Sowell: There's Still No Free Lunch

[Terri]

By Thomas Sowell
November 5, 2009

One of the strongest talking points of those who want a government-run medical care system is that we simply cannot afford the high and rising costs of medical care under the current system.

First of all, what we can afford has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of producing anything. We will either pay those costs or not get the benefits. Moreover, if we cannot afford the quantity and quality of medical care that we want now, the government has no miraculous way of enabling us to afford it in the future.

If you think the government can lower medical costs by eliminating "waste, fraud and abuse," as some Washington politicians claim, the logical question is: Why haven't they done that already?

More

[bootsn]

another exellent article by Mr. Sowell as usual. I remember well those lines in the seventys. I allso remember the gouging and outright robbery by some of the scumbags who later were forced out of bussines, if those idiots in washington could ever get it in their thick skulls the ambulance chasers are the big problem along with idiotic jury's awarding redicoulus awards to people. TORT REFORM is what we need,

[Charie]

There is no free lunch. As true a statement as it ever was.

The free market will always beat out a "free" government program.

What is all this yelling and screaming about insurance companies making money? It's just another liberal ploy to pit people against companies/corporations.

Insurance companies do have to pay dividends to their stockholders. We receive dividends from our life insurance company and interest on those dividends. I would be very unhappy if they stopped. And, you know what? When we took out the insurance policies many years ago we had the option of buying it from a whole lot of other insurance companies. This was the one who had the best policy for what we either could afford or had the best options for us.

Why don't people think about this instead of haring off after the red herrings dragged out by the Democrats?

Had the government kept out of the insurance/health care business from the beginning it would be a lot cheaper because we can't go to other out of state insurance companies for health care and government interference always encourages corruption and fraud. It cuts your options for choice. The Dems are all for choice so why not choice in health care?

I'll answer my own question. It's not about health care at all. It's about power. The power to control the people of this country! It's the only conclusion I can arrive at.

[antiliberalism]

A well articulated message from Mr. Sowell, and right on point with the current debate.

What we need is not "health care reform", but insurance reform. By this I mean that we need to treat so-called health insurance like it was insurance. Get the government out of the way and let the insurance companies create custom policies that reflect each person's need, priced to reflect their needs, as well. Stop forcing one group to subsidize another (as with health care plans from most - if not all - corporations, where everyone pays the same, and the costs go up for everyone whether they use the benefits or not).

Socialization - be it private or public - is one of the main problems. Moving towards a more socialized structure, adding people, and forcing new regulations of what must be covered onto insurance companies, will cause prices to continue upward, will reduce quality, create long waits for services, and expands upon one of the main problems with health care today... government intervention where it does not belong, Constitutionally or otherwise.

But as someone already said in a previous post, it's not about fixing anything. It's about control. It's as it ever was... government gets involved where it doesn't belong to "solve" a problem; government exacerbates the problem; government decries that the answer is MORE government involvement.

It's like we're stuck on the madness merry-go-round.

[greg]

it's not about fixing anything. It's about control.

It's not about health care at all. It's about power. The power to control the people of this country!

That's the bottom line for all the liberal initiatives, from cap and trade cap and trade to global warming to the antiFairness Doctrine in whatever subtle form, to hate crimes, to shamnesty, to anything Communist, to IslamoFascism, to Genesis 3:5b "you shall be as god".

The decision for us conservative Americans is pretty simple, isn't it?

The sweat, risks, and hard work isn't, particularly against name-calling bullies. 'What is the best kind of government?' "A [Constitutional] Republic, if you can keep it" (B. Franklin).

It's like we're stuck on the madness merry-go-round.

No we're not. So far, we, the people, still have the final say: like we, the people, adding Maine as the 31st state, like in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Great State of New Jersey two days back.

But, we, the people, had better to continue to exercise our boss-ship of the hirelings we elect before the latter, thinking that they're our dictators of the elite (the biggest self-deception down through history), finish closing that door of who's boss. And the party in power who carries that world view has been pulling out all the stops to do so since after November 2006, and they have their best chance now with an IslamoCommunist president in "power."

[utexas]

I've come to the conclusion that we can beat the Libs, Dims, Socs, and Coms over the head with facts like this over and over again until they are more stupid than they already are, and they will never, ever get it. Some of them are too stupid and too blind. For others, this is just part of what they want, total control over everything in everyday life over every American.