who to give it to.
Nick: I made a different argument on you blog but for here I will just say that "socialism" is a form of "communism" so why water down the truth? I can make "intellectual" arguments all day but I am more interested in people thinking for themselves. It is the so-called intellectuals who are pushing the perceived center to the left and I refuse to join in doing so. I speak to and for common people and so I use common terms. I believe and have posted an the blog that I co-host with KOOK, as well as here that our language is being neutered by the so-called intellectuals who are pushing us ever leftward. See my "neutering the language" post that will land on your blog shortly.
An excellent post!!! Reagan was a true conservative president. Bush was conservative in regard to social issues, but otherwise he was a progressive that pushed big govt. on us. This nation has moved from socialism to a push for communism. We must fight hard against this socialized medicine being shoved down our throats. Obama is a liar when he says you won't be forced to change from your private health insurance to his govt. plan. Just like a Democrat, he's playing unfairly because the govt. plan is the only health plan that won't be taxed. Democrats only want a quick fix but GOP is actually trying to figure out a good health plan for the American people. I believe that this is an issue that can revive the Republican Party.
Teresa – Yes, you are smart, and welcome here! I hope that you are right that this issue can revive the GOP, we need to cleanse the scourge of progressivism from the GOP….
Post a Comment