Jay Am­brose: For bet­ter health, run from Bernie

Calhoun Times - - FRONT PAGE -

The so­cial­ist threat best known as Sen. Bernie San­ders wants a sin­gle­payer health care sys­tem, and here is what that means: adding mon­strously to our un­be­liev­able en­ti­tle­ment debt, en­dan­ger­ing the econ­omy, do­ing away with our free­dom to choose our own health care plan and help­ing to make our fu­ture a flop.

It is all very sim­ple, you see, be­cause you get rid of health in­sur­ance com­pa­nies and let the gov­ern­ment take over and then do what it does best: spend money to the point of cri­sis. You will get ev­ery­thing free — no co-pays, no pre­mi­ums, no de­ductibles — ex­cept that you won’t. There is this thing called taxes, re­mem­ber?

The Ur­ban In­sti­tute, tak­ing a look at an ear­lier San­ders ad­ven­ture into this mind­less utopi­anism, fig­ured the cost would be about $3 tril­lion a year be­cause, well, ev­ery­thing would be cov­ered for ev­ery­one. So that comes to more than $30 tril­lion over a decade, and the taxes San­ders had in mind? They would come to $15 tril­lion, the in­sti­tute con­cluded.

San­ders, dur­ing his cam­paign, was fig­ur­ing on tax­ing just about all in­come at least 2.2 per­cent to pay the bills that would be low­ered whether the hos­pi­tals, clin­ics, drug com­pa­nies and doc­tors liked it or not. Em­ploy­ers? Hand over 6.4 per­cent, please. And San­ders’ hated rich? Get ready to wan­der around home­less, ladies and gen­tle­men, at least if the plan doesn’t get as much as needed, and it wouldn’t have.

What­ever tax ideas he set­tles on this time around, they won’t be enough un­less in­come is more or less for­bid­den, and the next so­lu­tion, of course, will be ra­tioning. Even though San­ders is call­ing his plan Medi­care for all, you can fig­ure the el­derly who get most of it now will get less of it un­der this scheme. Some peo­ple, af­ter all, are go­ing to have to get less care, and the el­derly have lived a long time and tend to be those cho­sen for sac­ri­fice in such schemes.

It might be noted, too, that less money to hos­pi­tals, doc­tors and drug com­pa­nies will also mean fewer hos­pi­tals, doc­tors and life­sav­ing drugs, which the dreaded Big Pharma pro­duces more than any­one else in the world. The squeeze will be on, and you just may have to wait in line un­til death ren­ders pa­tience.

Keep in mind, by the way, that So­cial Se­cu­rity, Medi­care and Med­i­caid are al­ready adding enor­mously to our na­tional debt, de­spite ref­er­ences to tech­ni­cal is­sues that ob­scure the fact. By 2026, our en­ti­tle­ments, joined with the in­ter­est on the debt, will con­sume ev­ery cent of fed­eral tax rev­enues if left un­ad­justed, ac­cord­ing to the Con­gres­sional Bud­get Of­fice.

Still, sup­posed free­bies win elec­tions, politi­cians tend to be op­por­tunists and 16 con­fused Democrats are al­ready hold­ing the so­cial­ist’s hands on a dis­as­ter that would make Oba­macare look like a suc­cess.

Ob­vi­ously, it has been no such thing. The Democrats made it im­pos­si­ble for in­sur­ance com­pa­nies to make an ad­e­quate profit in the pro­gram, de­ductibles and pre­mi­ums went way, way up, com­pa­nies dropped out, and the call was for sub­si­dies on top of sub­si­dies on top of sub­si­dies.

The Repub­li­cans also have a lot to an­swer for. They were neg­li­gent over the years in not com­ing to terms on work­able so­lu­tions, al­though they fi­nally con­sid­ered a Sen­ate mea­sure that would then have gone to a con­fer­ence with the House with all kinds of right an­swers con­ceiv­ably emerg­ing. A vote by Sen. John McCain in­ex­cus­ably ruled out that pos­si­bil­ity.

Some alert GOP se­na­tors and House lead­ers, how­ever, are at it again, with the chance of com­ing up with some­thing solid. That could be cru­cial in pre­vent­ing San­der­sstyle think­ing that could give us both health and eco­nomic tragedies through the be­lief that noth­ing good ever hap­pens with­out ever big­ger, more ex­pen­sive, more in­tru­sive gov­ern­ment that ac­tu­ally does the op­po­site of what it prom­ises.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.