Posted by
Compassionate Conservative on Monday, August 03, 2009 10:06:13 AM
In my last article, I demonstrated the inevitability of either tax increases, increased deficit spending, or rationing (or, more likely, some combination of all three) if the Obama administration gets the "health care reform" that it wants. Don't think for one moment that Barack Obama himself doesn't both know about these issues and fully approve of the means necessary to resolve them.
First, there's no doubt he intends to increase taxes on the "rich" to fund at least some of his initiatives. By rich, he actually means high income earners making more than some arbitrary threshold such as, say $250,000 a year, although to finance what this administration wants, it will no doubt be much lower. The truly rich - people such as John Kerry, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, Michael Moore, and George Soros - actually pay relatively very little in taxes, since wealth is not what we tax in this country, and what they do earn in yearly income is safely sheltered. However, since Obama won't be able to get enough from the high income segment of the population, he'll simply allow the deficit to increase. We know for certain he has absolutely no problem running large budget deficits.
Second, the Obama plan will undoubtedly include a federal health insurance program for those who can't afford private health care, a number in the vicinity of 47 million Americans, if you believe the liberal Democrats. When tax increases can't fund it all and the deficit gets too big even for the Democrats, the next step will be health care rationing for those unlucky enough to have to be covered by this federal insurance. Unfortunately, that will eventually be most, if not all, of us, as employers decide they don't want to bear the burden of relatively expensive private care and allow their policies to lapse. Federal insurance will, after all, be cheaper than private care, for the simple reason that the Feds can dictate to doctors and hospitals how much (or how little) they will receive for certain procedures, just a MediCare does today. Mr. Obama has no problem with this, either, because he's a charter member of the of the group the Holy Father quite rightly calls the "culture of death." He's demonstrated on more than one occasion that he favors killing unborn children who have only to have their heads clear their mothers' body to qualify for the liberals' definition of a living creature. In fact, he was a strong supporter of the Illinois abortion survivor law, which would have condemned babies surviving abortions to death by ensuring life-sustaining care was withheld from them. At the other end of the death cult spectrum, he seems to be in favor of assisted suicide, as he sidestepped this question during the nomination debates with Hillary Clinton last year. For a man like this, condemning senior citizens to a reduced quality of life and even earlier deaths by denying them health care deemed not "cost-effective" is a very short step indeed.
Barack Obama is an activist through and through, and no activist allows concern for the effects of their "progressive" policies on individuals. It's all done in the name of what's good for the "state," which naturally begs the question of the purpose of that state, but don't expect the activists to address that question. Oh, and of course, the activists, as members of the elite, won't have to suffer the ill effects of these misbegotten policies; they have, or will find, the wherewithal to receive the best medical care. Barack Obama, in particular, will have the top doctors in whatever field he requires them for the rest of his life. If only the rest of us could have them, too.