Nationalizing your body 4

Getting it right and making us laugh again, here is Mark Steyn on nationalizing health care:  

Health care is a game-changer. The permanent game-changer. The pendulum will swing, and one day, despite their best efforts, the Republicans will return to power, and, in the right circumstances, the bailouts and cap-&-trade and Government Motors and much of the rest can be reversed. But the government annexation of health care will prove impossible to roll back. It alters the relationship between the citizen and the state and, once that transformation is effected, you can click your ruby slippers all you want but you’ll never get back to Kansas…

Government-directed health care is a profound assault on the concept of citizenship. It deforms national politics very quickly, and ensures that henceforth elections are always fought on the left’s terms. I find it hard to believe President Obama and his chums haven’t looked at Canada and Europe and concluded that health care is the fastest way to a permanent left-of-center political culture. He doesn’t say that, of course. He says his objective is to “control costs”. Which is the one thing that won’t happen. Even now, health care costs rise far faster under Medicare than in the private sector.

By the way, to accept that argument is to concede a lot of the turf: Why is the cost of my health care Barack Obama’s business? When he mused recently as to whether his dying grandmother had really needed her hip replacement, he gave the game away: Right now, if Gran’ma decides she doesn’t need the hip, that’s her business. Under a government system, it’s the state’s business – and they have to “allocate” “resources”, and frankly at your age your body’s not worth allocating to. Why give you a new hip when you’re getting up there and you’re gonna be kicking the bucket in a year or two or five or twenty?…

Please do yourself the favor of reading the whole thing here

Posted under Commentary, Economics, Health, Humor, United States by Jillian Becker on Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Tagged with ,

This post has 4 comments.

  • Alejandro –

    As a reply to your comment – in addition to roger in florida’s and aeschines’s apt replies – please read our post titled 'An inalienable right to chicken Kiev'.

  • aeschines

    Alejandro – while your compassion is admirable, I find it rather disturbing that you would put your broad definition of “health” over the economy. How exactly are we to pay for “health” (especially in these times) if we trash the economy while trying to establish a health-care system? Who is going to pay for it?

    I think we can safely say that the best way to improve the “health” system we have in this country is by improving the nation's economy. We're going to be much better off if people can take their own healthcare in to their own hands instead of pretending that the government will do it for them. If I have to pay for someone else's family's health as well as my own, how is that going to help my overall health?

    Insofar as people who “can't afford it,” free emergency medical care is available – and you can prevent many health problems by simply exercising and eating right. What more do you want? Do you want to make sure poor people can get collagen and boobjobs too? Knowing most poor people, they would too. Poor people tend to remain poor because of the awful financial decisions they make. I am debt-free (and have a bit of money to spare), but I am still borrowing a car. It's hard sometimes, but I know when I get enough money to purchase my own car, I won't live in debt. Some of my poorer friends have 2-4 cars, motorboats, rock-crawlers, 4-wheelers, and other assorted luxury vehicles, purchasing them on credit or barely making the minimum payments on them.

  • Alejandro

    Despite the cost of a national health-care system, it's important to have one, because, as I've said before, some people can't afford it. One should never put economy above health.

  • roger in florida

    Mr Steyn has this exactly right. However if you wish to see the current “state of play” re: freedom and individual liberty vs State power look no further than GWB's attempt to allow personal private ownership of a minute part of social security accounts. The left demagogued the argument into a battle to “save” social security. The vast majority of the American people were too lazy, or stupid, or fearful to realise what the trick was. The “trick” of course is the same as is being used now to push govt. health care; everybody is being persuaded that they are going to get something for nothing, literally they are being bought with what they perceive to be other people's money. The reality of course is different. Once the national scheme is in it will be impossible to dismantle because the left will be able to scare people into believing that evil right wingers are trying to steal their health care coverage for the benefit of evil corporations.
    The endgame is for an elite group to be the permanent, privileged leaders of a nation of sheep, unfortunately we are already there.