Diary

Real Consequences of Health Bill

A disturbing poll was released recently by the venerable and respected New England Journal of Medicine. Conducted by a firm called Medicus, it showed that a huge percentage of doctors believe that the Obama health-care bill is bad for medicine and will induce them to leave their profession.

 

In that poll, 29.2% of the nearly 1,200 doctors surveyed said they would quit the profession or retire early if health reform legislation becomes law. That number jumps to a whopping 45.7% if the “public option” is included.

 

The survey also showed that 63% of doctors would not recommend medicine as a career if health-care reform passes while 46.3% of primary-care physicians said that they would either want to leave medicine or that they would be “forced out” by an Obama Care type of system. 

 

Phew! Forget everything else, friends, particularly the phony, lowball CBO score that the bill is going to cost $940 billion over ten years. Because the Law of Supply and Demand tells you that if you reduce the supply of doctors – by almost half in some cases, with hundreds of thousands discouraged from pursuing medicine in future decades – that the cost for medical care is going to spike and quality is going to plummet.

 

Yet the Obama Care bill is supposed to address rising costs, not fuel them. This survey should stop Obama Care in its tracks.

 

So what are we to make of legislation that drives doctors out of a profession that they have chosen to fulfill a desire to serve their fellow man? In other words, what the hell is going on here?

 

How about this – that every single time that the government says it is going to “solve” a problem, it always makes the problem worse for the majority of people, while improving the situation for a minority. And that liberals don’t care how much disruption their policies cause. Because they are only interested in increasing their power.

 

Think about it. The Obama Care bill is supposed to lower health costs and reduce the deficit. Ultimately it will do the opposite. Because government legislation never takes into account what are called “unintended consequences” like a mass exodus from medicine. Where is that “unintended consequence” mentioned in the 2,409 pages of legislation?

 

It is not. It never is. Because it is not exposed until it happens. Except that smart people can see it. 

 

Think about other entities like public education. Imagine that K through 12 education in America was all private, and that we were debating today whether to create a public education system. What would liberals be saying?

 

They would say that the public system will include everyone, and all students finally will get a shot at a good education.

 

And what do we know to be the facts about today’s public education?

 

That it is an awful system, that only about one-third of all students reach graduation with enough knowledge and skills to move on and contribute significantly to the world, that tens of millions have been left behind. And that alternative systems like private, religious and charter schools do a much better job of educating kids.

 

In Washington, DC – where the public schools are horrible – the Republicans in Congress actually established a federal scholarship program for 1,700 poor kids to attend private, religious and charter schools. Those kids were thriving in those schools. Yet the Democrats, under pressure from their cronies in the teacher unions, killed the scholarships because liberals do not want poor kids seeing a bright future in private or religious schools. That would have been an “intended consequence” and a predicted outcome of the conservative approach, also known as “success”. 

 

Look at the Post Office. Today it is a debt-ridden, sluggish, inefficient, bureaucratic monster run under ridiculous government and unions rules. It literally is a joke. People who work for the Post Office are considered laggards and dopes.

 

Meanwhile private  companies like FedEx do a much better job at much lower cost. FedEx just announced a high profit despite the recession. Yet if the mail delivery system were all private today like FedEx, proponents of a Post Office would be telling us how wonderful a Post Office would be while never predicting the “unintended consequences” of a huge, lumbering bureaucracy, like higher rates and poor service.

 

How about Social Security? Libs tell us over and over that Americans are thrilled with Social Security. Yet they do not tell you the actual numbers – that the original debit to each worker’s paycheck in the 1935 legislation was 2% total (1% paid by the employee plus 1% paid by the employer) of the first $3,000, but that today it is 12.4% of your whole check.

 

Yes, 6.2 times the debit of much more money. That would be like gasoline costing $20 a gallon.

 

And don’t believe the liberals who tell you that you, the employee, today only pay 6.2% Social Security out of your check and that your employer ‘matches’ your contribution and gives the other 6.2%. That is nonsense. The whole 12.4% is accounted for in your wage rate ahead of time. You pay ALL of it.

 

And today, after only 70 years of payouts – the first Social Security check was issued in 1940 – and after huge spikes in taxes since the system was founded, SS is flat broke. They never tell you that Social Security is a huge Madoff Scheme built on money coming in one door and going out the other. And that the number of people collecting SS has been increasing faster than the huge increases in taxes can keep up with. And that the system is running on empty. Now. In 2010. And that all this is an “unintended consequence” of changing demographics and increasing lifespans. No, that information was never included in the original legislation.

 

So what do liberals now say to us conservatives about Social Security?

 

Well, if you haven’t heard it yet, you will soon now that the account is empty. They angrily charge: “Well, if you’re such a right-winger, then why don’t you just turn in your Social Security card! Try living without it!”

 

And we conservatives are supposed to say, “Yeah, right. We don’t take money from the government! Here’s my card!”

 

Which is what the libs want us to say. Which is a trick. What we really need to say is, “We will turn in our Social Security cards when you give us back all the money, with interest, that we have been forced to pay into the Social Security system.”

 

That always shuts them up. Because it represents the truth.

 

No, liberal ‘progressives’ always have a trap set for us with their big-government agenda, and they use manipulative and deceptive language to ensnare us. And they never will tell us the full story including the crucial and ever-present “unintended consequences” of their actions.

 

Please visit my website at www.nikitas3.com for more. You can print out for free my book, Right Is Right, which explains why only conservatism can maintain our freedom and prosperity.