In order to truly understand the health care debate, one must grasp the core of the statist’s argument. The issue is not that some don’t have access to medical treatment. From the statist’s viewpoint, the crisis is that some Americans do. Like the two women standing before Solomon’s throne fighting for custody of the child in question, the statist would rather cut health care in half (thus destroying it) than allow Americans who have it to continue enjoying it. One-hundred years ago, both paupers and princes died young, and access to medical care didn’t really matter. Now that America has the technology to enhance longevity, the statist struggles with guilt because there are not enough resources for all to live longer. In order to assuage this guilt, the statist works diligently to take longevity away from everyone (except of course, the ruling class to which they belong).
When equality in longevity is the goal, it is always easier to shorten the lives of healthy people than it is to lengthen the lives of those who make unhealthy lifestyle choices. Even though the statist works to convince us that a single payer, government imposed system is in our national interest, their program merely reduces the gap in coverage by raising prices and/or reducing access for those who currently have it. It would be better for the nation if the statist would spend less energy destroying the system that works best for most of us, and instead focus their passion on Americans whose lifestyle choices are becoming unaffordable for us all.
Joseph D. Coco, Jr.
Whitefish