Health care can be seen as the single most evident element of personal responsiblity. Or, it can be seen as a part of the redistribution of wealth scheme, where monies are forciblly taken from all and paid to the doctors and major investors in healt by Mark Vogl
(conservative)
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
It’s personal responsibility vs. socialism. And, with that, a transfer of wealth to doctors, pharmaceutical companies, the land lords of hospitals, health care facilities, senior citizen homes, etc. The health care industry prospers at the expense of the rest of the natino. And Obama Care will only make that worse.
The debate over health care is termed in "rights" as if the Founding Fathers of this nation wanted to include health care in the Bill of Rights, but they didn't have enough ink or paper. No, guess that's not right. Instead, progressive and socialists will fall to one of their favorite arguments, "the Constitution and personal rights are living things which change with time." That's the argument which supports Roe v. Wade and gay marriage. The ruling elite, knowing that they can't gain the social changes they want through convincing a majority of Americans, instead use the Courts to expand federal powers vis a vis personal liberty.
Recently, Newt Gingrich, a Republican candidate for president of the United States made a state which basically said all must purchase health care protection, in the form of insurance, or bonds, or savings accounts. Newt has moved to the left, to the position that government must enforce that which cannot be depended on under the concept of personal responsibility. No matter the reason, the emphasis on health care, the continued pressure to create health care as a center of gravity or black hole which absorbs all dollars which get within its reach is what the medical community and lobbyists want. Like education, a bottomless hole of taxes and spending, health care will make America a binary star system where everything revolves around these two expenses. Instead of focusing on potential, on individual ambition as the catalyst for all economic activity, the future of the United States will be based on productivity sufficient to pay the bills, or at least keep us from sinking due to too much debt.
The progressives have pushed God out of the central position of guiding us, and placed themselves in the role of social conscience. It is the progressives who see a need for society to cover the education and health care costs of all. It is the progressives who see centralization of government authority as the solution to all our problems. It is the progressives who see the United States as the next Soviet Union, the next huge socialist Super power that will eat its own wealth making industries. While globalism is stealing American jobs and industries, thus reducing our ability to earn as a nation, the progressives are strapping down what revenue streams do exist, and dedicating them to certain social areas, primarily education and health. But as more and more money is sucked out of the economy to pay for these "Cadillac social services" our economy is starving and emaciated.
The debt ceiling issue offers the crossroads point where this can be reversed. Conservatives hold the House of Republicans, and can actually force a decision. If Republicans held the Senate, I doubt we would see even a skirmish over the debt ceiling. Republican Senators long ago sold out. But in the House we actually see a real opportunity to place a line in the sand. This has to be done, and citizens can play a role, like a million little Rushies....individuals can call their Congressman and encourage them to hold out, not to pass a debt ceiling without severe cuts to government and a repeal of Obama Care. And than don't pass the debt ceiling increase until the prerequisites are passed and signed into law.
By doing this, Republicans in the House will reject the premise which Gingrich is operating off of. The days of unguarded national charity to the unfortunate of the world are over. We simply don't have the economy to support it. If we were primarily a manufacturing nation, maybe we could afford it. But this new, 21st Century service economy simply doesn't have the gravitas to carry the burden of socialism. .
Newt, what you are not getting is: " Our government does not have the right or authority to direct us to purchase a specific service, product, etc." If charity, either religious or secular were responsible for financing health care for those who cannot afford it, the entire system would benefit by making the medical profession more sensitive to the market. Government and public insurance has inflated the cost of medical care. If doctors were refused because their prices were too high, prices would come down. This would be a more fair, more efficient way to manage health care costs. The present system is NOT slowing the grown of health care. Quite the opposite, it is making inflation necessary. .
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 2
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Mark Vogl only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Mark Vogl is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
