Response to "On the road to socialism"

I wanted to post the comments made about my article, "On the road to socialism," because the comments that Anonymous made were interesting, and with them I can clarify my position and explain a little more. I also wanted to prove to everyone that people do actually read my blog and care about what I say! As always, I love when people respond, whether to agree or not, because I enjoy hearing the sound of my own voice (or in this case thoughts). I'll insert my rebuttal into their comments.

Anonymous said...

Lincon,
You have a very interesting post and the topic is one near and dear to my heart. Please remember that the things I am about to say are not meant as a personal attack on your beliefs, however it is directly to identify the fallacy of your logic.
1. You refer to SCHIP bill as being "totalitarian." As the name denotes this program is "STATE CHILDREN'S HEALTH INSURANCE." States are not required to participate - totalitarian connotates power through force. Who is forcing your state to participate in the program other than it's constiuents? SCHIP was originally proposed by Ted Kennedy AND Orrin Hatch. States must match funds to participate. U.S. voters elected Obama - who is being forced other than those who DON'T agree with democracy and majority rule?
I'm fine with the original SCHIP because it does work well, but that this recent expansion is unnecessary and excessive. I also don't believe any state would turn down this free money, and I feel it's somewhat totalitarian in that the state can either go bankrupt paying for their state health care costs or take money from the federal gov't and be told how to use it.
2.You use the logical fallacy of "slippery slope," when you state :"This is only the first step. 'Cause the way I see it, providing coverage to 11 million children through CHIP is a down payment on my commitment to cover every single American." Because SCHIP is passed it does not mean Universal Health Care or "socialized" health care will be passed. Because SCHIP is passed it doesn't mean that the constitution will be altered or basic civil rights will be taken. The promotion of the belief that passing a health care subsidy will lead to eventually enslavement of the United States population is pure conservative propaganda and rhetoric. It's the same ideal of McCartheistic politics that has left a festering sore on the constitution.
I've never been compared to McCarthy before, but I don't believe the passing of this one bill leads down the road to socialism, if it were the only signpost. However, teamed with the successive overtaking of various parts of the free market system by the Fed is what leads me to the fear that our current leadership would be happier if gov't was in control of every aspect and capitalism had no part. I hope I am wrong. And by the way, that quote was from Mr. Obama's own mouth as he signed the bill.
3. You speak of the "little economist" inside of you and how it is telling you that SCHIP is not a good idea. According to research done by BYU and Arizona state, removal of SCHIP programs would lead to more expenses because underprivileged individuals would take their children in for emergency care vs. clinical help. The United States currently spends an estimated 15% of the GDP on health care, which is greater than any other country WITH socialized health care. Maybe the little economist just needs bigger ears?
Again, I agree that SCHIP works fine as it is, maybe I should have made that more plain in my original post, but the expansion just signed gives money to families who should be able to afford it. While the number may be 15% now (I've seen papers with higher estimates), in receiving my recent MPH I saw many reports by liberals in favor of socialized medicine that health care expenditures are increasing more rapidly than GDP growth, and at the current rate may surpass total GDP.
4. You state that "Giving everyone health care in lieu of fixing our highways or providing a national defense just doesn't seem right." I missed the part of the SCHIP initiative that said we were no longer engaging in highway repairs or national defense?
I didn't infer that SCHIP will stop those other programs, but if we continue to increase health care spending, than something else has to stop if we are to have a balanced budget, and those were just the most flamboyent examples I though of. I understand that socialized medicine does work fairly well in some countries, but would likely not work here because Americans want everything now and will not wait, and I've also never been impressed with the government's ability to be efficient in any large expenditure.
In conclusion I agree in a non-interventionist policy from government, however Republicans and Democrats alike do not engage in it. Most libertarians in Universal Health Care countries actually prefer it because of the reduction in expenses for individuals.
Research twice, speak once.
Live well

Thursday, February 05, 2009 10:05:00 PM