Socialized Health Care

President Obama is trying hard to push his economic recovery package. He could take a lesson from President Ronald Reagan, who came into office in an even deeper recession and lowered taxes and cut government spending, and the country got much better within two years.

Obama’s role model for his plan, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, spent federal money, raised taxes, and over-regulated industries, effectively lengthening the Great Depression by seven years. This plan, however, isn’t about recovery. It is about getting as many Americans dependent upon the government as possible. He aims to create “infrastructure jobs” that will build roads, fix bridges, and upgrade schools. He’s also going to try and sneak in Socialized Health Care.

From Fox News:

There is heavy emphasis on public works projects, which have lagged as state budgets contracted. Governors have lobbied Obama to help them patch holes in their budgets, drained by sinking tax revenues and increased need for public assistance such as Medicaid and children’s health insurance. Obama’s plan would increase the federal portion of those programs so no state would have to cut any of the 20 million children whose eligibility is now at risk.

Obama’s plan would also provide health care coverage for 8.5 million people who lose their insurance when they either lose or shift jobs.

Eight and a half million people would be covered under free government health care. Makes you wonder which way they would vote in the future, if they are forced into government welfare.


My next question: How do we pay for all this? Obama promises a 2.1 trillion dollar deficit. For you Obama voters, a deficit means debt. This is what that looks like:

$ 2100000000000

In his first inaugural address, on January 20, 1981, Ronald Reagan said, “You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we’re not bound by that same limitation?”


The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

RSS feed for comments on this post.

3 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. Yeh and you have got >40 million citizens without adequate health care and people using a charity founded to support third world medical aid having to spend 60% of its resources in the US.

    Trying to reduce the number of people without adeqaute health care is not Socialist.

    Oh and by the way the next time you encounter some one who is without health care, and say needs a cataract operation or chemo therapy, whether a universal system is a good thing let me know their answer.

  2. First off, let’s define socialism. A socialist policy is one that is run by the state or collective organization which distributes goods and/or services equally among the masses.

    So, in my opinion, National Health Care is exactly that. The affluent, hard working Americans would be forced to pay for the health care of a few who do not work. It’s a classic example of the government taking from one group and giving to another.

    Let’s not forget that everywhere that universal healthcare has been tried, it has failed. Britain, Canada, France, Germany, and elsewhere. High taxes and long lines for the most basic of services.

    And I doubt that I will be running into someone needing some sort of surgery without health care, but I can tell you that if it were me, and I needed one of those operations, I wouldn’t want to be stuck on dependence of the government. Owing to the state means that they can tell you what to do my friend.

    Thanks for your comment.

  3. I see so the US policy of providing free education at taxpayers expense to all young people under 18 is not a socialist policy?

    Please be aware of the facts regarding European healthcare policies systems and performance. They have not failed actually.

    1. Much of European healthcare provision is based on an insurance system very simlar to the US. The UK is one of the few which is wholly taxpayer funded.

    2. There are not long lines for the most basic of services. Example my son got Legionnaires Disease and Pneumonia. Saw local doctor in 30 minutes – hospital in 1 hour – out of hospital 1 week later sorted out. Cost to family zero, form filling = name and address.

    3. The cost of most European healthcare systems as % GDP is lower than the US and on many measures performance is superior.

    4. The big issue with European healthcare is that no one is left behind, everyone has similar levels of provision.

    Sure all countries debate their healthcare provision and there are huge issues in Europe just as you have with the US. Sure if you asked many European groups about their healthcare provision you would find that they want a better system. Actually you would get the same in the US.

    This basically comes down to a philosophical debate about do you wish to have a form of society where you can have groups which cannot obtain some key form of resource because of their financial status. In the US you say thats OK for healthcare but not for education. In Europe its both. Note in South Africa the Black government makes the Black population pay for the education of their children – why? because if its free much of the neighbouring states populations would migrate there. Sometimes its pragmatism.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: