Dale Steinreich has this article on LewRockwell.com, asserting that the conservatives (of all people) gave us the origins of ObamaDisaster, a.k.a. the “Affordable (sic) Care (sic) Act.” Well, he’s really referring to the more specific early creators of this government-controlled health care, particularly this mandate stuff. But conservatives are statists just as “liberals” are, and statists love mandates, they love telling other people what to do, attempting to control and arrange other people’s lives, and ordering people around.
In the article linked above, Steinreich reminds us of Willard Romney and Hermione Gingrich who love health insurance mandates, but he concentrates on supposedly libertarian proposals for “free-market” health care which are in no way “free-market,” because they are nevertheless designed within the current statist system of ultimate government control over everyone’s medical matters.
Steinreich points to a John Goodman (who blogs at the Independent Institute’s Beacon blog — why, I don’t know). I already have seen Goodman’s posts there mainly on health care and ObamaDisaster for the past year, and I could already see that he was not a libertarian nor a “free-market” advocate.
For example, according to Steinreich, in Goodman’s so-called Health Savings Accounts, he now wants Roth Heath Savings Accounts (RHSAs), which would “combine the RHSAs (holding after-tax dollars and allowing tax-free withdrawals) with fixed-sum tax credits.” And Goodman wants to have “Health insurance retirement accounts (HIRAs) funded by a new 4-percent payroll tax split between workers (2 percent) and employers (2 percent). With the Chilean social security system as a model, the revenue would be invested by ‘private security agencies’ [read: Wall Street].”
Now, I am assuming that Goodman’s proposals are what he wants to see as part of a government law which organizes these things — as an alternative to the Democrats’ DisasterCareless (i.e. “RepublicanCare”) — at least that’s what it sounds like to me. No wonder Goodman’s proposals are endorsed by the Heritage Foundation, the Stato Institute, and the
Weak Standards Weekly Standard.
You see, a real libertarian wouldn’t call for “health insurance retirement accounts funded by a new 4% payroll tax split between workers and employers.” No, first the real libertarian would say that there should be NO payroll tax, period!
And a real libertarian, in my view, would also suggest that individuals should not be dependent on their employers for health insurance. (Just who was it that started this thing with getting employers involved in workers health care or insurance matters? That has contributed to screwing things up royally in the long run.)
And a real libertarian would not be proposing some kind of system for “after-tax dollars,” or “fixed-sum tax credits.” No, the real libertarian advocates that the tax system be abolished root and branch, as it is nothing but theft, and that there should be no government involvement or central planning in anyone’s private medical matters, period.
And no, saying, “Well, since we have this tax system in place, and there’s really nothing we can do about it (Doh!), we might as well put in some kinds of ways for people to afford ‘health care’ such as getting the government to give special credits for this or that, etc, etc, etc.”
Sorry — No. Way.
Libertarians should insist: “Get rid of the damn tax-thefts, for crying out loud!” And keep government bureaucrats out of our private medical matters, period! And then we’ll talk.
Actually, personal responsibility, self-respect and self-care are a part of the libertarian philosophy, as I see it. Thus, part of the real libertarian philosophy should include advocating that people take care of themselves so they can prevent illnesses, so they don’t have to see a “doctor” too often. And yes, emergency or catastrophic situations occur. This may sound harsh, but as long as those situations could occur in the future, it is yet another reason why individuals and families should be encouraged to save and have some sort of emergency fund set aside. And when there is no longer a government stealing from the people, then there would be many more charities around to help those in need. And when there is no longer a government imposing fascist medical regulations for no good reason, then the costs of medical care would crash down.
Jeepers, this medical care stuff really isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, anyway. And when ObamaDisaster turns into SinglePayer and then SovietCare, we will have even less informed and educated “doctors,” as they will be State-loving, Pharma-worshiping government bureaucrats, just as in the Soviet Union. (Ugh, they’re bad enough already now!)
So all these “conservative” (i.e. statist) proposals as alternatives to government medical care are nothing but central planning fantasies being proposed by people who do not understand what a genuine free market is. A genuine free market would exist when there is freedom across the board. No government bureaucrat or legislative central planning whatsoever.
And by the way, if you are interested, Steinreich also wrote this article on 100 years of medical fascism 3 years ago. And Lew Rockwell has some suggestions on what should be done regarding insurance.
And, FYI, I wrote this post (with links to other informative articles) on Dr. Elaina George vs. Kathleen Sebelius.